PDA

View Full Version : EU constitution



Dutch Baka
25-05-05, 20:27
Okay the 4th of july i can vote for YES OR NO.... if netherlands will join the EU constitution... right now it is a 60% no in the netherlands and the goverment worries a lot about it.

im still thinking about what should i do?

one way i want to say now, because i dont want a United states of EUrope... i think netherlands will lose a lot of things in the future, like gay marriage, legal soft-drugs, etc etc... this is why i would say NO

but, i think if it will be a NO , it will be verry bad for the economic, because were are being closed out.... this means no salary raises, higher prices, etc etc and this is what the dutch really do not want at all!!!!! so this is why i would say YES

im having a hard time to choose, maybe i shouldnt choose because i will leave my country anyway, but it still stays my country!!!

so please help me vote, what did you vote? what would you vote, what advice can you give me???


p.s. sorry if my spelling is wrong, and some facts arnt completle right.

Miss_apollo7
25-05-05, 20:54
In Denmark, we will have a referendum the 27. September 2005.

I would vote yes, so decision-making could be planned federally among the member states and have directly elected Parliament. Then, we can become a strong Europe and become one strong and serious player in world politics.

Mycernius
25-05-05, 22:50
Tony Blair keeps saying that we will have a referendum on this, whether or not France and The Netherlands vote no. But I have a feeling that there would be a strong no vote in the UK (no surprise) and Tony might not be there to make the choice. As for you Dutch Baka I would vote for what feels right for you. Do you feel that Europe is strong enough at the moment without a constitution? That we will move closer together without being forced by Brussels, or do we need it to make us move closer?

Alma
26-05-05, 00:05
if i live that long to see this for my country...
uh... what to say, dutch, vote what you feel that is best for you and your familly, i guess. it is hard, i would vote now for yes, because my country is sooo troubled etc, but you know best for your country. hey, it is really big decition, good luck!

Duo
26-05-05, 00:44
man, I wish i would have the oppurtinity to vote, damm, i envy you guys sometimes :p

But um, dutch baka I think you should vote YES most defenetely I mean dont think Europe is against gay marriage and soft drugs, in belgium already there is gay marriage and stuff, soooo, plus I dont think the constitution will change things like that, it's just something that increase federalism and efficiancy of the new European system.

Anyways, I don't get why in France also there seems to be an attitude towards going no, now the netherlands :S, and also the UK :s

this is gettin a bit depressing, we are supposed to keep on going forward, not backward :(

bossel
26-05-05, 03:42
Maybe you should 1st read the constitution & then make your decision. If I see it right, not that much will change, anyway.

Constitution (http://europa.eu.int/constitution/en/lstoc1_en.htm)
Charter of Fundamental Rights (http://www.europarl.eu.int/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf) (PDF, integral part of the constitution)

I suppose, it won't really matter, though. If only one country doesn't ratify the whole thing is void. If not France, the UK will vote "no". If not the UK, some other...

thomas
26-05-05, 03:48
The term "plebiscite" derives from the Latin "plebs", that's why my government took no risks and decided not to hold a referendum, lolol. The Austrian parliament ratified the constitution last week. Personally, I understand the qualms eurosceptics hold against the constitution, but this is certainly a historic step for Europe that shouldn't be frustrated by internal bickering and national considerations.

As bossel pointed out, not a lot is going to change anyhow, but a symbolic display of unity would be of utmost importance.

Dutch Baka
26-05-05, 07:51
thanks for all the reply's , yes im sure going to read , hear more about the constitution the next week, as i really want to vote. this friday there is a 2 hour program on tv about it,, and i will just sit down with a nice beer in my hand watching it!

i think the thing is in the netherlands ( maybe more country's) that the feel so betreated betrayted by the goverment here, with the euro first of all, and things like that, that they dont trust this so good, of course now maybe nothing change, but maybe in the future it will be.

before the euro came the all promised good things, but everything just becom worst, i do not know any dutch who is happy with the euro, i see some benifets in it, but as long as the salary's dont rise ( if the will rise, they will steal your money from other things)

i dont know good how this is in other country's what they feel about the euro?

so yeah, in my opinion, and what i have heard, the dutch just dont trust it, for what will happen in the future.

I WILL READ MORE AND SEE MORE, thanks to ya all!!!

Lacan
27-05-05, 15:13
France will (I hope) vote no, not for internal bickering and national considerations, but for for a renegociation of the constitutional treaty. If you read the constitution you will see why...

Duo
27-05-05, 17:02
Are you also one of those people afraid that Turkey will join?

Can you explain to me why? Your points and objections.....

Lacan
27-05-05, 20:40
Are you also one of those people afraid that Turkey will join?

Can you explain to me why? Your points and objections.....

