ButterflyMaiden Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 The result of the French referendum is a rejection of the EU Constitution. Does this mean the Euro project is going off the rails ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 Not at all. Just means that the move to federalisation has halted, expect it'll restart. Hopefully, they'll come up with a better proposal next time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speckled Frost Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 The problem is that now the constitution looks dead countries could now get together and cherry pick parts which they could decide needn't be part of it. That means important EU laws and legislation could be passed, denying the public the chance to have their say via a referendum. Secondly, do any of us really know what the hell is in this constitution and what impact it would have. I like to think I have a reasonable grasp on politics and current affairs yet I haven't a clue what the constitution really entails. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Vader Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 As we on the Isle of Man are not members of the EEC in our own right but subject to Protocol 3 we would never have a vote anyway. It does not seem fair really when you think we have to comply with most EEC rules yet get none of the benefits. Did all the French voters get a copy of the proposed constitution? I bet most of them voted no because of a famous forum saying....... Too long. Didn't read Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 Typical post from Vader. From what I've seen in the media the French took the vote seriously, and the debate was high profile. All voters received a copy of the constitution. They made their decision of whether they thought it was a good idea or not. Much of the opposition seems, ironically, to have been about the Anglo-Saxon nature of the Constitution. It was too British for them in short. The general problem was that this Constitution was too long - it tried to lay down policy in many areas. A Constitution should define the system of Government. Define where the power lies (ie between the executive, the parliament and the judiciary as in America; or in this case between the EU and the individual nation states) and, perhaps, contain a statement of basic human rights that citizens can expect (a "Bill of Rights"). It shouldn't attempt to define things like how many hours people work for, which are flexible and may change due to public mood, or the prevailing circumstances. That is the responsibility of elected legislators. I'd argue the above example should be National rather than EU legislators, but that is one of the things an EU Constitution should decide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simon Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 People took it very seriously. My own totally unscientific straw poll (on Saturday night) showed that a clear majority of people had read it too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fleur Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 :-) From what we could see, the Non posters outnumbered the Oui posters by two to one! A good turnout too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 Typical post from Vader. From what I've seen in the media the French took the vote seriously, and the debate was high profile. All voters received a copy of the constitution. They made their decision of whether they thought it was a good idea or not. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Typical post from Declan. All the informed opinion indicates that it was more a vote against Chirac and his lame duck "policies" rather than a vote against the EU constitution. France is kind-of stuck in a rut and is leaking opportunity and jobs to other countries such as China. It is extremely serious as one of the founders of the EU (or as DeGaulle wanted to see it "The Greater French Empire") apparently does not want to see the EU go any further. Still, it will take at least 5 NO results until anything changes. One down, four to go. - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 All the informed opinion Such as? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simon Posted May 30, 2005 Share Posted May 30, 2005 IMO: The heart of the 'non' camp was essentially anti free trade - a bitter alliance of the FN, the Greens, farming unions, old world wine makers, co ops, the Communists and some from Socialist Party. For them - the constitution was too much about liberal economics. (And that isn't a particularly insightful scoop. It's what the media is reporting everywhere). As in most elections - it was the people who needed to be convinced who decided the vote. IMO these people are basically pro EU. But the 'oui' camp failed to convince them that the constitution was worth supporting. PS: There was a sense that it a was a vote against Chirac. Certainly it was a vote against what he was saying. I heard him described today on the radio as the weakest ever President of the 5th Republic. (It sounded very dramatic and significant). The last EU referndum which I experienced (in France) was re the Maastricht treaty. President Mitterand supported it and therefore so did a majority of the electorate. Well it seemed like that then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted May 31, 2005 Share Posted May 31, 2005 All the informed opinion Such as? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I make a post on the EU and all of a sudden you're interested in politics. What an amazing coincidence not. - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted May 31, 2005 Share Posted May 31, 2005 IMO Guardian Unlimited is still one of the best free news services on teh interweb. This is their latest on the referendum. I have to say you sometimes have to be patient as some articles assume a level of prior knowledge: http://www.guardian.co.uk/france/story/0,1...1495810,00.html - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans Posted May 31, 2005 Share Posted May 31, 2005 I make a post on the EU and all of a sudden you're interested in politics. What an amazing coincidence not. - I've only ever said I wasn't interested in local politics. Thanks for link, even if I don't really hold the views of a traditional Guardian reader, it's interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian rush Posted May 31, 2005 Share Posted May 31, 2005 The french vote and the likely dutch 'nee' make it likely the UK labour government won't even have to hold a referendum, thereby removing 1) a potentially very divisive issue from this parliament's agenda; 2) a fairly substantial, ready and smelly pile of doo-do from the the tories' arsenal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Vader Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4601439.stm Thats it guys. Netherlands say stuff it. Back to the drawing board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.