Reform in Europe after the 2005 Referendums: Battling for the Results

Summary: EU leaders must champion an interpretation of the French and Dutch referendum results that recognises them for what they are: the expression of popular sentiment on a range of domestic and European issues, of which the Draft

Constitution was only one. The two referendums were not a definitive vote by a majority of the electorate on the idea of the Constitution. The results were more likely a repudiation of existing elite-driven processes of EU reform, though even that interpretation is open to question. Further serious analysis of the two results to establish actual voter sentiment in both countries on the draft Constitution is essential.

EU leaders must change course on the timetable for ratification of the draft Constitutional Treaty. This does not have to mean abandoning its contents or visions. As polling on voter sentiment at the time of the referendums has shown, the draft itself is simply not politically contentious for the majority of voters. Suspending the ratification process for a couple of years may be the minimum amount of time required for future success.

A review of the referendum process itself is also needed. It may be desirable for any future referendums on EU constitutional issues to be held simultaneously with national elections. Not only does this make economic common sense, but will allow voters to express a range of views, both on their government's performance and the referendum question. As such, in the medium term, the European Council must adopt a policy of reform based on a more sensible approach to use of
referendums to ratify major changes.