Essay Competition

Got the following from one of my lectures, think sone of ye might find it interesting

Celebrating the 50th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome: Essay Prize
Competition

The European Movement, Federal Trust and Chatham House are organising an
essay competition to mark the 50th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome. Its
purpose is to provoke new thinking on the future of Europe among the leaders
of tomorrow. Entries are invited from students in full time education under
the age of 26 who are residents of one of the member states of the European
Union.

Topic: 'My vision of Europe in 2057'.

Length: between 2,500 and 3,000 words

First prize: £500 and publication as a Federal Trust paper. Two runner-up
prizes of £100.

Essays may be submitted electronically to email@ address.com or as
typescript by post to Professor Richard Whitman, Chatham House, 10 St
James's Square, London SW1Y 4LE.

Closing date: February 16, 2007

Judging criteria: Knowledge of the subject, clarity of expression, logical
structure, persuasiveness of arguments

Essays will be judged by:
Professor Richard Whitman, Professor of Politics, University of Bath
Dr Martyn Bond, Visiting Professor of European Politics and Policy, Royal
Holloway University of London
Mr Brendan Donnelly, Director, The Federal Trust

Prizes will be presented by Mr Geoff Hoon MP, Minister for Europe, at a
Chatham House Conference on March 22, 2007.

I'll more than likely be enetering and will post my entry after the closing date

What is Democracy ?

Democracy can be defined in multiple ways. According to Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1996, 1998) democracy can be defined as
“Government by popular representation; a form of government in which the supreme power is retained by the people, but is indirectly exercised through a system of representation and delegated authority periodically renewed; a constitutional representative government; a republic.”
This broad definition leads us to believe that all democratic states have representative governments, regular elections, have a constitution and are republics. Of course the regular governments and regular elections are cornerstones of democracies, but democratic states are not all republics or they do not all have constitutions. According to Cincotta (1998) there are pillars of democracy, which are:
• Sovereignty of the people.
• Government based upon consent of the governed.
• Majority rule.
• Minority rights.
• Guarantee of basic human rights.
• Free and fair elections.
• Equality before the law.
• Due process of law.
• Constitutional limits on government.
• Social, economic, and political pluralism.
• Values of tolerance, pragmatism, cooperation, and compromise.
These pillars and historic versions of democracy will be discussed in this essay.

Today democratic governments are the most common forms of government. From the early 1990’s the countries of the former soviet block cast off the yoke of communism and embraced democracy. More and more African and Asian countries are becoming democracies. Democracy is practiced in countries as varied as Japan, Italy and Venezuela. According to Cincotta (1998),
“Democracies flourish when they are tended by citizens willing to use their hard-won freedom to participate in the life of their society--adding their voices to the public debate, electing representatives who are held accountable for their actions, and accepting the need for tolerance and compromise in public life”

Democracies fall into two categories, direct and representative. The classic example of direct is classical Greek democracy, but it still is used today. It is not used to extent as representative democracy. The most common form of direct democracy used today is referendums. According to The Economist (August, 1999) only 3 democracies in Western Europe make no provision for referendums in their constitutions, they are Belgium, the Netherlands and Norway. Only six major democracies have never held nationwide referendums, they are the Netherlands, the United States, Japan, India, Israel and the Federal Republic of Germany. In other countries such as Switzerland and several U.S. states referendums rival legislatures in their significance. They are different types of referendums, advisory and mandatory. Advisory referendums are a way for governments to test public opinion on controversial issues. Mandatory referendums are apart of the legislative process and are one means of changing the constitutions.

In a democracy equality before the law and due process should be guaranteed to all citizens of the state. This is a fundamental to any just and democratic society. This judicial system should also guarantee basic human rights. The courts should be protecting the rights of the individual against encroachment form the government. The courts should also uphold the rights of minorities so that the democratic government does not turn into a ‘tyranny of the majority’ and abuse the rights of minorities to further their own gains. According to Cincotta (1998) there are essential requirements of due process in a democracy. These are:
• No one’s home can be broken into and searched buy the police without a court order showing there is good reason for such a search.
• No person shall be held under arrest without explicit, written charges that specify the alleged violation.
• Persons charged with crimes should not be held for protracted periods in prison.
• The authorities are to grant bail, or conditional release, to the accused pending trial if there is little likelihood that the suspect will flee or commit other crimes.
• Persons cannot be compelled to be witnesses against themselves. This prohibition against self-incrimination must be absolute.
• Persons shall not be subject to double jeopardy; that is being charged with the same crime twice.
• Because of their potential for abuse by the authorities, so-called ex-post laws are proscribed.
• Defendants may possess additional protections against coercive acts by the state.
Undemocratic states often try opponents for treason. For this reason, all democratic states should have a clear definition of treason to protect citizens from abuse of the government.

