Cheer-leader for an imperfect treaty

Date: 02/10/1997

PLAIN speaking has always been a trait associated with former Danish Foreign Minister Uffe Ellemann-Jensen.

A staunch defender of the European Union and not one to shirk a political challenge, he is now preparing to do battle with his compatriots and convince them that to reject the Treaty of Amsterdam - as they did first time round with the Maastricht Treaty - would be the height of irresponsibility and folly.

Ellemann-Jensen categorically dismisses the arguments being advanced by many on the right in Denmark that the electorate should reject the Amsterdam Treaty to teach 'Brussels' a lesson, and by those on the left claiming that a 'no' vote would lead to renegotiation of a better text.

“My position on that is 'Are you crazy?' If we vote 'no', there would be no Amsterdam Treaty and we would run the risk of being the ones blocking enlargement towards the East. We simply cannot do that, so if it is a 'no' we would, in all decency, have to withdraw from the European Union,” he says.

The Liberal leader, who played a prominent part in convincing the Danish electorate to accept the Maastricht Treaty after its initial rejection, emphatically denies that he is scaremongering by insisting that there would be no second chance on this occasion.

“I am just telling voters that there would be a price to pay. You cannot freely vote 'no' and then continue to pick the raisins from the cookie,” he explains.

Ellemann-Jensen acknowledges that the Amsterdam Treaty is far from perfect and admits that he would have liked EU leaders to have been more ambitious, particularly in their blueprint for handling the Union's foreign policy and justice and home affairs issues.

“If this was only about Amsterdam, then I would have my doubts as it is simply not good enough. I am very dissatisfied that they did not manage to solve the problems related to enlargement. But then the vote is not just on the Amsterdam Treaty. You have to consider the consequences. We should adopt it, start enlargement and continue to work for better solutions,” he argues.

In the coming months as Denmark prepares for the crucial referendum, Ellemann-Jensen, who is widely tipped as a possible future prime minister, intends to try to focus the Euro-debate in his country on to these essentials.

“We have a problem regarding priorities and the conception of Europe because quite a lot of the debate in Denmark centres on all that is irritating,” he says.

That debate is more often than not sparked off by the plans to make the single market a reality and the impact this has on individuals as they experience practical changes in their daily life.

“Suddenly you face claims that European bureaucrats are trying to set up silly rules on this and that. And, especially if you have a liberal way of thinking, you react negatively to that. You always hate it when the authorities make rules and that makes you an easy target for demagogues,” explains Ellemann-Jensen.

IN TRYING to keep the Euro-debate focused on the essentials, he believes that two different kinds of allegations of unwarranted EU interference have to be corrected.

“The first kind of story is encapsulated by the size and shape of cucumbers. What you are actually doing is just changing something to a common standard. As a result, this gives a small country quite a benefit and it benefits more than a big country from a single market. In such cases, it is a question of explaining why things had to be changed,” he says.

While Ellemann-Jensen is confident that rational argument can eventually win the day and convince people of the wisdom of change in such circumstances, he is quick to denounce the second category of attacks against the Union.

Recent examples have included claims that the EU forced a Copenhagen hotel to change all its exit signs at great cost or banned the traditional Danish game of hopscotch on glass.

When Ellemann-Jensen investigated both incidents, he found that in the first case the Danish authorities had not used the exemptions available and on the second occasion had been overzealous in applying EU legislation on toys.

“It is not the European Union, but a busybody Danish administration. But all these irritating things make a lot of people believe that we are faced with an enormous bureaucracy and that creates a negative atmosphere,” he says.

In trying to explain the basic thrust of European cooperation, the Liberal leader draws on the fundamental objectives set out in the preamble to the 1957 Treaty of Rome of maintaining security, freedom and peace in Europe through ever-closer economic cooperation.

Ellemann-Jensen believes that Denmark's penchant for sniping at the Union stems in large part from a failure to understand this basic reality.

“We have never really had that debate because when we joined the European Common Market, as it was called then back in 1972, we had a debate that concentrated on economic priorities, a debate on pork prices and so on. We never had this deep political debate on what was the real objective of this exercise,” he says.

Yet he takes some solace from the fact that, in his experience, Denmark's youth is more prepared than its elders to see EU membership in such terms, particularly as the Union prepares for the historic challenge of enlargement.

A keen advocate of expanding the Union eastwards, Ellemann-Jensen disagrees with the European Commission's strategy of effectively splitting the applicant countries into two camps: those ready to start negotiating on membership now and those forced to wait.

“I think we should begin with everyone on the starting line in order to give the applicants the clear message that once they have fulfilled the conditions they will become members,” he insists.

Ideally, Ellemann-Jensen would like the first batch of new members to include all three Baltic states, but if this is not feasible, he believes at least one must be in that initial wave.

“This is essential to break the ice around them and particularly as they were not invited to join NATO. They are in a special situation and I hope efforts will be made at the Luxembourg summit in December to bring all three of them in. If that is not possible, then at least one. Otherwise the wrong signal will be sent to Moscow. After all, they are the only ones who come from the former Soviet Union and they must have assurances,” he argues.

ELLEMANN-JENSEN'S fervour for the EU has never been in any doubt, but he readily admits that the strong pro-Union line he and his supporters espouse has cost them some political support over the past six to eight months.

Opinion polls suggest that their backing has fallen from 31&percent; to 27&percent; or 28&percent; as voters peel off towards extreme right-wing parties.

But Ellemann-Jensen insists that the party will not change tack and he is optimistic that he will be in a position to form a government after next year's general election.

He also believes that the downward trend in his party's popularity masks a silver lining. “We are not going to change, especially as young voters in particular need to have at least one party with a clear platform on the Union and the interesting thing is that we are not losing their support,” he explains.