xer-files
Wednesday, June 01, 2005
  Daily Dose of EU Constitution - The Conclusion
I finally found some good analyses on the voting for the European Constitution at THIS BLOG

"Next Wednesday, June 1st, I will be asked to answer the following question: "Bent u voor of tegen instemming door Nederland met het Verdrag tot vaststelling van een Grondwet voor Europa?"

(Are you pro or contra the ratification by the Netherlands of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe?)

I did three things to answer this question for myself. The first thing was reading the constitution myself. The second thing was to listen carefully to opinions of other people. The third thing was asking myself which criteria I find important for a European Constitution.

My criteria:
If the EU has power, it needs democratic control. The constitution needs to tell how.
The existence of the EU has to add something that individual countries can't reach. The constitution needs to make that clear.
A constitution needs to be political neutral and time resistant (not containing items which will lose meaning in a couple of years).
It's also very important to state that I don't judge this constitution against the current situation. I already concluded that it will be an improvement over the current situation. But that is not what they ask me to vote for.
Before I check the criteria, I'll give the most important good and bad points in this constitution (in my mind).

Good things:
The Objectives of the EU are written down. And I like them, apart from the "competition is free and undistorted" statement.
Human rights are now an integral part.
Environment and sustainability play a role.
We will have a common security, defense and foreign policy. That gives us a better role in the World.
No ability to veto, some form of complex majority voting that’s suitable for this set up.
Solidarity on all kinds of areas.
A common immigration policy.
Open internal borders for work, living and traveling.
A European court with enough power as final judge.
A reasonable social policy.
Stimulation of research on a European level.

Bad things:
The free market principles as an integral part of big parts of this constitution.
No full democratic control on all levels of the EU.
Defense and foreign policy are outside the control of the European Parliament (EP).
The quest for forever increasing production and consumption (III-229).
The amount of detail of some articles (like when to have meeting of a committee)
Having an agriculture policy that only includes Europe, not the rest of the world.
Exceptions on a lot of rules (like rules on transport but not on flying and rules on animal rights but excluding local traditions (bull fighting).

There are loads and loads more remarks to make, be it positive, negative or neutral. But that would only make this a very long post.Now back to my criteria and how this constitution measures up to them.
If the EU has power, it needs democratic control. The constitution needs to tell how." /../

okay, i'll go and vote now...
 
Comments:
Tell you new leader Jaques the cock Chirac we said hello! Have fun pulling his knife out of your back.
 
Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]



Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home
You know Stone's 'Hidden History of the Korean War'?

My Photo
Name:
Location: Netherlands
Archives
February 2005 / March 2005 / April 2005 / May 2005 / June 2005 / July 2005 / August 2005 / September 2005 / October 2005 / November 2005 / December 2005 / January 2006 / February 2006 / March 2006 / April 2006 / May 2006 / June 2006 / July 2006 / August 2006 / September 2006 / October 2006 / November 2006 / December 2006 / January 2007 / February 2007 / March 2007 / April 2007 / May 2007 / June 2007 / July 2007 / August 2007 / September 2007 / October 2007 / November 2007 / December 2007 / January 2008 / February 2008 / March 2008 / May 2008 / June 2008 / July 2008 / October 2008 / December 2008 / January 2009 / February 2009 / March 2009 / April 2009 / May 2009 / June 2009 /