 |
|
 The EU Flag
The French have rejected it. As have the Dutch. The future of the EU Constitution is now being compared unfavourably to that of a dead duck, but could you come up with a better version? One that could work for Britain and find support across Europe?ÌýÌý
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
Ballot papers for the French referendum on the EU constitution, Paris 29 May 2005.
|
|
|
|
|
|
USEFUL LINKS |
|
|
|
|
|
The 91Èȱ¬ is not responsible for the content of external websites
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
**These are your suggestions that we've addedÌýÌýto the alternative treaty written especially for us by David Heatcoat-Amory.
THE ALTERNATIVE TREATY: YOUR TREATY
A Europe of Democracies
Aware of the need to strengthen democracy and respect for the rule of law in Europe,
Observing the growing gulf between the EU institutions and the people of Europe and the loss of popular support for the EU as proved by successive referendums
We propose transforming the EU into a Europe of Democracies (ED) which should be a treaty association of free and self-governing European states and an open economic area.
1)Europe of Democracies. Europe shall not be governed by constitution. Instead, it shall be organised on an inter-parliamentary basis by means of a Treaty on European Cooperation. This will create a Europe of Democracies (ED) in place of the European Union.
(Andrew L)
When we say "a Europe of Democracies" we should remember that a democracy is a form of government where the ordinary person is literally in government which was contrasted with an oligarchy where just a few are in power. Both Plato and Herodotus agree that democracies are based on allotment for office.
I suggest the following proposal:
That there is formed a "citizen's court" consisting of 500 jurors randomly selected citizens. These jurors will be paid and stand for a term of one year.The citizen's court would have the following powers:
1. A veto on all legislation.
2. The right to appoint and/or veto all EU officials
3. The right to bestow honours on citizens
4. The right to prosecute polititians for crimes against democracy such as misleading the people of Europe.
(haseler)
2)Agreed, with one issue. 'Respects fully the ECHR' could cause problems. e.g. The UK, I understand is currently? (or at least recently) has been in breach of that due to its behaviour over the detention of foreign nationals. I would suggest that upon joining/if in doubt of a state's continued membership, that some form of voting be used to give due consideration to that. The UK needs to address issues such as unlawful detention, but that does not make it as bad as for example Zimbabwe. i.e. fully needs qualification?
(CobblyWorlds)
Define Democracy (and European). And what exactly does "respects fully the European Convention on Human Rights" mean? Some of the ECHR I consider to be genuine fundamental rights. Others, like state-supplied, are what I would consider "good things", but how they are implemented would have to depend on national needs and resources. Would this give the ED control over education policy?
(Andrew L)
Definitions of "European" and "democratic" might help here. And "state" come to that.
(iancgbell)
3)I think some things still need to have a national veto. At least when it comes to forcing that nation to do it (others may be able to do it themselves if appropriate).
(Andrew L)
"Each member state government is represented on the basis of equality". But this is a false and artificial basis, because they are not equal. Benelux taken altogether is roughly equal to Italy or France. Any state could become more powerful by splitting up, for example Czechoslovakia or Yugoslavia. When they are all members, Slovenia, Croatia, Macedonia, Serbia, Bosnia, and perhaps Montentegro and Kosovo, would have more votes than the UK,France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden and Austria. This doesn't seem a very good idea.
(Morewick)
Aren't we seeing the Conservatives' vision of Europe in this? A fine vehicle for trade and the free movement of capital without those inconvenient employment issues and safeguards for the people in general? Most important to many in Europe is the provision and safeguarding of social benefits to the populations. Don't forget that it was the perception of the French who voted the constitution down that these social rights were under threat.
No arrangement, call it constitution, treaty or anything else, will be accepted if the social aspects of the EU are diminished. The British Conservatives don't understand this.
(Harrison2000)
4)So the citizens of member states cannot vote for Commission members? Is that really democratic?
(Andrew L)
5)Broadly agree, the requirements of 3 should prevent the stupid stuff getting through, and as this is cross Europe proposed by national parliaments, local stupidity (e.g. New Labour's Legislative Record) should be avoided.
(CobblyWorlds)
Agreed. (And if it does genuinely stick to just these areas, some of my earlier criticisms may not be so necessary).
(Andrew L)
6)Openness and Transparency. The decision-making process and all relevant documents shall be open and accessible and available on demand.