Elections are often used as a benchmark of democracy to see if newly democratised states are truly on the road to democracy. The reason elections are so important in a democracy is that, in elections people chose the primary law-makers of the state. Whether the elections be for president or parliamentarians, those elected have been endorsed by the majority of their constituents. This allows them to govern with legitimacy. There are number of criteria for democratic elections. Elections must be;
• Competitive, more then one candidate standing for election
• Periodic, giving citizens the opportunity to pass judgement on government performance
• Inclusive, the number of voters should be a large proportion of the adult population and should include all minorities.
In democratic states all elections should be by secret and free ballot. This is to ensure that no voter intimidation takes place. At the same the protection of the ballot box and counting of votes must be as open and accountable as possible.

Checks and balances are very important in democratic states. This is to ensure that political power is dispersed and decentralised are not concentrated in one position, a dictator. These checks and balances ensure that there is a curb on government powers and that government is as close the people as possible. An important part of these checks and balances is the separation of powers. The writers of the United States’ constitution ensured that power would not be focused within one branch of government by sharing between the branches of government. The separation of powers provides an important safeguard against the abuse of power by governments, which all democratic states must confront.

A weakness of democracy is that if citizens do not take part in regular elections the legitimacy of the government is threatened. Of course citizens are perfectly entitled to show their dissatisfaction with the political process by not taking part in elections. Without the lifeblood of citizens’ actions, democracy will die. Citizens, who do not vote, may be involved in one of a myriad of organisations concerned with public policy. The right of individuals to join these nongovernmental associations is fundamental to democracy.

In a democracy communication is vital especially in large states. The media has begun to dominate communications between the government and the people. Communication and public debates now take place on radio, television, newspapers, magazines and books. Due to their importance within a democracy the media has a number of functions. The media is there to inform and educate the public on government proposals. This should be accurate, timely and unbiased information. Due to diverse opinions the media should access a wide range of viewpoints. This role is especially important during elections, as few voters will have the chance to meet the candidates. The media should act like a watchdog on the government to and other important state institutions. By being independent of the government, the media the media can expose the truth behind government claims and hold officials accountable for their actions. The media can also take a more active role in public debate through editorials and investigative reporting. By doing this the media can also call for reform of institutions and highlight what needs to be done. The media can also become an outlet for public opinion by printing letters to the editor and by printing articles of differing viewpoints.

There have many styles of democracy used throughout the centuries. These models are both historical and philosophical. The ancient Greeks used what we refer to as classical democracy. These were modelled on the city-states of ancient Greece. These city-states were governed by mass meetings in an assembly called the Ecclesia. Classical democracy had limited and weak central institutions which included a five hundred-strong Council, a fifty-strong Committee and a President of the Committee who held office for one day and not more then once in his lifetime. This was a major problem with classical democracy there was no continuance of policy in the power structures in government. Classical democracy was a true direct democracy as it was participatory. It was only viable because the city-states were very small. Also exclusion featured strongly in classical democracy as slave, women and foreigners were not allowed to participate.

In the seventh and eighteenth century’s protective democracy developed. This was helped by the liberal thinking about rights and freedoms by John Locke and others at the time. This model of democracy was used to constrain the over-mighty power of the state. This is what became known as government by consent. Protective democracy is associated with minimising the power of the state and maximising individual freedoms. Protective democracy was liberal and was the first step towards representative democracy. Protective democracy became the basis of the American political system. Protective democracy was supported by economic liberals. The problem with protective democracy was it often led to weak governments.

