Steer clear of the zealots

The EU is flexing its political muscles as D-day for the Lisbon Treaty approaches, with the Irish referendum scheduled for October 2. But the Times reports that Brussels is in a panic because the Czech government is planning to delay signing the treaty for up to six months even if Ireland approves it second time round.

The controversial Czech President Vaclav Klaus is apparently manouvering to upset the referendum, which will see fundamental changes in the way the EU operates, such as the introduction of increased powers for the European Parliament. The six-month Presidency rotation among member states would change to a two-and-a-half year period, allowing countries to more effectively stamp their authority on their time in charge.

Without doubt, the treaty is controversial. It smacks of arrogance - beaurocrats in Brussels dishing out laws with greater ease to an increasingly Europhobic popoulation whose disillusionment with the Union is increasing markedly. Lisbon also makes provisions for the position of EU Council President - a role Tony Blair is said to be tipped for, and a proposition the Liberal Democrats have rightly denounced for a multitude of reasons.

But there are differences when it comes to opposition of the EU.

The original rejection by Ireland of the treaty was the culmination of protests by a variety of organisations and political camps who viewed it as fundamentally undemocratic. This argument has foundations in a fear for the democratic rights of EU citizens whose involvment in EU decision-making is limited because members of some institutions such as the Commission are not elected.

The Czech opposition, however, is very different. President Klaus is a fervent climate change denier and has been embroiled in corruption scandals - indeed, his privatisation projects in his home country have been linked to a rapid spread of corruption. His opposition to the treaty is clearly influenced far more by a selfish opposition to its moderate proposals on tackling global warming than any genuine concern for the democratic rights of his people.

The problem with criticism of the Union in the member states is that it is dominated by nationalist zealots who generally make selfish proposals that serve only to fuel their own political agenda - UKIP is a prime example. There is undoubtably a need to address the democratic shortcomings of the EU, but groups aiming to do so must be wary of being led astray by the fanatics.