Observations on the European constitution

The right of working people to have a say in the way they are ruled would not exist without the collective efforts of the trade union movement in the long campaign for universal suffrage and democracy. For this reason alone, trade unions should take a long, hard look at a constitution for the European Union that would, if enforced, completely change the way we are governed.

Under the constitution, power is transferred from elected national governments to an unelected European Commission in Brussels. It confirms the sole right of the Commission to initiate new laws and removes from member states the power to veto proposed legislation in more than 30 new policy areas. This should concern every trade unionist, as it would deliver a fatal blow to any attempt to win progressive change in the law. You may be able to lobby an MP or parliament, but you don't stand much of a chance with the remote, unaccountable and unelected Commission in Brussels or MEPs who have no rights to table legislation. As the RMT general secretary, Bob Crow, put it recently: "The bottom line is that any government that hands over power to a degree envisaged in the proposed constitution is in effect no longer a government." British ministers may seek to deny it, but more honest Europhiles such as the Belgian prime minister, Guy Verhofstadt, openly admit that the constitution (which runs to nearly 900 pages) is "the capstone of a European federal state".

Some of those in favour of the constitution have argued that it would benefit workers because the Charter of Fundamental Rights contained within it ensures the right to strike. But that is not the case. Article II-28 explains that the "limits for the exercise of collective action, including strike action, come under national laws and practices". So Britain's anti-union laws would remain enforceable unless they are removed from the statute books. Moreover, article II-52 states that rights can be removed "in the general interest" of the EU. Workers could end up with fewer rights than they have now.

Thus the right to withdraw labour is far from guaranteed by the constitution. By contrast, the right of capital to roam is set in stone. Article III sets out "an internal market within which competition is free and unhindered", with no distinction between the private and public sectors. It also states: "A European framework law shall establish the measures in order to achieve the liberalisation of a specific service." The Commission would gain new powers to negotiate agreements on the General Agreement on Trade in Services and to impose privatisation on, for example, the education and health systems.

Given that trade unionists have always concerned themselves with peace and internationalism, they should also take note of the constitution's drive to militarise the EU. It envisages the creation of an EU army capable of acting globally and expects member states to contribute to a huge increase in the development of military hardware to carry out missions. An EU foreign minister would direct a single foreign and military policy that must be "loyally" supported by member states.

The protection of civil liberties is another issue dear to trade unionists that is threatened by the constitution. It proposes to harmonise legal systems, with standard sentences and Europe-wide rules for basic legal procedures that do not include the right to trial by jury. It also envisages an EU public prosecutor and an extension of Europol's structures and operations. Human rights organisations such as Statewatch have expressed serious concerns about the proposals on policing, asylum and immigration, countering accusations that it is racist to question the EU and its constitution.

The constitution's threat of further privatisation, military expansion and curbs on civil liberties, and democracy in general, is in opposition to the historical aims of the labour movement. Indeed, many trade unionists and Labour voters have deep concerns over the ratification of such a far-reaching document. The reason why this year's TUC conference will not include a motion calling for a yes vote in a referendum on the constitution is that it would be rejected by delegates. Opposition is also growing in the Labour Party, around the Labour Against a Superstate group set up by the MPs Ian Davidson and John Cryer. And left and democratic opposition is becoming hard to ignore in other member states, including France and Germany, whose governments have agreed to referendums under popular pressure. Too many things that trade unionists have fought for are at stake.

Brian Denny is a spokesman for the Campaign Against Euro-Federalism

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before you can comment on the website