I welcome Turkey in the EU, Turkey is a part of europe, but this has nothing to do with the constitution...

my points:

-total independence of the european bank, no control of the fluctuation of the €uro
-NATO as the principal defense of europe, it's difficult to have a diplomatic weight if you do not control your army isn't it. And remenber the Irak conflict...
-european deputies has no right to present law projects, a majority of social deputies are useless if no social laws are presented to vote
-any help of a government to a private society or entreprise are prohibited, good thing the AIRBUS A320 is already finished...
-and finally we won't be able to change anything in this constittution if it is ratified... scary
Those are the major problems French have with this constitution, just change this five points and France will ratified this treaty.

oh and please excuse my poor english skills :p

Dutch Baka
27-05-05, 21:57
i dont know if i welcome turkey to the EU yet, if i see what happend a couple of months ago with the woman that were protastating and that the police were really hard to them, i think no, i think turkey still need to change some thing before they can join in... other way i think it is really good that the come , it will unit the west with the m_east more if you ask me

about the constitution, isnt it just way to early to do it? why now? why not in 5 years
first the EURO, which havnt done much good yet, and then the Constitution,,,, how to trust that, when they didnt won our trust with the Euro???

Mycernius
27-05-05, 22:01
I heard on the news that some politician from Luxembourg has said that France and the Netherlands should keep having referendums until they get the yes vote. Democracy at work.

RockLee
27-05-05, 22:09
I don't want more Turkish or Moroccean peepz in Belgium, not because I'm a rascist, but because there has to be a limit.Right now there are WHOLE NEIGHBOURHOODS filled with immigrants where I live.And those people just won't adjust to our way of life.There have been a lot of problems with them and they make demands that are not reasonable.They want Arabic as the 4th official language in Belgium ??? like WTF??? There is a treshold, and they are crossing it very very bad ! If they would integrate in our society,and would act like normal people they would be better accepted in my opinion.I think they are doing it to themselves.

Also I can't go anywhere (unless remaining at home) without hearing at least 1 conversation in Turkish.It's driving me mad :( I wish there would be more Japanese...at least I would benefit from it :P :blush:

bossel
27-05-05, 22:15
-total independence of the european bank, no control of the fluctuation of the €uro
What would be the problem with that? The German Bundesbank was always rather independent, no problems in Germany.


-NATO as the principal defense of europe, it's difficult to have a diplomatic weight if you do not control your army isn't it. And remenber the Irak conflict...
Can't see your point here, either. Coordination on a European level should increase, but defence will still be a largely national task, there won't be too many changes here. (see article I 41)


-european deputies has no right to present law projects
Where does this stand in the constitution? For what I know, the exact rules of how the parliament will work in the future have to be layed down in new laws which are not part of the constitution. Could you point me to the article where it states what you wrote?

Addendum: I just found this in the protocols section (part4, prot.2, art.4):
"The European Parliament shall forward its draft European legislative acts and its amended drafts to national Parliaments."
Therefore it seems as if the EP will have some legislative rights.


-any help of a government to a private society or entreprise are prohibited
Could you point to the article where this is stated? Not that I would be opposed to this, since the usefulness of economic aid to single companies is dubious at best. Subsidies in general are not prohibited, anyway. You should read protocol 29 (part IV) for this. Quote:
"RECALLING that the provisions of Section 3 of Chapter III of Title III of Part III of the Constitution, on economic, social and territorial cohesion as a whole provide the legal basis for consolidating and further developing the Union's action in this field, including the creation of a fund;"


-and finally we won't be able to change anything in this constittution if it is ratified... scary
Where does it say so? Anyway, AFAIK any member state has the right to quit the EU later on. Therefore if a country is unhappy with the constitution it can say good bye.

Dutch Baka
27-05-05, 22:20
I heard on the news that some politician from Luxembourg has said that France and the Netherlands shopuld keep having referendums until they get the yes vote. Democracy at work.


yeah some dutch guy said this, that if the dutchies so NO, there should be a new referendum ( mmm i want to vote on this guy so he could become premier, but im reconsidering this)

jhough37
27-05-05, 22:24
As a history student it is very interesting to see the debates about this and reflect on the same type of debates that took place in establishing the constitution of the United States of America. I wonder if we can look back in a few decades and really compare.

Mycernius
27-05-05, 22:33
As a history student it is very interesting to see the debates about this and reflect on the same type of debates that took place in establishing the constitution of the United States of America. I wonder if we can look back in a few decades and really compare.
You could look to the US, but it is different in Europe to the US. The US was really 13 colonies from one country. They had the same language and the same cultural background. Within the EU you have 15 countries with different backgrounds and languages. The problems with the EU constitution would be cultural differences. What is acceptable in Germany may not be acceptable in Greece, not that the Germans had much choice in whether they want the constitution or not.

jhough37
27-05-05, 22:41
The 13 US colonies were the exact same. They might have had similiar backgrounds but they were fiercely independent and really wanted very little to do with each other. Their economies were not tied together and it took quite a bit of political manuvering to get them to agree to a single constitution. In actuallity the chances of the "United States" ending up like Europe, with independant state/nations was pretty high.

