France gives the EU a thumbs down

[Ed]

I really don't get what is going on, enlightenment is called for. Could it have to do with this?

Quote:

On the contrary, almost every Euro-poll has produced a No vote, whether in Ireland, Sweden or Denmark. On any normal measure, the EU has lost the confidence of its citizens. But the project was never meant to be democratic. From the first, the EU's founding fathers understood that it needed to be immune to public opinion. T

he genius of Jean Monnet and Robert Schuman was to design a system in which supreme power was wielded by unelected officials, and in which the peoples were presented with a series of faits accomplis. When, in 1992, they got their first No vote in Denmark's referendum on Maastricht, our masters were too set in their ways to consider respecting the result, and so pushed on regardless. They will do the same thing today.

Telegraph, today.

Unelected officials that "know best"?

[Seismosaurus]

YES!!!!

Truly a wonderful day. May there be many more rejections like it in the future! Dare we even hope that the EU itself might break up? Probably not, but fingers crossed...

[Supercharts]

A few months ago I read "And God Created the French" by Louis-Bernard Robitaille.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/ima...283155&s=books

The book is dense but the cover art explains it all.

[NoZed Avenger]

Quote:

Originally posted by Seismosaurus
YES!!!!

Truly a wonderful day. May there be many more rejections like it in the future! Dare we even hope that the EU itself might break up? Probably not, but fingers crossed...

I'm afraid that the best this can do is slow down the process. France will demand concessions in the charter and then push the revised charter vote through the legislature -- not leaving it to silly voters next time. A little thing like popular votes going against it is not going to stop this.

It may allow England some breathing room for a bit, though, and I hope it does. Y'all may not be too keen on joining when the charter may be amended in Fance's favor (in unknown ways) in the future.

[Ed]

So is the end result a benevolent dictatorship? Is this the nature of social progressionism?

[Flo]

Quote:

Originally posted by NoZed Avenger
I'm afraid that the best this can do is slow down the process. France will demand concessions in the charter and then push the revised charter vote through the legislature -- not leaving it to silly voters next time. A little thing like popular votes going against it is not going to stop this.

It may allow England some breathing room for a bit, though, and I hope it does. Y'all may not be too keen on joining when the charter may be amended in Fance's favor (in unknown ways) in the future.

and in the Netherlands' favor, and Poland's, and ....

[Flo]

Quote:

Originally posted by Ed
Unelected officials that "know best"?

relatives of self-declared experts who "know best" what Europeans and their politicians think and should do ...

[Drooper]

What this does show is the inherent hypocracy of the whole European "project" (don't you just lurve that phrase).

While everyone waxes on about Europeans becoming closure and the EU works to for the best of the whole these things are always voted down (by all countries) on the basis that constituent countries don't get to impose their own desires/beliefs on others.

[Flo]

Quote:

Originally posted by Drooper
What this does show is the inherent hypocracy of the whole European "project" (don't you just lurve that phrase).

While everyone waxes on about Europeans becoming closure and the EU works to for the best of the whole these things are always voted down (by all countries) on the basis that constituent countries don't get to impose their own desires/beliefs on others.

Always the same error: ascribing a hidden agenda to what is due to human nature ...


(It's unfair, it should be mine, mine, mine .....)

[Ed]

Quote:

Originally posted by Flo
relatives of self-declared experts who "know best" what Europeans and their politicians think and should do ...

And these things become law, don't they?

Tell me...what exactly is the difference between a benevolent socially awre state, ruled by fiat, that purports to have the best interests of "the people" at heart and conservative Islam?

What is the ultimate goal? From this side of the atlantic it appears to be a riskless society. Lord, the grandchildren of the resistance fighters who risked their lives fighting the Nazis being told how many hours they can work? WTF?

[asthmatic camel]

Oh what a joyous day! Chirac finally receives the bloody nose he deserves, from the French.

