Skip to comments.Official EU Statement on the "French Rejection"
Posted on 05/30/2005 6:45:01 PM PDT by Shortwave
Joint Declaration of President of the European Parliament Josep Borrell Fontelles, President of the European Council Jean-Claude Juncker and President of the European Commission José Manuel Barroso on the results of the French Referendum on the European Constitutional Treaty
"The French voters have today, Sunday 29 May, chosen to say no to the ratification of the Constitutional treaty. We take note of this.
We regret this choice, coming as it does from a Member State that has been for the last 50 years one of the essential motors of the building of our common future.
We completely respect the expression of the democratic will that has made itself felt at the end of an intense debate. The result of the French referendum deserves a profound analysis, in the first instance, on the part of the French authorities. The Institutions of the European Union should also, for their part, reflect on the results of the collected ratification processes.
It is important to remember that nine Member States, representing almost half (49%) of the European population have already ratified the Constitutional Treaty, in one case on the basis of a broadly positive referendum and that the majority of Member States have not yet had the opportunity to complete the ratification process.
The tenor of the debate in France, and the result of the referendum also reinforce our conviction that the relevant national and European politicians must do more to explain the true scale of what is at stake, and the nature of the answers that only Europe can offer. We continue to believe that a response at thee European level remains the best and the most effective in the face of accelerating global change.
We must ask ourselves how each among us national governments, European institutions, political parties, social partners, civil society can contribute to a better understanding of this project, which cannot have its own legitimacy without listening to its citizens.
The building of Europe is, by its nature, complex. Europe has already known difficult moments and it has every time emerged from them strengthened, better than before, ready to face its challenges and its responsibilities. Today Europe continues, and its institutions function fully. We are aware of the difficulties, but we have confidence that once again we will find the means to move the European Union forward. Together, we are determined to contribute to this."
In other words, "Noted, but we're going to cram down your throats anyway!"
In other words, "Noted, but we're going to cram down your throats anyway!"
I agree. It also says that countries representing 49% of the European population have already accepted the treaty. But only one with a referendum!!!! (Spain). The other countries made their people eat it whether they wanted it or not!.
Hey, EU! Who helped Europe emerge every time from its "difficult moments"??? (Hint to EU: Over here, we're observing something called Memorial Day...)
Translation: "Hey, Chirac! You screwed up!"
OMG! We make note of this? Oh jeesh, what has Europe gotten itsel into this time?
The next statement will contain "Let them eat cake".
They're ready to bring the entire weight of the EuroweenieOnion down on Ch'Iraq.
Perhaps, just perhaps they may try to develop an EU constitution that can fit on a single digit number of pages. That would make it immesurably easier to explain.
For example, the US Constitution takes 4. The Swiss Constitution used it for a model, but their President is elected every year.
Of course they could perhaps excise the welfare for bureaucrats, and add more limitations on government, but that isn't what they really want, is it?
Or maybe I was just reading into it too much.
To them, anyone failing to understand these things is ignorant and in need of education. Therefore, the failure is not one of the philosophy of the EU itself but, rather, it is their failure to properly present it to the unwashed so they could understand it and, once properly understood, would f course,overwhelmingly approve it.
Let them not join, Europe would be better off without them.
in other words, onlu one country ratified it by a vote of the people. My guess is that the nation that voted for it was Luxembourg. Or maybe Andorra.
"We must ask ourselves how each among us national governments, European institutions, political parties, social partners, civil society can contribute to a better understanding of this project, which cannot have its own legitimacy without listening to its citizens."
What part of NON don't you understand?
Actually the only nation who passed a referendum was Spain. I believe they had really low turnout, and it barely squeeked by. All in all its had 11 votes now. 9 by parliaments or heads of state, and 2 by the people. The people's record is 1-1.
This is such a mishmash!
A Constitution is the surrender of certain basic rights to
a governing center, and these Euros are being asked to give
up....who knows, to a who what...under vague conditions.
It deserved to fail, if for no other reason than:
Categories of competence
3. The Member States shall coordinate their economic and employment policies within arrangements as determined by Part III, which the Union shall have competence to provide.
Areas of exclusive competence
1. The Union shall have exclusive competence in the following areas:
(a) customs union;
(b) the establishing of the competition rules necessary for the functioning of the internal market;
(c) monetary policy for the Member States whose currency is the euro;
(d) the conservation of marine biological resources under the common fisheries policy;
(e) common commercial policy.
2. The Union shall also have exclusive competence for the conclusion of an international agreement when its conclusion is provided for in a legislative act of the Union or is necessary to enable the Union to exercise its internal competence, or insofar as its conclusion may affect common rules or alter their scope.
Excellent point. The typical socialist m.o., "You're obviously too ignorant and not enlightened enough to agree with us, so we'll make you do it our way because we know what's good for you." Perhaps our liberals will move to Europe. One can only hope.
Great post! There's are real irony in your words. I suspect we'll have to liberate Europe again when the Muslims overthrow there civilization. That's if they don't get to us first.
Isn't the Frence rejection more about a referendum on Chirac himself, and less upon the EU concept? If he were to be removed, wouldn't the French ratify it in a second vote?
Actually, I'm still hoping they pass it. I was really looking forward to the look on Chirac's face when he was told that france would have to give up the seat on the security council. Just think of all the money we would have saved on embassies in all those countries, we would have only needed one. Not to mention all the housing that would become available in DC and NYC when the dozens of embassies of Spain, Britain, france, Germany, etc. gave up their mansions on embassy row.
"Spoken in the true and peculiar vernacular of the Globalist Elites."
"Being the bulwark of the Hohenzollern Empire, the Junkers controlled the military, leading in political influence and social status, and owning immense Estates. Their political influence extended from the German Empire of 1871 to 1918 through the Weimar Republic of 1919-1933. It was said that Prussia ruled Germany, the Junkers ruled Prussia, and through it the Empire itself."
So what else is new?
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
Then, again, maybe the French understand what the great
American, Groucho Marx, once observed:
"I wouldn't want to belong to an organization that would
have me for a member."