And also, they we're not totally "from one country" As they had pretty high populations from multiple European countries.

Lacan
28-05-05, 02:19
What would be the problem with that? The German Bundesbank was always rather independent, no problems in Germany.

It may not be a problem in France, but this is a serious issue in France (with a high €uro ->low exportations, high concurence with China etc...)


Can't see your point here, either. Coordination on a European level should increase, but defence will still be a largely national task, there won't be too many changes here. (see article I 41)

article I 41: "The common security and defence policy shall include the progressive framing of a common Union defence policy. This will lead to a common defence, when the European Council, acting unanimously, so decides. It shall in that case recommend to the Member States the adoption of such a decision in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements. (...)it shall respect the obligations of certain Member States, which see their common defence realised in the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, under the North Atlantic Treaty, and be compatible with the common security and defence policy established within that framework."

since soon enough any EU country will be a part of the NATO, so any initative "uncompatible" with Bush oh excuse me the NATO isn't possible


Where does this stand in the constitution? For what I know, the exact rules of how the parliament will work in the future have to be layed down in new laws which are not part of the constitution. Could you point me to the article where it states what you wrote?

Addendum: I just found this in the protocols section (part4, prot.2, art.4):
"The European Parliament shall forward its draft European legislative acts and its amended drafts to national Parliaments."
Therefore it seems as if the EP will have some legislative rights.

Article III-396:1. Where, pursuant to the Constitution, European laws or framework laws are adopted under the ordinary legislative procedure, the following provisions shall apply.

2. The Commission shall submit a proposal to the European Parliament and the Council...
Only the comission can submit laws to the EP, a deputy alone can't...

sorry I'm tired, its 2:20 am, and the text of the constitution is written in a very small police so I will respond later to the other questions, but those facts are accepted to be true by both pros and cons constitution, the debate is about their importance.

oh, and I forgot to mention the laicity problem and the bolkenstein directive which are big issues too...

bossel
28-05-05, 05:12
Thanks for the sources.


It may not be a problem in France, but this is a serious issue in France (with a high €uro ->low exportations, high concurence with China etc...)
Same in Germany, but the Euro goes up & down, just as any other currency (except eg. the Yuan, dictatorships like to have control). At least for Germany, the rise didn't have that much of a bad effect on exports. & since imports got cheaper, an expensive Euro is actually good for me.


since soon enough any EU country will be a part of the NATO, so any initative "uncompatible" with Bush oh excuse me the NATO isn't possible
I think, you misinterpret something there: "it shall respect the obligations of certain Member States"
That does not mean that the joint EU forces would be willing participants in US military campaigns. It means that some member states which see their role in NATO as such, can put (part of) their forces under NATO command if & when they deem it necessary.

As could be seen in the case of Iraq, just because you're a NATO member doesn't mean that you have to follow Bush's orders.



Only the comission can submit laws to the EP, a deputy alone can't...
That's true, could be seen as a major flaw.
But as I understand it, this can be changed at a later point, depending on the laws regarding the procedure.
Anyway, to me that wouldn't be a major obstacle. It's not as if a law would come into force because one MP proposes it. The details of any law are usually negotiated behind the scenes, who then submits it, is of minor consequence (just IMO).

Good night!

Duo
28-05-05, 13:02
i dont know if i welcome turkey to the EU yet, if i see what happend a couple of months ago with the woman that were protastating and that the police were really hard to them, i think no, i think turkey still need to change some thing before they can join in... other way i think it is really good that the come , it will unit the west with the m_east more if you ask me

about the constitution, isnt it just way to early to do it? why now? why not in 5 years
first the EURO, which havnt done much good yet, and then the Constitution,,,, how to trust that, when they didnt won our trust with the Euro???


I'm sorry but i'm gonna have to ask you, have you ever been to Turkey before ?

A loft of people that are anti-turkish i think have no idea what this country is about. It has been labeled as this backward muslim country that can like destroy european values and that will invade europe and what not........... and whose people are all dark looking with huge mustaches and women with veils.

Well let me tell you that's totally the wrong picture. Western Turkey, especially, is one of the most "europeanized" parts of the Balkan I seen. The people at first, looks wise, look like your avearage european, and also beahavior wise they are very very similar to the rest of balkan countries, ie GReece, Slovenia, the latter EU members, etccc........