Seismosaur, I don't think this is going to lead to the break up of the EU, more's the pity, but it's a step in the right direction.

I'll be interested to see whether Blair and his mostly Europhile friends will allow the British their say, or slime around in the background making seedy deals so that they get their own way.

By the way, did you notice that Tony is having another free holiday in Tuscany? The freeloading scumbag.

[CBL4]

I think the good news is that it allows all countries to voice their opinion of the constitution without the threat of being ostr\acized. I would bet on "no" from at least 5 countries including UK and the Netherlands.

CBL

[DanishDynamite]

I suspect one of the problems is that this mega-document is generally refered to in the press as a Constitution. I'm not sure about the French, but this word would scare the hell out of a lot of Danes.

Officially, this document is a Constitutional Treaty. Just to clear things up.

A Constitution should be nowhere near 500 pages long. It shouldn't even be 10% of that.

I don't blame the French for voting No. Who the hell can expect the average person to read a 500 page document written in legalise, and then expect them to understand it?

I haven't read it either. So, I stick with the highlights I can find in newspapers, such as:

* Permanent EU president to replace six-month rotating presidencies

* EU foreign minister to conduct common foreign policy

* Qualified majority voting in most areas with vetoes limited

* Commission to be reduced to 15 with 10 non-voting associates

* Policy areas covered by European Parliament up from 34 to 70

* Legally binding Charter of Fundamental Rights

On the face of it, this doesn't look so bad.

[asthmatic camel]

Quote:

Originally posted by DanishDynamite
I suspect one of the problems is that this mega-document is generally refered to in the press as a Constitution. I'm not sure about the French, but this word would scare the hell out of a lot of Danes.

Officially, this document is a Constitutional Treaty. Just to clear things up.

A Constitution should be nowhere near 500 pages long. It shouldn't even be 10% of that.

I don't blame the French for voting No. Who the hell can expect the average person to read a 500 page document written in legalise, and then expect them to understand it?

I haven't read it either. So, I stick with the highlights I can find in newspapers, such as:

* Permanent EU president to replace six-month rotating presidencies

* EU foreign minister to conduct common foreign policy

* Qualified majority voting in most areas with vetoes limited

* Commission to be reduced to 15 with 10 non-voting associates

* Policy areas covered by European Parliament up from 34 to 70

* Legally binding Charter of Fundamental Rights

On the face of it, this doesn't look so bad.

On the face of it, this looks bloody awful. A referendum in Britain would almost certainly show a bigger no vote than the French delivered.

The politicians want more power and less accountability, the people who vote for them and pay the enormous costs involved want nothing of the sort.

The EU is a tremendous drain on Britain's resources, and always
has been. Perhaps, once the huge problems of corruption and bloated bureaucracy have been solved, people might find the treaty more enticing.

Who is going to solve these problems? The bureaucrats and corrupt politicians? Don't hold your breath.

[AWPrime]

Quote:

Originally posted by asthmatic camel
Oh what a joyous day! Chirac finally receives the bloody nose he deserves, from the French.

It is sad.

Now most of the no voters confess that they voted no against Chirac, not the EU.

[AWPrime]

Quote:

Originally posted by Seismosaurus
YES!!!!

Truly a wonderful day. May there be many more rejections like it in the future! Dare we even hope that the EU itself might break up? Probably not, but fingers crossed...

So You want a weaker England?

[asthmatic camel]

Quote:

Originally posted by AWPrime
So You want a weaker England?

A weaker England?(UK?) The EU has crippled the UK's economic growth for decades. The C.A.P. in particular has seen our once strong agricultural base brought to its knees. Manufacturing is heading the same way, whilst the service industries are shipping themselves back to India in a move of historic irony.

And the Spaniards steal all the fish. Bastards.

[DanishDynamite]

Quote:

Originally posted by asthmatic camel
On the face of it, this looks bloody awful. A referendum in Britain would almost certainly show a bigger no vote than the French delivered.

