[UPtimist]

So, now Sarkozy won the French election. He seems to support the constitution, even though he wants it to be cut to a minimum. It'll be the topic of discussion soon between the EU countries. So, think there's any hope? If maybe they could get the French on board at least.

Although it's sad if it has to be cut, since it's pretty much perfect right now, even though people don't realize it because of false facts and statements and interpretations that for some reason have spread (mainly because of the media seems to enjoy spreading completely random thoughts by people who just oppose everything that has to do with the EU by default).

Spoiler:

And yes, I do know what I am talking about.

It would be a major step in making EU work better and be more accessible to the people.

But is there any hope any more? And how would the cutting affect it?

[SSH]

Sometimes it amazes me that governments do referenda on issues like this where the thing is a good idea but can be easily misrepresented by rhetoric into to something that people don't like the sound of and hence gets voted down. This happened with the EU Constitution, with Edinburgh's congestion charging plans and with many other things too...

[Jatsie]

Boo, Hiss, down with the EU Constitution!

Let's look an Angela Merkel's lovely way of getting people to support it, tricking them! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/04/27/do2702.xml

[rlpw]

Just wait till you guys loose your right of sessesion and militia.

[Lucien21]

Originally Posted by SSH

Sometimes it amazes me that governments do referenda on issues like this where the thing is a good idea but can be easily misrepresented by rhetoric into to something that people don't like the sound of and hence gets voted down. This happened with the EU Constitution, with Edinburgh's congestion charging plans and with many other things too...

I glad that one was voted down it wasn't a great idea the bus network could never cope with extra capacity and a someone who lives out of town and works in town I wasn't willing to pay just to go to work.

Better than the Tram idea though.

[Jazhara7]

Originally Posted by rlpw

Just wait till you guys loose your right of sessesion and militia.

What's sessesion? I can't even find it one Wikipedia.



-

[Jatsie]

Originally Posted by Jazhara7

What's sessesion? I can't even find it one Wikipedia.

He meant secession.

[RLacey]

I think he means "secession", as in withdrawl from the Union (the thing that the Southern states did that provoked the American Civil War). [:EDIT: What Jatsie said.]

I'm afraid that I'm frightfully anti-EU Constitution, but then I'm also becoming worryingly anti-EU. I'm pretty damn sure that the UK people voted in favour of a trade agreement, not an overwieldy bureaucracy.

[rlpw]

Originally Posted by RLacey

I think he means "secession", as in withdrawl from the Union (the thing that the Southern states did that provoked the American Civil War). [:EDIT: What Jatsie said.]

I'm afraid that I'm frightfully anti-EU Constitution, but then I'm also becoming worryingly anti-EU. I'm pretty damn sure that the UK people voted in favour of a trade agreement, not an overwieldy bureaucracy.

Yes, what they said.

Just remember more bureaucracy will in the end mean more taxes to feed the evil deamon.

[Aj_]

If the EU constitution is a best attempt to make the EU more accessible we're doomed. A document that's incredibly long, and can confuse experts, is not perfect in my opinion.

[rlpw]

Originally Posted by Aj_

If the EU constitution is a best attempt to make the EU more accessible we're doomed. A document that's incredibly long, and can confuse experts, is not perfect in my opinion.

you mean it's incredibly complex and can be interpreted 50 different ways?

Welcome to America

[ATMachine]

Originally Posted by rlpw

you mean it's incredibly complex and can be interpreted 50 different ways?

Welcome to America

The American constitution has its faults, but one of its best qualities is in fact its brevity compared to other documents of the sort.

[Erwin_Br]

I'm pro-constitution. Many of the things that are in it, are already established through various agreements. Instead of having a pile of loose agreements, which are sometimes different per country because of exceptions and amendments being made here and there, I think it's best to bind them together in one document for every country. I think it may even reduce bureaucracy.

--Erwin

[Starflux]

I'm against it. I don't want Europe to become a federation of states. I'd much rather we remain independent nations that work together for trade and peace. What I don't want is a European army. The last thing this world needs is more armies.

[Kolzig]

I absolutely agree with Flux.

[Jatsie]

Let's all join The Bruges Group.

Euro-sceptics unite!

[UPtimist]

The constitution doesn't make EU a federation of states (at least the way I understand it) importantly (or at all) more than now. The main point behind it is to enhance functionality inside (for example by what Erwin said) and to the outside. It gives more power to the people. I can't see what's negative in that.

And there is no new army either. It's co-operation of forces. It helps ensure the security of the area. What's bad about that? And even though I am not one of those people who are skeptics and expect Russia to attack without warning any day, the location of Finland still makes one cautious, as there is still a (maybe small, but still it's there) risk of a upheaval of some sort. (And that's just an example, it's the one that's the one that's maybe the most threatening to Finland, which luckily isn't a big thing, I'm not saying that Europe needs to defend against Russia...)

And more importantly (yes, this is still a Finnish view) it would help Finland get rid of maybe our biggest disgrace, the mandatory army (though that wouldn't really help that much, joining NATO would be the trick, though there of course are pros and cons) (I'm not going to go into that though I could talk all day).

[Erwin_Br]

Originally Posted by UPtimist

And there is no new army either. It's co-operation of forces. It helps ensure the security of the area. What's bad about that?

Plus, this 'one army' already exists. We're already together in countries like Afghanistan.

When it comes to the constitution, I'm afraid most people vote with their emotions, instead of using their brain. Here in the Netherlands we voted No, because -A) We didn't like the ruling government (How stupid is that!?) -B) We felt cheated by the Euro, and -C) Because we didn't want Turkey and some Eastern European countries to join (Again, how stupid is that!!!???) Things that had nothing to do with the constitution. Quite embarrassing, actually.

--Erwin

[Catbert]

I have no idea what the constitution is. When our politicians were talking about it it was all about "WE SHOULD BE AGAINST IT" or "IT'S GOOD LEWL" and nobody's any wiser.

[Jatsie]

You could try reading it, it's only 485 pages of legalese!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/09_01_05_constitution.pdf