Then as religion is concerned, Turkey has a very very strong secular sentiment, especially in the bureacracy and the army. I agree that there are some issues, economy a bit for example and the issue of the Kurds and what not, but instead of shunning Turks away, Europe should put its arm around it and favor positive change and improvment, and lastly, we can not leave out a country that has been such an important player in European history and demographic change. In Turkey, especially Instanbul, there has been a gene orgy, south eastern balkanic genes are all over the place there with huge Bosnian and Albanian minorities, and let's not forget GReek; turkey and greece have had a 50% gene transfer with each other through the ages.

alexriversan
28-05-05, 13:28
now, i read your post, and had an idea:

same sex couple can buy licence to live together for one year, like dog licence.

including the PURPOSE. means, credit card institute can access the data field "PURPOSE". and, this does not include "grow up children". or, additional camera in the dining room, for safety purpose*. do not know if you would like to have that.

now, experience shows, such relationship often ends after three years.

so, banish the marriage discussion, and introduce a licence. means, people pay for that. not the other way round, gettin tax relief.

wouldn't it occur as a big PITY, to abandon all the smokin/boozin liberty, holland has obtained?

it occured, only 6/7 percent of NL people use to smoke hash, even if allowed. most people stay away from it.

*medicians would argue, to monitor correct nourishing. they can "be" quite cynical.

hope you excuse my disapproval by that contribution.

Mycernius
28-05-05, 14:30
I don't think the UK has any problem with Turkey becoming a full member of the EU. Tony Blair is for them, but from what I can gather the French government don't want them to become full members. I cannot see why they can't. everyone one mentions human rights abuses to the Kurds, but the UK has done this and is in the EU, and so have other EU members with their minority groups.

Dutch Baka
28-05-05, 19:52
I'm sorry but i'm gonna have to ask you, have you ever been to Turkey before ?

A loft of people that are anti-turkish i think have no idea what this country is about. It has been labeled as this backward muslim country that can like destroy european values and that will invade europe and what not........... and whose people are all dark looking with huge mustaches and women with veils.

Well let me tell you that's totally the wrong picture. Western Turkey, especially, is one of the most "europeanized" parts of the Balkan I seen. The people at first, looks wise, look like your avearage european, and also beahavior wise they are very very similar to the rest of balkan countries, ie GReece, Slovenia, the latter EU members, etccc........

Then as religion is concerned, Turkey has a very very strong secular sentiment, especially in the bureacracy and the army. I agree that there are some issues, economy a bit for example and the issue of the Kurds and what not, but instead of shunning Turks away, Europe should put its arm around it and favor positive change and improvment, and lastly, we can not leave out a country that has been such an important player in European history and demographic change. In Turkey, especially Instanbul, there has been a gene orgy, south eastern balkanic genes are all over the place there with huge Bosnian and Albanian minorities, and let's not forget GReek; turkey and greece have had a 50% gene transfer with each other through the ages.

No i havnt been there, but i have turkisch friends for all my life. I AM NOT ANTI-TURKISCH, if you mean that, just i dont know if turkey is ready for it yes or no. thats it, for the rest i know turkey is a modern country, with such friendly people, and im not afraid they will invate europe at ALL....

so for one more time, i dont look negative to turkey, just i dont think they are ready yet!!!!

Dutch Baka
28-05-05, 19:57
now, i read your post, and had an idea:

same sex couple can buy licence to live together for one year, like dog licence.

including the PURPOSE. means, credit card institute can access the data field "PURPOSE". and, this does not include "grow up children". or, additional camera in the dining room, for safety purpose*. do not know if you would like to have that.

now, experience shows, such relationship often ends after three years.

so, banish the marriage discussion, and introduce a licence. means, people pay for that. not the other way round, gettin tax relief.

wouldn't it occur as a big PITY, to abandon all the smokin/boozin liberty, holland has obtained?

it occured, only 6/7 percent of NL people use to smoke hash, even if allowed. most people stay away from it.

*medicians would argue, to monitor correct nourishing. they can "be" quite cynical.

hope you excuse my disapproval by that contribution.

is this about the EU, or about the gay marriage?????:o

Lacan
29-05-05, 22:08
:romance: :cracker: :confetti: :hum: :beer: :gulp: NO wins in France with 55% and 70% of participation

Dutch Baka
29-05-05, 22:50
YES, that makes me happy without France its non good for the constitution i think, so now it will be almost sure netherlands will say no too....

and i made my decision to, i will say NO.

because many things we already have, and dont need, and i think it is to early for this...

let us first go up with economic and win the trust from the goverments again!!!

thanks all of you people, to help me making this decision!!

Lacan
29-05-05, 23:00
I hope this will be a new start for another europe, a more democratic one

Duo
29-05-05, 23:14
No i havnt been there, but i have turkisch friends for all my life. I AM NOT ANTI-TURKISCH, if you mean that, just i dont know if turkey is ready for it yes or no. thats it, for the rest i know turkey is a modern country, with such friendly people, and im not afraid they will invate europe at ALL....

so for one more time, i dont look negative to turkey, just i dont think they are ready yet!!!!