I don't doubt it. The Brits have always considered themselves an island apart from Europe. Plus they are basically brought up to hate the French. Get over it.

Quote:

The politicians want more power and less accountability, the people who vote for them and pay the enormous costs involved want nothing of the sort.

What are you on about?

Quote:

The EU is a tremendous drain on Britain's resources, and always has been.

On the contrary, Britain has always had a special deal and never paid the dues they should have. As usual, the Germans have been paying for this project.

Quote:

Perhaps, once the huge problems of corruption and bloated bureaucracy have been solved, people might find the treaty more enticing.

Perhaps you should read a different newspaper and have a look at the larger picture.

Quote:

Who is going to solve these problems? The bureaucrats and corrupt politicians? Don't hold your breath.

Perhaps the new powerful Parliament, which would be in place if the Treaty was accepted?

[asthmatic camel]

DD, hang on a minute... The UK is a net contributor to the EU, to quite some tune. I'm old enough to remember the referendum which took the UK into what was then known as the "common market."

The idea presented to the voters was that of a free trade area, not that of progression towards an United States of Europe.

I seem to remember that the Danes were less than keen about the Maastricht treaty. How would they vote on the treaty now?

[Morwen]

Quote:

Originally posted by asthmatic camel
And the Spaniards steal all the fish. Bastards.

Hey!!! I resemble that remark!

Besides, the anchovies left all by themselves. We didn't take 'em!

[Skeptic]

And the Spaniards steal all the fish. Bastards.

You didn't expect a a Spanish fisherman?

[Drooper]

Quote:

Originally posted by DanishDynamite
On the contrary, Britain has always had a special deal and never paid the dues they should have. As usual, the Germans have been paying for this project.

Au contraire. This is more Brussel myth used to castigate those naughty Anglo Saxons.

Britain has the highest per capita net contributions of any member state and the second highest aggregate net contribution after Germany.

No wonder they abhore the glutenous gravey train of vested interests that the EU represents.

From the outside looking in it truly is a laugh. You would all be better off outside the EU, but you have somehow convinced yourselves that economics is war (!) and that you need some sort of fortress. No doubt, to a large extent down to those canny French who see this the EU as a gradiose way to restore themselves to thier rightfult place as a powerful global political prescence. Well, the people of Europe are the losers in that and ironically lap it all up.

[Ed]

Quote:

Originally posted by DanishDynamite


Perhaps the new powerful Parliament, which would be in place if the Treaty was accepted? [/b]

In your experience, do bigger and better and less accountable buerocracies solve things? Not in mine.

[AWPrime]

Quote:

Originally posted by asthmatic camel
The C.A.P. in particular has seen our once strong agricultural base brought to its knees. Manufacturing is heading the same way, whilst the service industries are shipping themselves back to India in a move of historic irony.

And the Spaniards steal all the fish. Bastards.

OOOOooo that is just global capitalisme.

[AWPrime]

Quote:

Originally posted by Drooper
You would all be better off outside the EU

Some people think that the sum of all members would be smaller if unified.

But does this applies to the US as well?

[DanishDynamite]

Quote:

Originally posted by asthmatic camel
DD, hang on a minute... The UK is a net contributor to the EU, to quite some tune. I'm old enough to remember the referendum which took the UK into what was then known as the "common market."

And? Denmark is a net contributor as well.

Quote:

The idea presented to the voters was that of a free trade area, not that of progression towards an United States of Europe.

Of course. Because that was what was on the table at that time.

BTW, what are your major concerns regarding a United States of Europe?

Quote:

I seem to remember that the Danes were less than keen about the Maastricht treaty. How would they vote on the treaty now?

I suspect they would vote against.

[DanishDynamite]

Quote:

Originally posted by Drooper
Au contraire. This is more Brussel myth used to castigate those naughty Anglo Saxons.

Britain has the highest per capita net contributions of any member state and the second highest aggregate net contribution after Germany.