7)Agreed, with a requirement that they can put forward points to be answered by the council. i.e. answering these points is REQUIRED, not optional (Is there any way to structurally avoid the kind of non-answer/avoidance we get in the UK?). Points to be put forward decided on a unanimous basis?
(CobblyWorlds)
Interesting that the European Parliament used to be an appointed assmebly, but was deemed undemocratic and was replaced in 1979 by the present directly elected assembly.
I wonder just who wants to go back to Tony's cronies being appointed to do his bidding? No legal activism. The European Court shall be composed of one judge from each member state, elected by national parliaments for a single four-year term. The court shall resolve disputes between member states and interpret ED laws. Treaty interpretations shall be referred to the council."
The Court is composed of a judge from each country! They do interpret EU law and disputes between states. Anyone for Cherie as Britain's appointed judge? The present judges are appointed for a six year renewable once term. Whether they get a second term is in the hands of the other judges (bit better than Tony sending a judge home in disgrace as he failed to do his bidding). It is not unknown for judges not to get a second term - usually they get the message and resign rather than waiting to be pushed out.
I get the feeling that someone whould find out what he is talking about.
(kneegro)
8)Sounds reasonable. But what exactly is "Legal Activism"?
(Andrew L)
9)I broadly agree, at present there is no clear military danger to the EU. Allegiances in times of war can be arranged on the hoof and as there is no threat to counter it is fruitless to counter a threat that may be of an unforeseen nature. However, issues such as interoperability of communications and command and control are vital. As the treaty proposes that we be in a union with shared interest it is reasonable to suggest that any threat to one is likely to be a threat to all. Thus some military cooperation and interoperability is needed.
(CobblyWorlds)
Agree. (I can't envisage any need of an EU/ED army any time soon, or for any purpose other than say war with Russia. If that became likely, I'm sure we would have time to reconsider).
(Andrew L)
** SOME OF YOU HAVEÌýPROPOSED A WHOLE NEWÌýCONSTITUTION:Ìý
"Globalisation cannot be stopped," This is a little like saying the weather cannot be stopped. It is yet another meaningless battle cry. There has been international trading since before recorded history. Ok the the distances are greater now but the suggestion is that we have no control over what we buy. Mrs Thatcher famously used the quote, "You can't buck the market". Again a meaningless statement. But is used time and again by those who don't stop to think what they are saying.
We are the "Market"! We can decide what and how we buy and sell things. These statements are accepted and all thought seems to stop. However with a market of say 300 million consumers we have a certain amount of power. As an example, in recent years we have been exporting jobs to countries who run on near slave wages and import the goods we no longer produce at subsidised rates. Purpose of this trade is to compete on price. This always leads to a reduction in quality and inhibits R&D. The true cost of carbon based transport is incalculable even be the brightest environmental economists.
It is within our competence to discover exactly what a child labourer in a third-world sweat shop earns. Our market response should be simply to reckon the difference between the production costs and tax the imports to that amount. The difference should then be assigned to an NGO specialising say in educational programmes for that country. Then the goods would be allowed to compete on quality not on cost.
The present course of unregulated trade will lead to the impoverishing of the many, multinational monopolies and final collapse the free and fair trading system. If you find this hard to believe. Look the hundreds of examples of industries that no longer exist in most of Europe and with their disappearance goes the expertise to develop or evolve.
"This idea of 'social protection' is draining our economies and damaging our societies"
Quite the reverse. The UK almost has no societies left in the European sense. Where was the social protection for the Rover workers. We don't have any and unless we take charge of our own market/society, we will continue our progression all the way back to the Victorian values which ensured the need for the original Labour Party as the only way to get a food into the mouths of the starving families of low paid unskilled labourers. Is that where you want us to leave as a legacy to the next generation?
Our population has been changed to low paid debtors and credit loaded consumers whose life savings or life times work is there to be harvested.
Doesn't anybody find it strange to be told that because takings on the highstreet is falling that we are heading towards collapse as though "highstreet spending" is the only measure of our worth. If, which I doubt, we are the forth richest economy, where is all that money. I can tell you - We haven't earned it yet. We have mortgaged our lives and those of our children to pay for our consumption harvest.
The UK has very little to teach the rest of the EU. We are an object lesson on how not to allow their home grown industries wither on the vine. The EU is not without its birthpains but should give us the opportunity to raise our eyes above millstone and leave our children something better to work with than our debts.
(MGArkley)
The Treaty should start with a statement of intent that: -
1. Each citizen is free and that unless proscribed by law may undertake any action or determin not to act according to their own conscience and will.
