Europeans look for new direction from EU

[lovuian]

http://feeds.bignewsnetwork.com/?sid=affed69ea575e52a

Big News Network.com Monday 30th May, 2005 (UPI)

Something is rotten in the state of Europe.

Despite many EU leaders' best attempts to ignore the French rejection of the bloc's first ever constitution Sunday, the result highlights the growing divide between the Union's rulers and ruled and between the treaty's lofty goals and the more earthy desires of disgruntled voters
snip...

By rejecting the constitution by a wider than expected margin -- about 55 percent to 45 percent -- French voters have voiced their disquiet at the direction Europe is heading in. Not that you would notice in Brussels, the self-styled capital of Europe and home to the main EU institutions.

After the provisional result was announced late Sunday, politicians and senior EU officials rushed to broadcast studios and press conferences to declare that the treaty was not dead, that the 'show must go on' and that one country should not be allowed to decide for 24 others. They produced statistics showing the constitution, which aims to make the club more open, democratic and efficient, had already been ratified by nine countries representing half the EU's population. They questioned whether the French 'non' really was a 'no' as the anti-treaty camp was split into those wanting more Europe and those wanting less. And they pledged 'business as usual' on economic reform, eastern enlargement and creating an ever closer Europe of states and peoples.
snip..

'Just because one country said 'no' there's no reason to start questioning everything the EU does,' European Commission spokeswoman Francoise Le Bail told reporters Monday.

Legally speaking she is right. Current EU law requires all 25 states to ratify a new treaty before it can enter into force. However, a declaration tacked on to the constitution states that if 20 states have ratified the constitution in late 2006 and one or more countries have failed to do so, EU leaders shall meet to decide what to do next. Clearly the intent is to push ahead with the ratification process in the hope that all but two or three countries will say' yes.' The miscreant states would then be politely asked to hold a second vote aimed at producing the 'right' answer

snip...

'The clear rejection of the proposed constitution by the French citizens is an indication of the alienation between the people and the governments', said Thomas Rupp, leader of the European No Campaign. 'A constitutional project that has completely excluded the people from the beginning is a contradiction in itself and now the political elite has to pay the price.'

more...

The French and the Dutch really have the political elite in a quandry!!!

[G2099]

1. This may lead to a better and stronger union in the long run . ..

The sad thing is that the no vote was more against the, political elite, then the EU constitution.

[LondonAmerican]

2. it was against both

the eu is a political project managed by the european political elites. it's deeply undemocratic and attempts to force neoliberalism across the continent. the voters saw that and that is why they rejected this abortion of a constitution.

[pie]

3. Could you please briefly explain the bad points

Also, were there no good points?

[AP]

4. I think the EU constitution is incredibly democratic. Put it sided by

side with the US constitution. What the US constitution does is reduce all rights down to state citizenship. 90% of the constitutions is essentially forbidding one state from discriminating against another state. The EU reduces those rights down to the individual level. Rather than the individual having rights as a consequence of state citizenship, states have rights as a consequence of individual citizens having rights.

How do you think it spreads neoliberalism across the continent?