Far be it for me to doubt your word, but how does this square with this article which states:

Quote:

Year after year, the Germans send significantly more money to Brussels than they receive back. In 2003, the difference amounted to €7.7 billion, making Germany the biggest net contributor by a long shot. Only the Netherlands and Sweden pay more on a per capita basis.

Onwards...

Quote:

No wonder they abhore the glutenous gravey train of vested interests that the EU represents.

"glutenous gravey train"? Might you perhaps be slightly biased?

Quote:

From the outside looking in it truly is a laugh. You would all be better off outside the EU, but you have somehow convinced yourselves that economics is war (!) and that you need some sort of fortress. No doubt, to a large extent down to those canny French who see this the EU as a gradiose way to restore themselves to thier rightfult place as a powerful global political prescence. Well, the people of Europe are the losers in that and ironically lap it all up.

You seem to have a serious problem with the French. BTW, tell me again how the much maligned Euro is doing against the Dollar, again?

[DanishDynamite]

Quote:

Originally posted by Ed
In your experience, do bigger and better and less accountable buerocracies solve things? Not in mine.

Nor in mine. What's your point?

[Ed]

Quote:

Originally posted by DanishDynamite
Perhaps the new powerful Parliament, which would be in place if the Treaty was accepted?

Sounds like a new group of folks. You said it.

[Orwell]

The damn document is impossible to read and hard to understand. The voters didn't quite know what they were voting for, and because of this all kinds of groups spinned their own interpretation of the document into scary threatening stuff... This coupled with the unpopularity of Chirac and Raffarin, a bad "Oui" campaign and fears over EU enlargement made a "non" victory inevitable.

I'm afraid the french shot themselves in the foot over this thing. I also hope that the European commission goes back to the drawing board and rewrites the proposed constitution into something understandable.

[Orwell]

Quote:

Originally posted by Ed
In your experience, do bigger and better and less accountable buerocracies solve things? Not in mine.

But the idea behind the new constitution was to simplify the workings of the EU! You sound like the typical well trained eurosceptic: someone says European Union, and he answers bureaucracy.

[Skeptic]

deleted post

[Skeptic]

But the idea behind the new constitution was to simplify the workings of the EU!

Yes, but if your best "simplification" efforts produce a 600-clause unreadable and impenetrable document, that might make people suspicious about how effective the whole thing is.

[Orwell]

Quote:

Originally posted by Skeptic
But the idea behind the new constitution was to simplify the workings of the EU!

Yes, but if your best "simplification" efforts produce a 600-clause unreadable and impenetrable document, that might make people suspicious about how effective the whole thing is.

Oh I agree with you on that. That was plain stupid, and I believe that was one of the main reasons why it didn't fly.

(I agreed with Skeptic on something! Somebody pinch me, I must be dreaming!)

[Flo]

Quote:

Originally posted by DanishDynamite
I suspect one of the problems is that this mega-document is generally refered to in the press as a Constitution. I'm not sure about the French, but this word would scare the hell out of a lot of Danes.

Officially, this document is a Constitutional Treaty. Just to clear things up.

[snip]

Who the hell can expect the average person to read a 500 page document written in legalise, and then expect them to understand it?

and that's the main error everybody does: because it is long and in legalese, most people will not read it or, having read it, will persuade themselves it cannot be understood . They'll of course never, ever, ask a legal expert about the points they're not sure about and believe primarily those telling them it's all a big conspiracy towards the ultimate tyranny. That's exactly what many opponents count(ed) on (and a fair number of those in favor ...), so they can scare the hell out of the dumb sheep they're expecting will follow them.

[Flo]

Quote:

Originally posted by AWPrime
It is sad.

Now most of the no voters confess that they voted no against Chirac, not the EU.

It is indeed. Europeans as a whole will have, someday, to learn about compromise and consensus, and to make the difference between what is personal and what is important. As it is, we're in a culture of "if it is not in my interests, and my interests only, I'm against it" ...

