Time to tip Union’s citizens off their fence … or is it?

Date: 04/07/1996

THE Don't-Knows are on the march.

The undecideds, the haven't-a-clues, the equivocators, the prevaricators, the maybe-maybe nots, are rising up and threatening the very fabric of our society.

They are an insidious force, undermining European Union stability, sowing seeds of doubt in the minds of the stronger-willed, opinionated citizenry. The opinion-formers are being overrun, clarity of thought is being clouded and this movement, for we may call it thus, is growing daily.

Wherever two or three people are gathered, you will hear the same blood-chilling refrain. In a bar, one will ask: “Shall we go back to my place for coffee?” and there will always be another in the crowd who says: “Don't know.”

It is the same in the office, in the home, on the streets: “Do you think it will rain today?” - “Don't know.”

“Where are the car keys?” - “Don't know.”

“Who ate the last chocolate biscuit?” - “Don't know.”

Like all sinister developments, this one has crept upon us slowly, almost unnoticed. But it cannot be ignored for much longer.

The Don't Knows are about to gain the upper hand and that, significantly, is the only thing of which they are sure.

If you think this is scaremongering, look at the latest Eurobarometer charting public opinion. It is littered with the Don't Knows, who don't know anything from their own expectations of an improved lifestyle to whether or not they want a single currency.

In one survey, pollsters asked who had heard of the Intergovernmental Conference, eliciting a negative response from 68&percent; of the sample, a positive response from 25&percent; and a “don't know” from 7&percent;.

Six per cent didn't know if they had heard of enlargement, 4&percent; didn't know if they were aware of the Maastricht Treaty, and 5&percent; didn't know if they had heard of the single market.

When asked about the relative importance of decision-taking power in the European institutions, 20&percent; said they didn't know.

When asked if they were for or against subsidiarity, 18&percent; said they didn't know.

Should we take these people seriously? I don't know, but we cannot dismiss the statistics as unimportant.

The challenge is to tackle the problem at its root, because the Don't Knows breed across Europe as soon as they are out of the cradle and starting to talk.

“Did you kick little Timmy in the head because he was very annoying, mildly annoying, getting up your nose, or don't you know?” screams an angry parent at junior.

Back comes the inevitable wail: “Don't know.”

The prosecutor in court thunders: “Why did you steal that car? Was it unlocked with the key inside, locked but easy to break into, were you drunk and not in full possession of your faculties, or don't you know?”

“Don't know,” mutters the criminal in the dock.

But don't know should not be an option. It is not an answer, but a dereliction of duty.

How can you not know if you find the name 'Euro' acceptable for the single currency?

How can you not know whether you want a federal Europe?

How can you not know whether you think you will be better or worse off next year than you are this year?

There are, of course, genuine don't-knowers, but these are people who don't know whether they are coming or going. They do know about everything else, but they have three bags of shopping delicately balanced on two arms and another 60 yards to go before they reach the safety of the car, and then along comes a grinning moron with a clipboard and string of questions which, mid-morning on a busy Saturday, seem about as relevant to daily life as tea on the lawn at the White House.

The opt-out in the circumstances is the sincere but misplaced don't know. People in a rush will answer “don't know” to anything, because it saves them thinking and could conceivably avoid follow-up questions on the same topic.

They are too flustered to know. They have a pregnant dog, a child with measles and camp-beds to find in the attic for six visiting cousins. Their bank card will not work, granny is on her death-bed and the last thing they need, frankly, is to have their lack of awareness of the IGC probed in any great detail.

These people are not a threat, but they should be excised from surveys because they unwittingly distort the figures. They, and the serial don't-knowers who wilfully muddy the waters, are a powerful force in the land.

It is deeply significant that the only question asked for which don't know was not an acceptable answer during 32,100 face-to-face interviews with EU residents, as well as 15,500 telephone surveys, was: “What is your occupation?”

For your information, 13&percent; said they were responsible for shopping but were without occupation; 8&percent; were in an employed position, mainly working at a desk; 2&percent; were in an employed position, not at a desk but travelling; 1&percent; were farmers; and 0&percent; were fishermen.

There is little doubt that at least 2&percent; would have said “don't know” if the option had been available.

It is now up to the pollsters to adapt their questioning to eliminate, for example, meaningless questions which ask whether or not the European Parliament is “reliable”.

This is not an adjective which readily springs to mind in relation to the Parliament, not because it is unreliable, but simply because reliability is something more associated with washing machines, cars and dinner guests.

My watch can be reliable and, perhaps, my secretary. But my European Parliament?

Oh yes, I would reply if the question were raised, the European Parliament is very reliable. It always meets one week a month except in August. It never lets me down.

It is as regular as clockwork. It always debates crucial issues and then votes on them two days later when the topic has gone off the boil. You can rely on it for that.

My other favourite is a question along the lines of: “Have you read or heard anything at all in the last six months about something called the Committee of the Regions and, if so, do you think it is a very good thing, a reasonable thing, a bad thing, a very bad thing or don't you know?”

My answer, if asked, would be: “No, I have not read or heard anything about the silly thing and yes, I do think it is a very good thing that I haven't.”

While we are on the subject, let me tell you that a mere 13&percent; of EU citizens have heard or read about the Committee of the Regions - and it figures nowhere on the scale of institutional reliability.

No, for reliability you need a European Parliament (45&percent; say you “can rely on it”), followed by a European Commission (41&percent;) and a Council of Ministers (40&percent;).

And not only is the European Parliament reliable, it takes the most important decisions in the entire European Union, according to 40&percent; of the survey sample.

But then again, what do they know?