 |
|  |
 |
|
Lawrence of Arabia
|
 |
of the Gulag Archipelago
Apr 2001 time: 06:23
|
|
http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0...6-399999,0.html
looks like your boy JP Raffarin and JLR Zapatero are feeling the heat. they are losing support.
also
Nicolas Sarkozy wants YOU to know qu'avec les impôts régionaux les socialistes dérapent et que dans son région, monsieur Sarkozy did NON à l'éxplosion des impôts socialistes.
SIGNEZ LE PÉTITION AUJOURD'HUI !!!!!!!
(et il veut aussi vous dire de voter pour l'UMP au cours des prochaines elections)
http://www.u-m-p.org/site/petition/petition.swf
Last edited by Lawrence of Arabia on 02-03-2005 at 01:44
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Maniac
|
 |
Gent, Belgium
Jul 1999 time: 06:23
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Spiffor
You know, the EU constitution is a compilation of the status quo with only a few new things. Except for the fact that it overrules all previous treaties, the EU constitution changes precious little, just like Nice. So, the bargainings weren't about the statu quo that was upheld; they were about the few changes to the statu quo. As such, the bargainings about the Constitution were as "focused" as bargainings about amendments would be. |
quote: The fact that there isn't a realistic room for change unless a major crisis happens (which will make everybody agree), makes this constitution unacceptable. |
Having already presented my arguments, what can I say besides "I disagree".
quote: I don't think so. If the Brits are the only ones to reject the constitution, this is a sure thing. If both the Brits and the French reject it, that's far less sure. In France, almost half of the left-wingers oppose the constitution, despite them being traditionally pro-Europe (only 55% of the French Socialists voted that they wanted the party to support the Constitution. The French Greens, who are extremely pro-European, almost decided to oppose the Constitution, at a very short minority)
...
Actually, I think that a French-British no to the constitution will make apparent the old wedge in the EU that we have constantly tried to keep hidden under the rug: the Brits fundamentally want less Europe; they want a Free-trade area. The French fundamentally want a more integrated Europe (where obviously they call the shot ), they want a "bloc-EU".
...
These two conceptions of Europe cannot be pleased by dumbing down the constitution. That's why the establishment will understand that it needs new ideas. And that's why it will go back to the drawing board. |
Well, let's hope you'd be right. Though I have been told, that while France wants more EU cooperation on more domains (eg defence), she strives for an intergovernmental Europe instead of a supranational (which means losing national sovereignity). If both France and the UK (also intergovernmental) reject the constitution, won't this then mean a significant weakening down of the (supranational) European Parliament and Commission, and an upgrade of the (intergovernmental) Council of Ministers and European Council, where unanimity is still more the rule (thus once again bringing you further from what you want)?
quote: The Lissabon process is a typical example of Europe being crap. |
I'd agree the content of Lissabon is crap (not though that Europe is crap ). I just gave it as an example that cooperation can happen outside the legal frame, even though with the current ideological mentality the cooperation is not going into the direction we'd want...
quote: The only reason why the GAP, the Structural funds, or Airbus exist today (actually ambitious common policies) is because they have been decided far before we were so fricking many. |
Q: were these initiatives taken before or after they were officially allowed according to the then running treaty?
(I'm not sure, but for example for the structural funds those were started under the first treaty of Rome, proving my point that new initiatives can happen even if they aren't legally allowed yet under the treaty)
Of what is GAP the abbreviation btw? I guess it's English abbreviation of which I only know the Dutch version.
quote: Yup, but these [strengthened] cooperations cannot go against the constitution. I don't see these 8 countries remove the crown from the head of the ECB's leader. I don't see them inverting the balance of power between the Parliament and the Council. I don't see them loosening the free-marketeer exigences. Do you? |
Nope, AFAIK strengthened cooperation can't change the institutions, the "box of tools". They can decide what to do with these tools though, so I think it should be possible to have a lesser free market fetish.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:23. Apolyton Time is 00:23. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|