[Shane Costello]

Quote:

Originally posted by Danish Dynamite:
I don't blame the French for voting No. Who the hell can expect the average person to read a 500 page document written in legalise, and then expect them to understand it?

Quote:

Originally posted by Ex Lion Tamer:
The damn document is impossible to read and hard to understand. The voters didn't quite know what they were voting for, and because of this all kinds of groups spinned their own interpretation of the document into scary threatening stuff... This coupled with the unpopularity of Chirac and Raffarin, a bad "Oui" campaign and fears over EU enlargement made a "non" victory inevitable.

Wait a minute. The remarkable thing about the referendum campaign in France appears to be how engaged and informed the electorate were. According to the analysis I've been watching on Irish TV more people watched the final debate than tuned into the French Cup Final, and books on the EU constitution dominated the non fiction best sellers charts. I don't think you needed to read the constitution cover to cover to become informed enough to form a considered opinion on it.

Quote:

Originally posted by Flo
It is indeed. Europeans as a whole will have, someday, to learn about compromise and consensus, and to make the difference between what is personal and what is important. As it is, we're in a culture of "if it is not in my interests, and my interests only, I'm against it" ...

Which seems to have been the attitude taken by France and Germany when it came to the growth and stability pact and the services directive.

Quote:

You seem to have a serious problem with the French. BTW, tell me again how the much maligned Euro is doing against the Dollar, again?

You should ask European manufacturers their opinion of the strong Euro. From what I've read a strengthening Euro is not of itself proof that EMU was a sensible course of action.

[Flo]

Quote:

Originally posted by Shane Costello
Wait a minute. The remarkable thing about the referendum campaign in France appears to be how engaged and informed the electorate were. According to the analysis I've been watching on Irish TV more people watched the final debate than tuned into the French Cup Final, and books on the EU constitution dominated the non fiction best sellers charts. I don't think you needed to read the constitution cover to cover to become informed enough to form a considered opinion on it.

Unfortunately, the cacophony and spin were intense and there was no way you could form an informed personal opinion without reading at least part of the document itself. I certainly didn't have the feeling most of my compatriots were all that well informed, and I was depressed from the start at seeing how it was the occasion for all the has-beens to come back under the limelight ...

Quote:

Which seems to have been the attitude taken by France and Germany when it came to the growth and stability pact and the services directive.

Unfortunately, yes. Having lived most of my life in Switzerland (26 cantons, 4 languages, various religions, different cultures) and appreciated its prosperity, I prize the culture of compromise and consensus. It doesn't solve all problems, not everybody benefits equally from it, but it saves quite a lot of time, energy and ressources for mainly the global benefit.

[asthmatic camel]

Quote:

Originally posted by DanishDynamite
And? Denmark is a net contributor as well.

BTW, what are your major concerns regarding a United States of Europe?

So? the Danes are paying unnecessary taxes to a corrupt and bloated organisation too. Do you expect me to applaud?

My major concerns are the same as I have about the EU. Lack of accountability, voter apathy, corruption, incompetence, red tape...

In common with the majority of Brits, I think that integration has already gone far enough. Perhaps one day our politicians will listen to the people they are elected to serve instead of arrogantly going down the road that suits them best.

Yeah, I know, but a man can dream.

[Flo]

Quote:

Originally posted by asthmatic camel
My major concerns are the same as I have about the EU. Lack of accountability, voter apathy, corruption, incompetence, red tape...

which of course don't occur in the UK (or in any other country, if you take EU opponents at their words)

BTW, given the voter apathy, who are "they" supposed to be accountable to ?

Quote:

In common with the majority of Brits, I think that integration has already gone far enough. Perhaps one day our politicians will listen to the people they are elected to serve instead of arrogantly going down the road that suits them best.

Yes, and should they finally listen to them, they would give them shovels to widen the Channel and bombs to destroy the Chunnel ...