Moulding our Europe

This week the important event of worldwide significance is without any shadow of doubt the election of the President of the United States. Whether we like it or not, George W. Bush will be the most powerful person for the next four years. But though his decisions, for better or for worse, will have an impact on the entire world, it is only US citizens who can influence the choice. We may be surprised at the uncharacteristic record turnout. We may have had a predilection for Mr Bush or John Kerry. In the end we have been only interested but passive spectators.

On the other hand two important occurrences happened last week in Europe which caused quite a bit of a stir. Since we are now in a position to have a say, it's more profitable to reflect on these events.

First let us consider the retreat beaten by the President elect of the new Commission. On the one hand we might rejoice in the growing authority of the European Parliament. It is satisfying to realise that the elected representatives are not mere rubber stamps. How far their power is enhanced and at whose expense is another matter! In this case it was at the detriment of the proposed Commission.

But on the other hand do we want the European Parliament to grow vis-à-vis the Council of Ministers? The answer would be coloured depending on what sort of Europe we want. Do we want a Europe of sovereign states or do we want a federal Europe? Probably the response would depend on culture, history, national idiosyncrasies as well as the size of the country one comes from.

On purely democratic and economic efficiency grounds one would tend to favour a federal state similar to the US. And probably in a distant future, certainly not in our lifetime, this may be the solution. At present everything points to the difficulty of reconciling cultural and institutional differences. Especially small states, even those larger than us, would veto such a development.

Our strength lies in the Council of Ministers. Our Prime Minister's voice in many spheres is worth absolutely as much as that of the German Chancellor or that of the British Premier. The same goes for our foreign or other ministers. If we needed any proof, we had it also last week on the question of pollution of the seas by ships. We had two other countries that successfully opposed measures against our interests. But we could have done it on our own.

On the other hand, even though we may not agree completely with the thoughts expressed by Rocco Buttiglione, we remain dismayed at the treatment meted out to him. Prof. Buttiglione was not rejected because he was incompetent. He spelled out his religious beliefs but stated unequivocally that he would not let his convictions about gays and women interfere with his political duties. He expressed his feelings when prompted or rather provoked by a Green MEP. What was he expected to do? Lie, to be politically correct? Imagine the uproar if such treatment was reserved for a member coming from a minority group!

Some may consider this as water under the bridge since the Italian politician has withdrawn his candidature. I beg to differ. Isn't it a fact that traditional values are under siege? What about the freedom of expression so long fought for by the left and liberals? Where is their tolerance? Will we slowly be forced to hide our religious feelings and values? We have to beware. Tomorrow we may be forced to hide our feelings about abortion and euthanasia. It is up to citizens to resist the overbearing, intolerant arrogance of secularists and beware especially during elections, national as well as European ones.

The other important event was the signing in Rome of the European constitution. Now it remains to be ratified by each individual country. Far from a foregone conclusion! In our case the government has already decided that as with all treaties the constitution would be ratified by Parliament. There is no point in going for another referendum. The issues have been debated thoroughly over the last 10 years. Membership of the EU is not officially anymore a bone of contention.

If anything the constitution has increased our rights. Among them another seat in the European Parliament and the right to secede, so dear to chunks within the Labour Party! It is thought that, though the opposition has not committed itself, they would not be so keen on a referendum, not least because it would open raw wounds.

Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici has been haranguing the leadership to reject the constitution citing the decision taken at the party conference, a compromise that is being given diametrically opposite interpretations by the two souls within the party. The situation is not easy for the leadership. It may decide to compromise once more by deciding to vote against the treaty. It is not for us to tell Labour on what they should do. However, following this path might put into doubt Labour's commitment to Europe.

L-orizzont's daily barbs have already shaken the people's confidence in Labour's real commitment. Voting for the constitution would allay the danger for Labour of the next election being fought on continued European membership.

Some are expressing their dismay at the internal tensions within Europe and are pessimistic (optimistic seen from the eyes of Eurosceptics) about Europe's future. But these are merely growth pangs. Europe is not even 50 years young. It took centuries and numerous wars and revolutions for the modern democratic nation state to evolve. It is apt to remember Bismarck's dictum, just over 150 years ago, that Germany could be united only with blood and iron. Various attempts were made to unite Europe through submission. In our time it is being built through the ballot box.

The founding fathers have laid the foundations. We have a duty to help mould Europe with our active and vigilant participation.

Dr Deguara is Minister of Health.