2. No citizen will be taxed without the specific consent of the people determined by simple majority by way of ballot of all entitled to vote.
3. All taxes are to to be transparent in operation and certain as to their effect. Where doubt prevails the presumption is to be in favour of the citizen and not the State. There is no obligation on the populace so as to arrange their affairs for the benefit of the State or to increase the size of their tax burden.
4. Every legislative assembly shall present itself for re-election by the people whenever: -
i) the fourth anniversary of appoint occurs
ii) a major item of legislation proposed by the governing majority is defeated by the legislature acting within a quorate majority
iii) the legislature passes a vote of no confidence in the governing majority
iv) on a ballot of the people called by not less of 15% of the electorate entitled to participate in an election to appoint the legislature
5. No law shall be binding on any nation unless passed by the national legislative assembly of that nation.
6. The primary purpose and role of national government stated as: -
i) Defence of the realm
ii) Protection of the populace
iii) Establishment of the national infrastructure
iv) Integrity of all official process
v) Enhancement of the quality of life
(From Ray)
Ìý
1) The EU shall guarantee the life, liberty, privacy and property of it citizens.
1.1) This shall include but not be limited to freedom of speech, assembly, expression and political activity
1.2) At the minimum all citizens shall be protected from intrusion, unwarranted publicity and data may be held about them by any agency with their express consent
1.3) No EU government or agency may limit in any way a citizens enjoyment of and defence of their property
2) EU governments and agencies shall be accountable to their citizens.
2.1) This means that a presumption shall exist that all decision making shall be public and that governments and EU agencies will make available to citizens all documentation and information they hold - The only exception to this shall be for purposes of national security and this shall be strictly limited in scope and duration.
2.2) All officers of state - at National or EU level shall be elected.
2.3) All decisions shall be taken at the lowest available competent level of government.
3) The EU shall be committed to the full unfettered operation of free markets
3.1) This means that any subsidy, tariff, administrative measure or other restraint or distortion of trade is unconstitutional and therefore prohibited.
3.2) This specifically includes that no restriction may be placed on, or tariff may be charged on, items imported into one EU country from another EU country if any duties appropriate in the country of purchase have been paid.
3.3) However where an non EU country applies a market distorting restraint of trade the EU may apply a countervailing measure.
4) A citizen of the EU has the rights of free movement, residence and employment within the EU
4.1) This means provided proof of EU citizenship is available no other documentation or registration or similar is required for an EU citizen to cross an internal border, purchase property, take up residence, take up employment or establish a business.
5) Taxation is an infringement of a citizens property rights and can only be levied with consent.
5.1) This means that all taxes must be raised for a specified purpose and may only be used for that purpose.
5.2) This means that for any tax the citizens who would pay the tax must give their consent - The preferred mechanism for this would be an annual referendum of the citizens upon whom the tax is levied.
5.3) It is specifically prohibited that any EU government or agency may be granted a blanket authorisation to tax
(Richard Curry)
Ìý
Ìý
1) The European Union is a union of European states which agree to common action for their prosperity and well being. Membership is conditional on their observing the principles of representative democracy, freedom of speech, and the rule of law.
2) Between and within members states, there shall be free movement of goods, services, capital, people, and ideas, other than any restrictions which may be necessary for public safety and security.
3) The European Institutions shall consist of (i) an executive (the European Council), appointed by the member states on the principle of qualified majority voting; (ii) an upper chamber (the Council of Ministers), appointed by the member states on the principle of qualified majority voting; (iii) a lower chamber (the European Parliament), elected by the peoples of Europe from geographic constituencies of strictly equal population; (iv) a European Court, appointed by the European Council from persons of qualified judicial standing; an administrative service (the European Commission), which is appointed by and fulfils the decisions of the European Council. All these Institutions shall reside in the same European city.
4) In order to achieve Article 2., member states delegate to the European Institutions the power to manage the following functions on their behalf: (i) trade within the Union; (ii) trade with bodies external to the Union; (iii) capital movements between members states; (iv) setting of environmental standards; (v) agreement on environmental standards with bodies external to the Union.
5) No member state shall seek to limit the operation of Article 2. by discriminatory laws, subsidies, technical or professional standards.
6) The European Institutions shall possess a budget calculated as a proportion of the gross domestic product of member states. It shall be set by the European Council and approved by the European Parliament. The proportion of the gross domestic product shall be proposed by the European Council and agreed by all the Parliaments of the member states.