After protective democracy, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and others came up with developmental democracy. According to this model, democracy is a means of promoting of the development of both the individual and the community. It was associated with maximalist ideas of government and the state. Developmental democracy became associated with the common good, which led to the development of the welfare state. This led to more focus on the community rather than the individual. Developmental democracy became associated with the ideas of the left and centre-left. Developmental democracy also led to the creation of strong governments. The question of how and who defines the ‘common good’ is a major problem with developmental democracy. This model is often criticized as ‘totalitarian democracy.

‘People’s democracy’ is a term adopted by communist regimes to attempt to legitimise their regimes. People’s democracies were based on Marxist critique of liberal democracy as ‘capitalist (bourgeois) democracy’, as opposed to participatory democracy. People’s democracies believed in economic democracy, where all wealth would be shared among the proletariat. In practice, communist parties defined themselves as ‘the vanguard of the working class’ and controlled power.

The dominant version of democracy used throughout the world is liberal representative democracy, usually referred to as liberal democracy. It is representative democracy as people elect representatives to govern them and it is liberal as political equality and freedom of all individuals are guaranteed. It is argued that liberal democracy is on the way out, as it faces growing problems. Declining electoral turnouts threaten the legitimacy of governments. There is a growing trend of declining membership of political parties, showing disillusion with party politics and politicians.

Democracy faces an unknown future. With more and more states becoming democracies, something must be done to encourage other undemocratic states to become democracies. Democracy has a number of challenges ahead of it. As pointed out already electoral turnout and membership of political parties are decreasing. There are some arguments that democracy needs to be renewed or strengthened. Some say that greater use of direct democracy is needed. This can take the form of greater use of referenda, e-democracy or citizens panels. Some members of the left and centre-left argue that freedom and political equality are insufficient for democracy. They believe that real power lies with wealth. On the other hand some members of the right and centre-right argue that states have too much power. They want to minimize state power and focus of maximising individual freedoms

Celtic Tiger Prosperity For All?

Since the ‘Celtic Tiger’ boom in the Irish economy from the mid-nineties, most people’s incomes have increased. High earners incomes have increased more the low-income earners, widening the gap between rich and poor. State pensions have not increase either allowing pensioners to fall into poverty. In 2005 according to the United Nation Human Development Report 2004, Ireland has the second highest gap between high and low income earners, with United States of America (USA) having the highest. This is not the first time Ireland has come second to the USA in this category. It is an ongoing problem that the Irish Government is trying to addresses. Ireland has the highest gap between rich and poor in the EU. There are four different definitions of poverty, the United Nations (UN) use absolute and relative poverty, the Irish Government uses consistent poverty and the European Union (EU) uses persistent poverty. The variety of definitions of poverty used makes comparisons between reports difficult.

Absolute poverty, which is used by the UN in its Human Development reports, is based on subsistence, a minimum standard needed to live. Seebohm Rowntree's research identified a 'poverty line' on the basis of minimum needs. Relative poverty, which is also used by the UN in its reports, is based on a comparison of poor people with others in society. Peter Townsend defines poverty as "the absence or inadequacy of those diets, amenities, standards, services and activities which are common or customary in society." Consistent poverty is set at those whose income is below 60% of average income and material deprivation on a number of key items. Persistent poverty, which was defined at the EU summit in Laeken, Belgium, in 2001, is defined as a person/household being below the 60 per cent of median income poverty line in the current year and for two of the three previous years.

Before a policy can be put in place to deal with poverty the causes of poverty must be found also the solutions to the causes. The causes of poverty are unemployment, educational failure, tax and welfare systems, inequality, discrimination and exclusion. In 1997 the Irish government implemented the National Anti-Poverty Strategy (NAPS) to combat poverty. NAPS was a first as it was the first strategy that set out ‘specific targets for poverty reduction’ (Frazer, H. 1999, p6) It was implemented by the then Minister for Social Welfare Proinsias De Rossa. The original targets for NAPS for 1997 - 2007 were to reduce those living in “consistent poverty” by half, halve unemployment to six by 2007, cut long-term unemployment to three point five percent by 2007, eliminate early school leaving before the Junior Cert and place the needs of the poor and socially excluded on top of the national agenda in terms of Government policy.

NAPS has had some successes. In the case of consistent poverty it has dropped from fifteen percent in 1994, to the ten percent in 1997 and to six percent in 2000. The drop in consistent poverty reflects sharp drop in depravation levels. If NAPS is to reach its 2007 target, then consistent poverty to less than five percent by 2004 and by less then two percent by 2007.