Well, for that neither is romania or bulgaria but oddly enough they are entering

Lacan I don't understand what you're so happy about, what new democratic Europe ?

Democracy works only efficiently with representative and delegated powers, and countries of europe have to start to delegate powers to the EU system and try to understand that if we are going to have a united europe we need to take bold steps else we are gonna either ruin all the progress till now or progress with small tiny steps and by then europe's power and influnce will be minimal. It really is a race against time I think, but whatever, you think im wrong and i think you're wrong, so I guess we can't change our minds, but I def know that people who are anti EU are wrong, and ppl who dont try to compromise things and let some things slide that they dont like are also wrong. Look at the American state-makin progress, Jefferson agreed to the constitution but also wanted a bill of rights, he didnt sabotage it, but waited 11 or so years until the bill was added, he compromised, i dont think ppl can just say NO like that. Plus in France a big issue of the EU constitution was that people didnt like the gov and voted no and were scared by interan ******* politicians who used this as a means to gain influence and what not to gain further popularity by scaring the people with idiotic things like Turkey will be in etc etc etc. internal politics ruined the real debate.......

Dutch Baka
29-05-05, 23:16
Well, for that neither is romania or bulgaria but oddly enough they are entering



Lol we start talking about turkey, not about other country's sorry next time i will think about all the other things more then what we talk about. LOL

what do you think about it DUO, about france said NO, and what does it mean for the consitution now?

Duo
29-05-05, 23:42
Lol we start talking about turkey, not about other country's sorry next time i will think about all the other things more then what we talk about. LOL

what do you think about it DUO, about france said NO, and what does it mean for the consitution now?


hey, i just fixed up my post above this one, so for france saying no, well im disapointed cuz france is a key player in the EU, plus i think the real debate there was ruinec by internal politics instead of looking at the real issues. I can understand concerns of nations of givin power to the EU but if we are in this, we really have to make it work, steadily and step by step, but we have to swallow sometimes things that we dont like for the greater good.

I can't hide it that im a very very pro EU person, mainly cuz i've traveled a bit around Eruope. lived here in Belgim for 7 years, have many internationalf friends from Europe and I can really see that Europe shares so much within itself and actually there is no more a pure european nation, and well, i mean through history and genes we really belong. Many people for example, think I'm dutch, they always talk to me in flemish, and in the Netherlands they always assume in dutch as well, and i have like no foreign blood in my family, and my turkish friend looks a bit russian :blush: and my slovene friend looks western as well, so i guess i want to say that we are not as different.

On an integration system, i would have thing sped up, try to have all of europe in by 2010 by agressive programs, especially in transitory countries who are being sabotaged by internal issues and irresponble and selfish politicans who drag things down, such as some balkan countries, including my own. There i would have the EU exert strong strong pressure to have things move and even have EU agencies appeal to the local population to really pressure their leaders.

As far as the constitution i saw it's main outline on a special program the triangular design of it and it seemed fairly good. If there are objections things can be changed, but we cant change something that we say no to. I mean the constitution would have us solidify this union for the better, i think it's important now to create a more cohisivie union, a more efficient one, because we cant have wasted efforts and 100 thousand procedures and rules and what not just so that everyone is pleased....... we need to be efficient yet still considerate of national identity that I think can slowly dissapear if we increase the Euro mentality and atmosphere.

Also many people are displeased with the EUro, but let's not forget that it was also the fall of the dollar that made the EURO stronger and made many european economies go down a bit because Americans, the largest partner in trade prolly of the EU, quit buying some european products because the dollar kept falling against the Euro, and we kept importing more cuz we could buy more for the same amount of Euro.

WE cant have good and happy things all the time, things go up and down, especially the economy, we can't blame the the Euro solely for this. I mean i guess I would to put it this way, think of it this way ? What chance has the the Netherlands or any other EU country to best have their benefits served in the world aren alone against the EU and the emegering giants India, China etc. Now what chance do u have if you are part of the EU? I think for the small coutnries especially the EU is a good thing, because we can have our way and best serve our interestests by being a in a larger and more powerful entity. And even for countries like France, the good times wont last forever, their population power wont stand a chance once india and china begin to emerge.......

Well I hope the other EU countries vote YES, and then france maybe can reconsider under a proper campaign that is about the EU constitution and not about the Gov or internal bickering......

