E.U. Constitution, Oui or Non?.........

[red indian]

......the French electorate are just a few days away from voting in a referendom to adopt the E.U. constitution.

This impenitrable, unreadable, massive document has the French in total dissaray. As one of the principle and founding members of the E.U. they are faced with the very real prospect that the French electorate are about to vote against its ratification and adoption as the bedrock of the E.U.

The anti's are up in arms because they feel the provisions of the constitution are far too favourable to Anglo Saxon ideas and principles of free trade and anti protectionism.

Basically the French are all in favour of free trade as long as it does not cost them anything, and as long as their markets are fully subsidised and protected.

The British euroskeptic's on the other hand, intend to vote against the constitution becuase they see the document as far too protectionist and anti free trade, and generally far to restrictive in many ways.

All members of the E.U. are currently ganging up on the UK in an attempt to cancel our EU rebate (secured for us by Margeret Thatcher) this, despite the fact that with or with out the rebate, we are the second biggest contributor to EU funds, and yet recieve the least back of any of the other members.

I know which way I wil be voting if this governement ever gives me the opportunity to do so.


The U.S. constitution is about ten pages long and starts with "We, the people"......the E.U. equivalent starts with a list of names of Royal famillies.

Enough said.

 

[milagros317]

.....

The U.S. constitution is about ten pages long and starts with "We, the people"....

I wish that everybody in Washington remembered that.

 

[Dr. Vollin]

So now we know the vote was "Non". What do you think this means for the EU's future, red?

 

[red indian]

Blimey......

....thats a hell of a question! Knowing the way Brussels operates, they may well even now be conspiring to come up with a way of circumventing the French "non".

Eurocrats are not easily put off by a trifling matter such as the founder members electorate voting against a document they have taken years to concoct.

The Dutch look likely to vote no as well in a few days time, so its only going to get worse for the French government and its pet project.

The Brits have been promised a chance to vote on this "contitution" by Tony Blair, but as he has aligned himself with the Europhiles it will make him look very weak if he gets a resounding "bollocks!" from the British electorate, and he already looking very weak as it is so, as they say, turkeys dont vote for christmas.

God knows what Americans must make of this crazy set up we have in the E.U. Britain is the second largest contributor financially to the E.U. but we are bottom of all the member states in terms of benifits. We are one of the two principle financial backers, and yet we are not likely to get a chance to vote on the E.U. constitution.

Bloody ridiculous!

 

[Nige]

Red, this is what happens when we have a Dictator running the country, and he got less than 36% of the vote as well. That surely cannot be democracy?? Tony Blair is full of broken and empty promises, I am surprised 36% of the british people voted for him. At least the French did us a favour, by voting against this nonsense.

 

[nerobob]

It is democracy, because his party got more votes than anyone else. 🙄

 

[Nige]

Interesting!! Did his party get more votes?? They certainly won more seats, but that does not mean they got more votes.

 

[nerobob]

Whatever. He got in fair and square, and that's democracy. Fact.

 

[DEV]

It's a shame it was a no vote. Europe needs to be united and strong as America is all powerful at the moment and the Chinese Dragon is awakening. If Europe is to hold any say in worldwide matters it needs to be strong.

 

[red indian]

Yes Dev.......

.....good point, well made. However, I doubt that a model based on the preservation of the French way of life, and the protection of the French economy against all foriegn competition is the answer to the problem.


The French appear to be stuck in some kind of time warp based on the late 50's and extending in to the early 80's.

That time has gone, the world has moved on, the free market is the name of the game, and I hope the UK is well positioned to take advantage, and take control of the EU for the forseeable future.

 

[BigJim]

So now we know the vote was "Non". What do you think this means for the EU's future, red?

It means practically nothing will change. (Forgive me for butting in.) Remember, the arseholes in Brussells a lawyers to a body and they won't let a little thing like the will of the people stand in the way of their Great Work of Ages. There are ways and means around everything and the will of the people counts for nothing (Anyone else remembering Ted Heath saying that there was "no question of individual nations surrenduring any sovreignty", only to say in an interview twenty five years later when asked about the potential for a USE, "Oh yes, it was always about that"?).

As happened with Ireland, there will just be (if nothing else more devious) referendum after referendum, stretching years into the future, and eventually they'll get a "yes", whereupon a referendum result will suddenly become irrevocably legally binding. After that, no matter how much the Child changes, there will still be plenty of fucking wankers who will pompously say "we had our say back then" and expect people to actually believe the unbelieveable bullshit they're trying to peddle. There are still people who try to push that we can't in good conscience withdrawn from the E.U. because "we had our say" back in the mid-70's and said "yes". They don't care of course that nearly two new generations have entered the electorate since then, nor that what we were voting over bore no resemblance to the Antichrist of Politics that subsequently grew out of what was originally the European Economic Community, a free trade assosciation.