Views of the Treaty

Proponents of the Treaty claim it is a utilitarian adjustment to cumbersome EU governing mechanisms and a required streamlining of decision-making processes, necessary to facilitate enlargement of the EU into Central Europe. They claim that consequently is vitally important for the integration and future progress of these former communist countries. Many who are in favour of greater scope and power of the EU project, feel that it does not go far enough in fact, and that it may in any case be superseded by future treaties and Treatys (such as the possible ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon/Reform Treaty). Proponents differ in the extent to which enlargement may proceed without it, some claiming the very future of the Union's growth – if not existence – to be at stake, while others saying that enlargement can legally proceed – albeit at a slower pace – without it.

Opponents of the Treaty claim that it is a "technocratic" rather than "democratic" treaty, which further diminishes the sovereignty of national/local parliaments, and further concentrating power into centralised and unaccountable bureaucracy - "deepening but not widening" political power. They also claim that five applicants may join at once under the current system, and that all others may negotiate on an individual basis - which they believe will be advantageous to the applicants. It is also claimed that the Treaty of Nice will create a two-class and two-tier EU, specifically to enable an "inner-club" of powerful states (e.g. France and Germany) to effectively co-opt EU institutions for their own purposes. Opponents point out that leading pro-treaty politicians have admitted, that were referendums to be held in countries other than Ireland, it would probably be defeated there as well.