Lacan
30-05-05, 11:42
The debate in France was very hot. If you think that french people voted against their government then you're wrong. People in France don't vote that massively to punish a governement, plus a majority of the government sympathizer voted NO too! If you followed the fluctuation of the french opinion, you can see that the French were naturally bending to vote yes, as every single politics figures was saying it was a good treaty.
Then the French people started to read the text, books about the constitution are best sellers here. We all think that it was a good treaty, but there are some major flaws that we don't want to be "engrave in the marble".
You discuss the term of a contract before you subscribe it, not after. We have experienced the "shut up! you said yes!" just too many times...
I am very european, i love europe and I think that a constitution was a good idea but this love is not blinding me, I love europe so I want what is best for her.
And finally this NO is not a no to Europe but a yes to a slightly different Europe, a europe with more social and democratic concerns and not just a free market.

Once again excuse my poor english, me learning the Korean language is not helping right now...

Duo
30-05-05, 15:18
No worries, your english is fine.

The free market thing is way blown out of proportion....besides you have to realize that you can't always have it your way, if every country in Europe wouldn't vote yes to any constitution because something that they dont like doesn't fit we will never have a treaty. The way to measure such decisions is to weight benefits vs. negative things, in my view the benefits were larger than the negative aspects.

And now furthermore, what this will cause is heads of the state of europe to go ahead and active certain main provisions of the the constitution at the EU council level, where approval of the population is not needed, sooo, the political elite of europe is actually gonna have to take things in their own hand because in the netherlands it's not looking good either, let alone the UK.

Maciamo
30-05-05, 17:05
I was quite dismayed to see that the French rejected the Constitution. I don't believe in perfection especially when 500 million people from different ages and cultures have to agree with each others about politics, rights and the economy. Therefore I think it was a good Constitution. The who voted 'no' were rather selfish and unrealistic in their hopes. Now France will only lose political weight within the EU and that can only means that decisions will be less favourable that they could have been for the French people in the future.

The BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4580909.stm) says that the French division over the Constitution was not political but a matter of class, with the professionals, businessmen and the middle classes voting 'yes' and the disaffected people at the lower classes supporting the 'no'. I suppose that means that just over half of the French not happy with the current economic situation or are among the 'disaffected'.

ArmandV
30-05-05, 23:12
The French always have marched to their own (different) drummer. They proved it once again.

Duo
30-05-05, 23:42
clever analysis, thx for the input

Lacan
31-05-05, 11:25
The French always have marched to their own (different) drummer. They proved it once again.

We will see soon enough if it is our own lonely way :-)


The way to measure such decisions is to weight benefits vs. negative things, in my view the benefits were larger than the negative aspects
You are right, but there are some principle we just couldn't let go
eg: laicity, directive bolkenstein that the clever president of the European commision Jose Manuel Barroso sait he would force on us with the new vote system and all the points I talked about earlier, I do think we can renegociate this points


The who voted 'no' were rather selfish and unrealistic in their hopes. Now France will only lose political weight within the EU and that can only means that decisions will be less favourable that they could have been for the French people in the future[quote]
So the other countries will have more political weight and it will be more democratic :p
OK maybe our hope are unrealistic but at least we tried, when the Nice treaty was ratified (in Fance!!) by our political leaders we couldn't do anything by cry, this is the first time sinc Maastricht that our opinion are in the balance. Like Liza Di Paolo Sandberg said on BBC NEWS yesterday, the EU need to hear her citizen voices and not be the playground of some elites.
(I love this woman).

[quote]The BBC says that the French division over the Constitution was not political but a matter of class, with the professionals, businessmen and the middle classes voting 'yes' and the disaffected people at the lower classes supporting the 'no'. I suppose that means that just over half of the French not happy with the current economic situation or are among the 'disaffected'.,
middle class represent far more than the half of the french. I don't know if I qualify in the "France d'en bas" (I am a scientist and earn my 3200€ per month) and I don't think this is how the division worked. It was more a matter of "potential victims". Those who think they were in danger or not with this treaty. Some who are fed up with the governement. And some who just didn't understand the treaty ( you can't ratify something you don't anderstand do you) A good margin of professionals and middle class voted no.
I am not in danger with this constitution nor do I care for the government, I think Turkey (and Ukraine) should enter the EU as soon as possible. So I based my vote on the text and only the text.

Mycernius
31-05-05, 16:59
I have heard on the news that they reckon if the Dutch vote no it will probably kill this current constitution. Probably won't stop our dear leader Rev.A.Blair from still holding a referendum. It really doesn't take a genius to realise how the vote will go in Britain, we are not the most EU friendly country.

Dutch Baka
31-05-05, 19:22
if more then 5 country's vote NO, the constitution will be GONE!!!!
if it is less then 5, there will be some good, boring Conversations!

Duo
31-05-05, 20:26
I hope that ppl come to their senses and stop for a second and vote on the constitution itself instead of other things, like grudges against the government, or paranoia about an invasion in europe or of being swallowed up by the EU and loosing power and sovreignty and what not.