As the number of people living in consistent poverty since the introduction of NAPS, the number of those living in relative poverty has increased. Relative poverty has increased from 17.4% of persons (16.3% of households) in 1987, to 20.9% of people (25.8% of households) in 2000. This is due to a number of factors. Between 1997 and 2001 employment income has increased by 40%. In the same period non-contributory pensions increased by 35%, contributory pensions by 25%, unemployment assistance by 21%, and single parent allowance and disability allowance have increased by 18% (Source: Layte at al, 2004 p6) . The differences in the increases have made it easier for those on state benefits to fall into relative poverty.


In 2002 the Irish government reviewed the targets of NAPS. The new targets want consistent poverty eliminated if possible, eliminate long-term unemployment when possible, ensure housing supply in brought inline with demand and reduce the gap in life expectancy between traveller community and the rest of the population by at least ten percent by 2007. These new targets were launched by the Minister for Social Welfare, Dermot Ahern, in “Building an Inclusive Society”. This became known as NAPSincl.

There has been much criticism of NAPS and NAPSincl by various groups. The Economic and Social Research Institute (ERSI) believe using income levels as a measure of poverty fail to give an accurate picture of Irish poverty. The Conference of Religious of Ireland (CORI) believes that the government have “betrayed poor in favour of the better-off” (Donaghy, K. 2001 p7). CORI says this as the government negotiate with trade unions and employers, but make no negotiations with Ireland’s poorest people or representative groups.

Irish data collected by the Irish Government cannot be compared to data collected by the EU as the methodology used by the Government is different to that of the EU. According the EU Survey on Income and Living Conditions in 2003, 23% of the population are living in relative poverty. While less than 9% of the population are living in consistent poverty. This is a lot higher than the Irish Government figures, but the Government are blaming the different methodologies for the discrepancies.

The Irish Government is not the only government in the EU with an anti-poverty strategy. In 2001 all the then fifteen member states initiated anti-poverty plans. The Irish government can draw on the other plans for new ideas for future policies. According to Brian Harvey (2001, pp8-9) the Dutch are focusing on involving the socially excluded themselves by holding twice-yearly consultations with benefit claimant groups. The Dutch have also set u a think tank to put forward new ideas to combat poverty. The Danish are focusing on improving the value of welfare payments. The Danes also have a DK70m plan for five model urban neighbourhoods, to improve housing, welfare, education and local democracy. The French have focused on new initiatives that range from helping people at on low incomes to improving access to culture and leisure. France already has a system of guaranteed rights to income, housing and health, but their plan says more needs to be done. Under the agreement in Laeken, Belgium all the plans will be compared under 81 different indicators.

According to the National Economic and Social Forum (2003, pp51-52) there are a number of challenges and barriers that NAPS must overcome in the future. NAPS must ensure the full participation of people living in poverty in informing any national policy against poverty. Future government poverty policies must be rights based rather then setting targets to reduce poverty. Future policies should aim to mainstream local, national and European anti-poverty strategies. Equality should be strengthened in future policies. More resources should be given to NAPS and future anti-poverty initiatives. Communications on poverty and related issues should be improved to show how programmes like NAPS are making a difference.

NAPS focuses attention on understanding causes of poverty and identifying action areas, this cannot continue in the future when hard-hitting policies to tackle poverty are needed. Ireland has changed dramatically since NAPS was first introduced. The unemployed are no longer the majority of the poor. The elderly now compromise the majority of the poor. The long-term success of NAPS and NAPSincl requires redistribution. This means linking pensions and other social welfare benefits to average incomes to prevent venerable people from falling into relative poverty. This will mean an important role for Government social and budgetary policy. The government should acquiesce to the community pillar and set targets for relative poverty instead of just monitoring it.

Poverty is still a major problem in Ireland as the number 15.3% of the Irish people are living in poverty. The richest ten percent of the Irish population is making 9.7 times made by the poorest ten percent of the population. This is something that cannot continue in today’s society where equality is treasured by all. Rights for those living in poverty should be high on the Government agenda and the Government should also involve people more in deciding future policies on poverty, just like they do with the national pay agreements.