View Full Version : [EN] New European Constitution
I dont know how it is most of the other EU countries, but here in NL we are soon going to vote for the new European Constitution.
What are your opinions on this? If i could vote, i would say no. That is because i think we get less democracy, less influence for netherlands and more bureaucracy.
Angryminer
04-05-2005, 20:46
The germans aren't asked, but that's fine with me.
The current ruling party in germany isn't very ... appretiated any more. So when this party asks the people to vote for the new constitution they will vote against it, because they don't like the people who asked the question.
Personally I think the new european constitution is good to give europe the chance to speak as one instituion with one voice. Another mayor advantage is that europe's economy will grow together. That will help the economically inferior countries and give growth to every nation in the EU.
Of course the new constitution is not perfect. In fact, there will never be a perfect constitution. Everyone will have to live with the downsides to gain the advantages.
Perhaps I'll throw in another two cents later.
Angryminer
Webmaster
04-05-2005, 21:06
the fact about the constitution is that the EU already acts by certain laws and rules. the constitution is just a formal act.
the member states will always be sovereign. there won't be less democrazy. the EU organizations are based on peace and democrazy.
europe has still to go a long road to speak with one voice. the consitution is one step as the EURO was.
as angryminer said, it isn't a perfect constitution. but which one was perfect from the beginning? it will be adjustable.
the EU is the only option for europe to become equal with china and the US.
I don't think The constitution is any good. Almost every european nation finds there something bad and it is natural.
I agree that in most of cases it is just formal definition of things that already work in Europe. Also there is great issue between smaller countries and big ones, especially France and Germany. People in France want to have more power in Europe while smaller nations want to be safe from their power. It is natural.
European constitution is a compromise. It must be compromise. In this case the compromise is not very good. But as far as I know the history there has never been anything perfect made by negotiations. European history is a history of imperfect decisions and institutions that are always reforming in order to be better.
Constitution should be better but if I would have given the right to vote about it (it is not decided yet in Czech republic if parliament or people will ratificate it) I will vote FOR.
Also there is great issue between smaller countries and big ones, especially France and Germany. People in France want to have more power in Europe while smaller nations want to be safe from their power. It is natural.
You've hit the main point I think. I will vote for the constitution because it's probably the best compromise we'll have since the points of views are divergent according to which country you live in.
Among the "no" supporters, many claim France will lose of its power. We actually hear it so often that it's truly unbearable, but hey, there are people who only want to see their own interests everywhere and are not very... conciliatory.
If you have read the Constitution, you'll see that small countries won't loose their power since it is required that 15 countries agree on an agreement for it to be sealed, whatever the % reached. Therefore the argument many Netherlanders use to criticize the Constitution is just preposterous.
yes, I think this is the best possible ballance.
If it is more for "big guys" like France and Germany, Constitution can't be ratificated in countries like Czech republic or Denmark or the Netherlands.
If it is more for "small guys" it won't pass in Germany and France.
We'll see if even this compromise will pass....
I think, these countries where referendum is held are making a mistake. Because most people don't know the constitution and many of them vote asked by close people and according to secondary circumstances ("I am anti-globalist, I'll vote against"). This lead to a dumb situation when if any one country votes against, EU has to consider constitution again, every country confirm it again and so on...
In my country, constitution was confirmed by parliament and I'm happy for that, because I know all this money can be used in better way then to organize another public voting, with only 30% citizens attending.
I think, these countries where referendum is held are making a mistake. Because most people don't know the constitution and many of them vote asked by close people and according to secondary circumstances ("I am anti-globalist, I'll vote against"). This lead to a dumb situation when if any one country votes against, EU has to consider constitution again, every country confirm it again and so on...
In my country, constitution was confirmed by parliament and I'm happy for that, because I know all this money can be used in better way then to organize another public voting, with only 30% citizens attending.
wise words, Baggy :go:
In my country it is not decided yet what will be the way of ratification :eek:
there is also huge sum of money for campaign to convince people to vote for the constitution... and this sum is now "governed" by our former prime minister who nobody believes...(as he used state money for his own political campaign)
and I'm afraid that many Czechs are dumb and just follow what is said to them in television (f.i. in one district a criminal - but owner of TV - was elected into senate and then the same criminal - after the Republic has to pay 10 billions of CZK(350 millions EURO) due to his foul business - was elected into European parliament :puke: ) I don't want those people to decide about European constitution!
nobody of them understands it, but old communists will go to the "election" and vote NO just because their communist leader told them to do so. And with low percentage of voters those prople may get high total percentage :sad:
Angryminer
17-05-2005, 10:31
I'm also very glad that the german parliament ratificated the constitution.