Lacan
02-06-05, 10:41
The netherlands voted no. I think this is the end of the ratification process. But I think every country should have their word about what they think of this treaty.

Miss_apollo7
02-06-05, 11:26
France voted no, the Netherlands no....This is certainly not great news, as Denmark will have a referendum in September and the yes-campaign people are now thinking how they should win the campaign....

I am sad the way things have turned out, however, I would still vote yes.

Here are my views:
The EU is responsible for the last 50 years of peace in the member countries (no wars), and I think it is a pity that the "no advocates" are trying to build up a campaign that the treaty should be re-negotiated. The treaty is a result of years work among the member countries.
In my opinion, the "no advocates" have not won over me as I don't think they argue well-enough. The typical "no advocate" says that the EU will get more power and will grow too big losing our sovereignty.
In Denmark a certain political party wants us to say no to EU and have a society we had back in the 1930s: farming, reading the Bible, no immigrants, respect the Danish virtues, at-home-mom, etc.,.....This is a step back, not forth!!!
Some French "no advocates" say the EU is not big enough and the power is still not at its peak.

This means that the EU will become an EU in which the integreation of EU will be slower. It will take 10 years before the EU can become a strong unity and challenge the US as a "second force."

Duo
02-06-05, 14:49
I agree fully, plus wat really is irratating is that the NO side is just putting spin to the issue of the constitution with fear tactics with idiotic arguments such as beware of Turkey of eastern european migrants, makin us seem as like some kind of savage race ready to come and usurp everything good in western europe, just total crap and the sad part is that many here in the west dont know much about eastern europe and are getting scared s**tless by flamboyant right wing poiticians using this treaty as a means to gain more votes in their country and thus sabotating the process of an integrated Europe.

Dutch Baka
02-06-05, 19:31
well im happy we voted NO, i did too! 61,8 % NO
england will say no, thats almost for sure, if denmark say no that is 4 country's
tjechie is doubting, and sweden want to have a referendum too.. well if they all say no, that will be 6 so bye bye consitution!!!

IM NOT AGAINST the constitution, just they way they say VOTE YES YES YES YES, if you dont vote yes, it will be bad for the country and this and that... and i think it is too early, and i dont trust it 100%, some things should change in the constitution for they dutch people. and yes the east-europe country's is at least in the netherlands a small part to say no! but its more about we are afraid that the bigger country's get more power, and for the netherlands many new laws are not neccasary..

so constitution!!!! i will vote YES, when i trust my goverment, when the consititution change some things, and when the time is RIGHT, and that is for sure NOT NOW

( sorry i dont that much about politics, im just reading more about it, but yeah,, this is my opinion, and i geuss my opinion is imporant in SOME way LOL)

Duo
02-06-05, 20:44
But see that's the point....... you don't trust your government or what not, or you doubt them, or they have done you wrong... i dont know...... but voting yes and having a constitution assures that no matter the party that comes in power, your country will have to respect or abide or maintain some standards, economic prosperity and certain policies that will keep things stable. So even though one may have a crappy government, the EU constituion and standars assure that the country remains on track and moves in the right direction. Politicans are sometimes spineless and manipulators, but they can't go and mess around with what a larger entity their country is part of requires them to maintain, an entity that is made of experts in their field and of seasoned bureacrats. Whatever, but if people are discontent about their government or have been done wrong by it, or don't trust or what not, voting YES is a way to keep the governments of Europe in check.......

bossel
02-06-05, 23:10
and i dont trust it 100%,
If you don't know much about politics & the constitution, how do you know what's wrong? Anyway, do you really think, matters would get worse with the new constitution? & what do you base this opinion on?


some things should change in the constitution for they dutch people.
Perhaps you missed the point: The constitution is not for the Netherlands but for Europe in general. As it seems there is still too much nationalism around.

Isn't it strange that those who celebrate the most now are those on the far left & far right? Should make you think...


Edit:
BTW, the NYT has an editorial (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/02/opinion/02brooks.html?th&emc=th) which (although I don't agree with all of it) has some good points:

" This is the context for the French "no" vote on the E.U. constitution. This is the psychology of stagnation that shaped voter perceptions. It wasn't mostly the constitution itself voters were rejecting. Polls reveal they were articulating a broader malaise. The highest "no" votes came from the most vulnerable, from workers and the industrial north. The "no" campaign united the fearful right, led by Jean-Marie Le Pen, with the fearful left, led by the Communists.

Influenced by anxiety about the future, every faction across the political spectrum found something to feel menaced by. For the Socialist left, it was the threat of economic liberalization. For parts of the right, it was the threat of Turkey. For populists, it was the condescension of the Brussels elite. For others, it was the prospect of a centralized European superstate. Many of these fears were mutually exclusive. The only commonality was fear itself, the desire to hang on to what they have in the face of change and tumult all around.

