Dutch will vote 'No' by wider margin than French

As Dutch leaders made an 11th-hour plea for a “Yes” vote on the European Union constitution, polls suggested a disillusioned public will reject the charter in a referendum tomorrow by an even larger margin than the stunning “No” delivered by France.

A second repudiation within a week would likely be fatal for the document and force the leaders of the 25-member bloc to reconsider the direction of European integration when they gather in two weeks in Brussels.

“When two member founding states vote no, it looks like a big crisis,” said Aurore Wanlin, an analyst with the London-based Centre for European Reform.

It also would be a debacle for Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende, reinforcing his image as an ineffective leader. But unlike in France, even a decisive rejection was unlikely to lead to resignations or a Cabinet shake-up.

Two polls published late yesterday indicated opinion is running at close to 60% against the constitution, showing even greater resistance than in France, which voted 55-45 to reject the treaty.

But the margin could be even wider if supporters decide the battle is lost and stay away from the polling stations, said pollster Maurice de Hond.

“I think the French ‘No’ will definitely affect the turnout. I think it will make it easier for people who are wondering how to vote to vote ‘No’ as well because the Netherlands will not be isolated if we vote ‘No”’, said Lousewies van der Laan, a parliament member of the D-66 party which supports the constitution.

In one of his final appeals, Balkenende pleaded that the Netherlands must remain at the centre of European decision making. If the Dutch say No, “then it won’t be a discussion with us over the question of how Europe must go on, but one without us,” he said in the Trouw newspaper.

Neelie Kroes, the Dutch businesswoman appointed EU competition commissioner last year, said a “No” vote would not spell the end of the constitution, and that at least some of it can be salvaged. “Definitely not,” she replied when asked if the constitution is dead.

“I’d rather talk about a new international treaty. That we’re talking about a constitution at all – I say this with a weak smile – is because of the enthusiasm of the chief author, Giscard d’Estaing,” Kroes said, referring to the former French president who led efforts to draft the charter. “He put a nice title on the thing because he was in an exultant mood. That exaggerated optimism is now being punished,” Kroes told the Volkskrant newspaper.

Opponents cite a wide range of reasons for their scepticism, from liberals concerned Holland will lose its independence over such policies as euthanasia and marijuana to right-wingers worried the Dutch will lose control of immigration policies.

“This is purely a protest vote, partly against Europe and partly against our own government,” said Johan Huizenge, the Europe analyst for Radio Netherlands.

“The government miscalculated anti-Europe feelings. It began its campaign too late. When they found Europe was not a popular issue to sell, they became hesitant.”

Major opposition parties backed Balkenende’s coalition, urging voters to stay focused on the larger issues. “It is no longer about coal and steel, it’s about asylum and terrorism,” said the Labour Party’s Wouter Bos, the opposition leader. “We simply need new ground rules to make Europe workable. It’s not about giving up power to Brussels, but making it easier to do what must be done.”

Aurore Wanlin, of the London-based think tank, said French and Dutch opponents of the constitution have several concerns in common: discontent with Europe’s swift enlargement, a fear of greater immigration, and unhappiness with the proposed membership of Turkey, which would become Europe’s first Muslim country.

She said it could have a domino effect when Luxembourg, Portugal and Denmark hold their referendums later this year. Poland and Ireland also are due to vote, but Britain is likely to back out of its plan to let the voters decide, she said.

The other EU countries have left ratification to their parliaments, where MPs are more welcoming of the constitution than the public.