Greek referendum - Respect the grenade of democracy

TO SAY that Greece lobbed a hand grenade into the heart of the teetering eurozone would be a gross understatement — by announcing a referendum on the €130 billion EU bailout deal, the Greek Prime Minister, George Papandreou, has dropped a bombshell on Brussels.

Not surprisingly, he was roundly criticised as shares dived yet again on global stock markets, triggering emergency meetings today. But the irony is that he will be seen by many as striking a blow for democracy.

No doubt, when giving the people of Greece the right to have their say on an issue which will dictate the future quality of their lives for years to come, his political reputation and place in history were uppermost in his own mind. For a politician that likes to see himself as a champion of democracy, the referendum offered a convenient way out. As the Irish Government has just discovered to its embarrassment, referendums can be unpredictable and dangerous. For Europe, however, the problem is that the outcome of this proposed referendum seems entirely predictable.

The dilemma posed by the Greek Prime Minister goes to the heart of the democratic process. By asking voters to make up their own minds about the EU deal, he has taken a gamble. The risk is that while acceptance would consign Greece to years of cutbacks, austerity and change, its rejection would condemn them to decades in the wilderness.

With opinion polls already showing 60% of the population opposed to cuts, there is a distinct sense of asking turkeys to vote for Christmas about this initiative. To put it in a domestic context, what would happen if Irish taxpayers were asked to back the Government’s move, described in these columns as “unnecessary” and “socially and morally outrageous”, to give unsecured Anglo-Irish investors a €750 million bonanza today?

Whatever Papandreou’s fate, the Greek crisis throws up questions that cannot be avoided. Given the growing uncertainty surrounding the future of the EU, it has to be asked whether a similar referendum should now be extended to all the citizens of Europe to determine whether or not they want to continue going down the road of fiscal unity?

Ultimately, the choice may come down to deciding between a pre-war style Europe consisting of individual states with separate currencies or a United States of Europe based on integrated economic and fiscal union? There are cogent and coherent arguments for both sides of that debate. The problem facing Brussels is that while Greece cannot hold the EU to ransom, other governments cannot be seen to condemn democracy in action. Especially at a time when many believe the political problems facing Europe could mean the end of democracy as such within an EU increasingly dominated by the major powers.

Ultimately, the citizens will have to make up their minds about what kind of EU they want — a loose amalgam of nation states or a fully united Europe. Ideally, the outcome of that debate ought to be decided in the ballot box by the people.

Arguably, as the Irish Government prepares to hold a series of referendums on far-reaching reforms of the Constitution, it should take the initiative and include a direct question on what kind of Europe the people of Ireland want to be part of in the future.