7) A Court of Auditors shall be appointed by and report to the European Parliament. If it reports that any item of expenditure by a European Institution has not evidently been made for the approved purpose, or has been made in a discriminatory manner, expenditure under that heading shall cease immediately until the Court of Auditors certifies that the error has been rectified.
6) No additional powers or competences shall accrue to or be assumed by the European institutions, other than by an amendment to this treaty. Members of the European Council may agree to co-operate on subjects not within the scope of this treaty, but not so as to increase the powers of the European Institutions.
7) An official document issued in the English language by a European Institution or member state shall be authoritative. An official document not in English which is issued by a European Institution or member state shall be authoritative only if accompanied by an English translation of its full contents.
8) Entry of further member states may be approved by the Council of Ministers and European Parliament, upon their acceptance of this treaty.
9) This treaty comes into effect upon ratification by the member states, and may be amended by the same process.
(Anthony Pick)
Ìý
1) A new treaty which enables independent European nations (the Signatory Nations) to collaborate with one another for mutual benefit.
2) The Signatory Nations to remain sovereign with jurisdiction over all matters, independent of any central authority.
3) The only European institution to be The European Commission consisting of:
i. a Governing Council.
ii. a Civil Service.
4) The Governing Council to comprise the Heads of Government of all Signatory Nations. The purpose of this Governing Council will be to decide on which matters the Civil Service will be asked to draft legislation. The Civil Service shall not initiate any matters unless asked to do so by at least 25% of the Heads of Government of Signatory Nations. Signatory Nations voting in favour of legislation in a particular matter (Participating Nations) will instruct the Civil Service to draft legislation to implement their will.
5) The Civil Service will, upon a request from Participating Nations, draw up legislation suitable for passing into national law by the Participating Nations. Any such legislation will only be effective in Participating Nations.
6) Such legislation may only relate to cross border matters such as commerce between Signatory Nations, environmental pollution and the maintenance of a free market in goods services, people and capital. All other matters are outside the remit of the treaty.
(Arthur Cunynghame )
Ìý
Ìý
1) Many more decisions to be by unanimity rather than by qualified majority. Countries will then only have to sign up if they agree.
2) The right to opt out of a decision at a later date, if the government or circumstances change in the country signing up.
3) Flexibility for those members who want more EU government to press ahead without other states, subject to satisfactory arrangements about costs and the budget to be agreed by unanimity of all members.
(John Redwood) MP for WokinghamÌý
The new treaty must provide for:
- setting of social rules on holidays, maternity leave and pay, paternity leave, pensions
- common standards of air and water quality; recycling targets; agreed carbon dioxide reduction targets; parallel laws on toxic waste disposal outside the EU (most of which is in place)
- agreement to contribute to a common fund to enable an effective regional policy to bring all nations up to the same standard of living
- agreement to pay 0.7% GDP in aid
Setting these standards and enabling the continued improvement in the quality of our lives depends on acting together not going it alone: and an elected EU president, common foreign policy, and more majority voting are pre-requisites to make all this work.
(sjbendle)
The fundamental error was calling the document a "Constitution". Like all its predecessors it introduced largely institutional reforms that are more relevant to the various institutions and to governments in the Member-States than to the average EU citizen. For people to adopt a new Constitution they must feel that that their existing national one (written or not) is imperfect or, at least, insufficient and that the proposed text is both understandable and an improvement. The mistake was to get people to vote on a complicated, long treaty that they do not see how it will really improve their lives.
It would be far more sensible to present a short, legally binding constitutional text that would decree the fundamental rights and responsibilities of citizens, institutions and governments. This "Constitution" would refer to a longer legal document (a Treaty) that would lay-down the more detailed legal situation but would have to be compatible with the constitution.
This would allow the EU citizen to have a 'cut-out-and-keep' guide to his/her inalienable rights (perhaps along the lines of the EU rights for air passengers leaflet) whilst enabling institutional reform through the linked treaty. It might even be enough to give EU citizens a sense of 'ownership' of the EU.
Because these documents would be linked, they would (both) need ratifying by all Member-States. Thereafter it would be the responsibility of the European Court of Justice to strike down future measures incompatible with the Constitution (unless it was amended).
(sjcgbe)
The best Constitution has already been published, and is in daily use. It begins with the immortal words,
"We, the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union..."
Change the words 'United States' to read 'European Union' and we're there!
Simple!
(MikeCunningham)
 Back to Reports 91Èȱ¬page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
