[EN] New European Constitution

[Elvain]

well, it seems that France suffers political earthquake now.

And Europe will need newly reworked Constitution...
I think that process of ratification is now senseless

[Ldvs]

It's not really senseless because if France is the only country that doesn't agree, we'll be pressured until we back down. It's whispered that there could be a new vote on the same Constitution fall 2006...

As for the political earthquake, unfortunately we're past that. I don't know what happens in your countries, although I suspect it's nearly the same, but in France when most of the politicians speak it's just wind, they rarely keep their word, thus only a handful now trust them and the institutions. Their only goal is to be elected: they've already been competing for the presidential elections for 3 years and the elections are scheduled in 2007!

[Angryminer]

1. There will be no new constitution.
2. Even if only one member of the EU agreed to talk about a new constitution everybody would know that it would never be so "social" again. Most propably we would get a by far more liberal constitution.
3. If the french understood that they didn't vote against Chirac but against France itself, they wouldn't have voted against the constitution. Or at least less than 50% of the french would have voted against the constitution.

Angryminer

[Elvain]

I agree with you , Angry. I think constitution should be rather liberal than even more social

But I must say that if the French really voted "against the Constitution" instead of "against president Chirac" (what is possible, I don't know why it is everywhere interpreted as anti-Chirac voting, as if it was impossible that Constitution was refused) I see no reason why should be France "forced" to ratificate it. It would be against freedom!!!!

And from several opinions I've heard it is very possible that vote wasn't against Chirac, but against extending of EU further and further (I could understand why French don't want even 25, not speaking about 27 or even 29(furthemore with Turkey)

[Ldvs]

I see no reason why should be France "forced" to ratificate it. It would be against freedom!!!!

I see one: they don't want to renegociate the Constitution. Thus, if France is isolated, we could be told: "Hey! See, you're alone there, everyone's agreed. We give you a last chance to reconsider your foolish act"
Why do you think they would continue the ratification process otherwise? They want France (or any other country that says "No", provided they're fewer than 5) to revote.

[Elvain]

This is true. But why do I disagree with it?
France said NO and there are also many other nations that may say NO too. Nobody as right to force them to agree. We must consider what are the reasons of the refusal and do something withit, not force them to accept it. This is way of Bushes policy: wither you agree with Bush or you will be forced to agree with him. Europe shouldn't do this.
It is hard to find compromise that 25 nations will agree with (Bulgaria and Romania - future members - will agree with everything just to get inside) but such compromise must be found.
If this constitution was found as bad (maybe it will be really proven that French voted against Chirac, not against the Constitution) it shuold be reconsidered

[Ldvs]

They didn't vote against Chirac, but rather agaisnt the idea of "Liberalism"... As soon as they spot words such as "market", "competition", it turns into a phobia. The "No" supporters just exploited this concept perfectly and won...

[Angryminer]

Then there will be no french "yes" to any european constitution, because this was the most "social" constitution the european union will ever get.

But I personally believe that at least 5% of the french denied the new constitution because they said "no" to Chirac's policies. These 5% would have been completely sufficiant to accept the constitution.

And about Elvain and freedom:
So why do 5% of the french force me and a great many other europeans to live without the constitution?
... Yes, I'm teasing you. :wink:

I cincerely hope that the french accept the constitution when they are asked again. It is vital that this constitution is accepted, or we won't have any constitution in the near future because the next one will be more liberal.

Angryminer

[Ldvs]

Then there will be no french "yes" to any european constitution, because this was the most "social" constitution the european union will ever get.
Indeed, but if they hadn't put an economic model in a Constitution which must not have one then the "No" supporters couldn't have whinned about the liberalist ideology of it. Hopefully, they will drop Part III when they present it again.

But I personally believe that at least 5% of the french denied the new constitution because they said "no" to Chirac's policies.
15% would certainly be closer to the truth...

[Noldy]

Well, guys, it's over in Netherlands. A half an hour ago we stopped voting and it's definately a NO. It's not official but the first estimations are that 63% (!) has voted against; so you can count on it that it will be no.

TBH, if i could vote, I would nhave voted FOR. I know I posted i wanted to vote against, but I changed my mind :) I think I was a little too harsh when speaking against.
There isn't actually that much going to change in the constitution, it's more of bringing all the treaties that have been done since 1956, which is a good thing. Since the first european organisation (i dunno the English names of all those treaties and stuff, but i know it began with EG - dutch abbreviation) they have been bringing Europe closer to each other and created a wide market. This is particularly good for Netherlands, as we are the European mainport with our Rotterdam harbor. This also, although it's a small one, is a step forward.
Besides that, I was appauled to hear the reasons people had to say against the constitution. Arguments about the Euro and Turkey or our goverment were brought forward when voting against. This has absolutely nothing to do with the constition. Also, the parties for which I am for all are FOR the constitution and all the parties I am against vote AGAINST.

Overall, I find it a pity that we voted no because the people who made the constitution are actually (though indirectly) elected by us to take decisions for us, they know best the buissiness that's going on, and know the mob must decide about the constitution, something most people dont know or understand what it is about. A referendum about Turkey extension and such, ok, they are worth voting about, but not the constitution. This will not bring the Netherlands in a too favoured position in the EU, though it will not mean a crisis.

EDIT: Counting is over and official is 61,6% AGAINST