The core fact is that the European model is foundering under the fact that billions of people are willing to work harder than the Europeans are. Europeans clearly love their way of life, but don't know how to sustain it. "

Maciamo
03-06-05, 17:39
I agree fully, plus wat really is irratating is that the NO side is just putting spin to the issue of the constitution with fear tactics with idiotic arguments such as beware of Turkey of eastern european migrants, makin us seem as like some kind of savage race ready to come and usurp everything good in western europe...

I have just come back from a 2 weeks trip to Turkey. I was surprised at how developed the country has become. The highways, cars and buses are at least as good as in Western Europe or Japan, and usually even better because newer. I was also surprised to see that the prices had skyrocketed, and a meal in a heap restaurant in Western Turkey now cost more than in Tokyo ! There are also many nice and new houses and apartment blocks everywhere, well tended public parks and gardens, new tramways, etc. I really can't see why the Turks would like to move to Northern Europe after joining the EU. With all the real estate agencies destined to North-Western European on the Western and Southern coast, I'd be more inclined to say that the movement of population is going the other way round.

Population-wise, I was also startled to see so many blue-eyed Turks (maybe 1/4 of them in Western Turkey) and even more blond people than in Italy or Spain. This is because so many of them have European blood, be it Greek, Celtic (from the Gallatians that invaded Anatolia in the 2nd century BC), Gothic (ditto later) or from the European possessions of the Ottoman Empire (about 10% of the present Turkish population). Historically Turkey was culturally, ethnically and linguistically European until the Turkish invasions from the 13th century. But as the Turks as somehow related to the Hungarians, Finns, Estonians and Bulgars, there is no even an ethnic argument against them. Less than 1% of the population is of Arabic descent, much less than in Spain - or France for that matter.

So there is in fact very little reason to refuse Turkey's accession to the EU. Turkey is also safer than many 'developed' European countries. The only reason it can't join now is its Human Rights issues with the Kurds (and Armenians ?), Islam (they really should prohibit the call to prayer at 5am if they want to join the EU :p ), discrimination against women (maybe to a similar extend as Japan), and a few other political issues. Even inflation wouldn't be that much a problem as Turkey won't join the Euro anyway (although most hotels already quote prices in euro only :p ).

Duo
04-06-05, 01:34
Maciamo you have hit the nail on the head. I was there about 2 years ago, and it was the same thing as you are describing, that is why people who tell me such stupid things turkey this and that annoy me because they don't know from first hand experience. It's not a perfect country, but Turkey has European blood and costums and is closely linked with the development of Europe in history, therefore it should belong in the EU.

lolife
04-06-05, 07:22
What I've heard and read, Turkey is very.. uhm.. split up. You do have a smaller very modern part, but also a larger rural part where much of the old traditions, etc, lives. And the gap between these two is supposedly huge. But as I said, not experienced it myself.

I also wonder, given that the € is this high, why there isn't more investments made abroad. Take profit from the cheaper imports (and not increase the imports). Or maybe it is, but I just don't seen any of it.

:-)

Sr Pasta
04-06-05, 15:13
Yay!! I was very happy to hear about the decisive no:s.

IMHO, corporations love the centralization of the European political structure, because they know very well how much more difficult this makes it for ordinary people to influence decisions.

I prefer democracy, myself.

Mycernius
06-06-05, 18:08
Our foreign secretary, Jack Straw has now put the UK referendum on hold. It's a political way of saying as far as the UK government are concerned it is dead. Some Backbenchers are concerned about Brussels trying to bring it in via the backdoor piece by piece

Duo
06-06-05, 18:21
yeah, i think that is something that may happen or that has a possibility to happen ; the political elites of europe don't really seem to be movin on the issue of a united europe.... so i donna, it will be interestin to see what happens.......

Maciamo
10-02-06, 13:20
A little update of the subject : Expatica : Flemish MPs approve draft EU Constitution (http://www.expatica.com/source/site_article.asp?subchannel_id=24&story_id=27509)


Flemish MPs approved the constitution with a large majority, with 84 votes in favour and 29 MPs opposed. One MP abstained from voting.

Only the extreme-right Flemish Interest MPs deputies rejected the constitution.
...
The parliamentary vote represented the last hurdle for the federal state of Belgium to formally ratify the charter. It means Belgium is close to becoming the 14th EU country to ratify the EU constitution.
...
The EU constitution had to be ratified by seven parliaments in Belgium: the Flemish parliament, Wallonian Parliament, French Community Parliament, the German-speaking community Parliament, the Brussels Parliament as well as the Belgian federal Parliament and Senate.

nurizeko
09-03-06, 19:32
I prefer democracy, myself.

Amen, brother.