Several thousand French voters have made the difference between the "yes" and the "no" to the Maastricht Treaty. Following Ireland, Luxemburg and Greece a fourth country has democratically expressed its approval of the Treaty and with this vote the way is open for ratification by the other six who have not yet completed their internal procedures. Several thousand Danes made the difference between the "no" and the "yes" and this obliges the Twelve to find a way out of the legal labyrinth created by the Treaty itself and forces the Danes to re-think by another referendum.

The French Maastricht debate and the narrow difference between the "yes" and the "no" has revealed a fact stressed by the great majority of either camp: Europe's citizens want a Europe which is more transparent, more democratic and closer to them, that is capable of looking after their real interests.

If the governments want to take account of this, their citizens' will, they must, as a matter of priority, render more open and democratic the institutional interplay which governs Community decisions. They ought, in the first place, to change the modus operandi of the Council and make its legislative meetings public: it would suffice to alter the internal rules of the Council by qualified majority. True democracy will not be achieved, however, until the European Parliament has the same legislative powers as the Council.

If the governments want to take account of the worries of the public they must work to give the Union the means to be governed which means giving its institutions the wherewithall to view matters in terms of common interests, to formulate concrete measures to defend these interests, to find agreement for these measures amongst its citizens and to create a European administration entrusted with the realisation of these measures. To meet these challenges the national governments must allow the creation of a system of government at European level, both efficient and democratic at the same time.

Public opinion sees every day that Europe is not governed and the advances made by Maastricht in respect of economic and monetary union, foreign policy and Community powers risk weighing down even more a system of scant efficiency and inadequate democracy.

If the heads of state and government of the EC at the extraordinary Summit convened on the initiative of John Major, wish to respond to these questions, they must confirm that the Maastricht Treaty will come into force on 31 December 1992 as signed on 7 February, but at the same time they must map out the steps of Community reform focussed centrally on the organisation of European government. Being a matter of reforming the constitutional basis of the Community the European Council must establish a procedure capable of convincing and mobilising the people.

Could we accept yet again that such a radical reform of the "constitution" of the Community be conceived and adopted by methods which would be intolerable in our democratic countries?