Our politicians might not be the smartest people, but at least they are smarter than the average citizen.
Angryminer
I still wonder why in some countries the people are allowed to vote for/against it, and in other countries, you can't vote. Of course, it's because of the consitution in every land, but it's not exactly democratic if some are not even asked.
yes, it is not. But hoow many of those being asked go and vote?
m curious what would be percentage of people presence in plebiscits. I would guess a number for Czech republic: about 40%
so then it would be enough if 21% would agree or disagree. Would this be democratic? No, it wouldn´t.
If 21% of all Czechs (there is about 10% communists who are strictly against, all nationalists will go and vote against and some people could vote against for objective reasons - objective for Czech republic) and the constitution fails. 21% of Czechs is about 180.000 peoople.(population of Czech rep is 10millions, many of them is under 18)
Do 180.000 mostly not very educated and in many cases blinded(by losat dream of communism) and manipulated(by criminal-led TV) people have right to refuse the constitution when other say 150 millions agreed to?
Here in France, it is quite the exception: there's a true debate and people try to be as informed about the subject as possible. However, the anti-globalization leaders are clearly trying to make the Constitution look like a scarecrow, say that it will jeopardise the welfare-state beyond everything that has already happened and they distort every argument possible to frighten the electors.
In France, the "No" may win because people don't (want to) realise that a high level of social security cannot be sustained if you don't take the global environment into account, and everything that firms could benefit from should not be accepted...
Webmaster
17-05-2005, 16:46
hopefully a "ja" from the german bundesrat will influence the people in france to say "oui"
Webmaster
17-05-2005, 16:48
I still wonder why in some countries the people are allowed to vote for/against it, and in other countries, you can't vote. Of course, it's because of the consitution in every land, but it's not exactly democratic if some are not even asked.
this is part of the constitution *g* on a european base there can be a referendum!
germany has no referendum since during the republic of weimar things went terrible wrong leading to hitler ;(
hopefully a "ja" from the german bundesrat will influence the people in france to say "oui"
We'll find out on May 29th :wink: From the look of it, there will be as small a margin on the winning side as there was when people voted in 1993 (Maastricht).
Webmaster
18-05-2005, 10:32
vive la france!
We'll find out on May 29th :wink: From the look of it, there will be as small a margin on the winning side as there was when people voted in 1993 (Maastricht).
Alas! I would have liked to see "plan B" ... :wink:
Alas! I would have liked to see "plan B" ... :wink:
There's one for sure. I can't possibly imagine European bureaucrats haven't planned something to save the day. In any case, the Nice treaty lasts until 2009 so there would be still time to come up with a better idea (I agree with them on one point: putting an economic model in a Constitution is utterly stupid). However, it will be to the sorrow of the opposition since they won't remake a Constitution with the "high social standards" they demand. Pity the utopians...
In the last part of the article III-145, there's something really important:
Without prejudice to Subsection 2 relating to freedom of establishment, the person providing a
service may, in order to do so, temporarily pursue his or her activity in the Member State where the
service is provided, under the same conditions as are imposed by that State on its own nationals.
In France it's in the spotlight, because it was exposed that France Telecom use a supplier that employs Portuguese employees who haven't received the minimum wage as it is set in France but received what they would have in Portugal (they're underpaid thus highly cost-effective). The worst part of it, is that it's perfectly legal according to the aforementioned article. In France the "temporarily" turns out to be 2 years!!
Of course, voting no to the Constitution won't change that since all the policies described in part III are already in use. But, as it is mentioned in the Constitution in the article IV-445:
The European Council may adopt a European decision amending all or part of the provisions
of Title III of Part III. The European Council shall act by unanimity after consulting the European
Parliament and the Commission, and the European Central Bank in the case of institutional changes
in the monetary area.
Such a European decision shall not come into force until it has been approved by the Member States
in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements.
Therefore, such measures wouldn't be removed once institutionalised (once the "yes" wins) as "easily" as a law could be removed.
I'd like to hear your opinions about this, especially the citizens of the countries that pay their employees less than in the "more" developed countries of Europe.
As most of you may have already heard, the "No" clearly won yesterday in France and by a fair margin (55%) at that. Hopefully there's an emergency plan.
vBulletin v3.5.4, Copyright ©2000-2007, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.