PDA

View Full Version : EU agrees to new Constitution




Sayhey
Jun 18, 2004, 07:44 PM
The summit of leaders of the EU nations has agreed on a new constitution. This is just the opening of a long fight to get it ratified by each nation. The UK looks to be the hardest sell.

EU agrees historic constitution

A deal has been reached on the first constitution for the European Union after hours of talks at the EU summit.

The final text of the constitution was put to leaders of the 25 EU states, who approved it a short time ago.

The accord concludes two days of intense negotiations in Brussels and four years of argument and preparation.

Reports say the other sticking point - a new European Commission president - has been postponed for later talks after a bitter row over candidates.

But both Germany and France backed a compromise constitutional draft put forward by Ireland - the current holder of EU presidency.

Now every country will have to ratify the treaty, either in national parliaments or through public referendums.

Contentment

European leaders toasted the new agreement with champagne, and gave a standing ovation to Irish Prime Minister Bertie Ahern who brokered the deal.

UK Prime Minister Tony Blair said it paved the way for a flexible Europe of strong nation states co-operating together.

"It's a success for Britain and a success for Europe," he said.

French President Jacques Chirac said the agreement meant "an important day for Europe".

Mr Ahern described it as a "win-win solution" which was advantageous for everyone.

"Nobody was rolled over and we worked hard to achieve that," he said.

The document sets out the powers of the national governments of the member states and the EU's various institutions as well as a charter of fundamental rights and a detailed catalogue of how the union will conduct a wide range of internal and foreign policies.

It includes one of the issues that torpedoed constitutional talks last year - resistance by smaller nations to plans for new voting rules.

The new plan says measures must have the backing of at least 55% of EU states, representing at least 65% of the total population, in order to pass.

Mr Blair said the treaty had satisfied the UK's demands to keep vetoes on issues such as economic policy, defence and foreign affairs.

France had complained that the UK was making too many demands for special treatment.


Commissioner debate


The UK remains at odds with both France and Germany over a successor to Mr Prodi who steps down as head of the commission when his five-year term ends in October.

France and Germany had backed Belgian Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt, but Britain opposed him on the grounds that he could be too eager to make the EU more federal.

Mr Verhofstadt later said he was "no longer available" for the post.

A UK commissioner, Chris Patten, had been proposed - but President Chirac said he did not think it was a good idea to have a candidate from "a country which doesn't take part in all European policies".

Mr Patten has now also pulled out, according to Mr Ahern.

The Irish pirme minister said he hoped to resolve the issue before his country's presidency ends on 30 June.

BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3820607.stm)



skunk
Jun 18, 2004, 07:52 PM
The summit of leaders of the EU nations has agreed on a new constitution. This is just the opening of a long fight to get it ratified by each nation. The UK looks to be the hardest sell.
Looks like Blair may have pulled off a bit of a coup. Chirac may have got his comeuppance (at last!). 25 votes to play with instead of 15 changes the political landscape and balance of power quite significantly.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3820947.stm

zimv20
Jun 18, 2004, 10:27 PM
it's good to see that, somewhere, countries can cooperate. well done.

Sayhey
Jun 18, 2004, 10:42 PM
I think you're right that the new members have changed the old alliances. However, the French and the Germans are on the side of the future. The economies of Europe will grow more and more into an integral whole. The standards set by the EU on a host of civil liberties and other protections will become the way of life for all member states. I don't see how there is really much choice for Europeans. If you want to be a "player" in the 21st Century then it will mean larger and larger economic and political structures. It makes sense to have that come in the form of structures that one can have a say in. That includes the late entry into the monetary union of the UK, Sweden, and Denmark.

If I were in the French or German governments, I would protest and yell about the British intransigence, all the while knowing that it only strengthened Europhiles in Britain if the UK's positions are seen as winning some concessions. In fact, after a suitable period of refusal, I think putting the Presidency in the hands of Chris Patten may not be such a bad idea. I would, of course, rather have someone like Kinnock in the post, but a Tory (I'm right in remembering Patten is a Conservative Party member?) in charge of moving Britain and the rest of Europe together has its tactical advantages. It would split the Conservatives right down the middle, and they seem to be the greatest threat to the EU right now. It would also comfort many citizens of the UK, I believe, for the voice of the EU to be an English one. It looks at the moment as if this won't happen as the latest report is that Patten has withdrawn from consideration, but this might not be the best thing for the French and German position.

If not Patten, then I would think that after his success in pulling off the Constitutional agreement Ahern's stock must be rising. He is not someone I share political views with, but I think he could be very successful. Whatever happens it will be fascinating to watch the next year to see if the Constitution will be ratified or the nationalist forces (aided and abetted by the Bush administration) will tear it apart.

skunk
Jun 19, 2004, 06:08 AM
I think you're right that the new members have changed the old alliances. However, the French and the Germans are on the side of the future. The economies of Europe will grow more and more into an integral whole. The standards set by the EU on a host of civil liberties and other protections will become the way of life for all member states. I don't see how there is really much choice for Europeans. If you want to be a "player" in the 21st Century then it will mean larger and larger economic and political structures. It makes sense to have that come in the form of structures that one can have a say in. That includes the late entry into the monetary union of the UK, Sweden, and Denmark.
The French and Germans on the side of the future? I don't think so. Unless you see the future as some kind of corporatist heaven. The Eurozone is no advertisement for the Euro: their economies are all in the doldrums even though the three main members have all excused themselves from meeting the criteria they themselves bullied everyone else into conforming with.

In fact, after a suitable period of refusal, I think putting the Presidency in the hands of Chris Patten may not be such a bad idea. I would, of course, rather have someone like Kinnock in the post, but a Tory (I'm right in remembering Patten is a Conservative Party member?) in charge of moving Britain and the rest of Europe together has its tactical advantages.
Having just heard Kinnock wittering on the radio for 5 minutes this morning, I am reminded what a complete twat he really is. Talks ENDLESS drivel and says absolutely NOTHING. The real challenge is staying awake till he gets to the end of a sentence.

Voltron
Jun 19, 2004, 06:16 AM
It shows that Saddam thought he was an immediate threat to the US.http://sharevana.com/forums/images/generalsmileys/new_shocked.gif
I doubt Puttin would lie for Bush.

BTW I posted this news story in I think the Iraq thread.

skunk
Jun 19, 2004, 06:33 AM
It shows that Saddam thought he was an immediate threat to the US.http://sharevana.com/forums/images/generalsmileys/new_shocked.gif
I doubt Puttin would lie for Bush.

BTW I posted this news story in I think the Iraq thread.
Excuse me, but aren't you in the wrong thread??? :confused:

Voltron
Jun 19, 2004, 07:00 AM
Excuse me, but aren't you in the wrong thread??? :confused:
Apparently because what I replied to isn't here :confused:

skunk
Jun 19, 2004, 07:01 AM
Apparently because what I replied to isn't here :confused:
Keep taking the tablets... :D :rolleyes:

Sayhey
Jun 19, 2004, 09:15 AM
The French and Germans on the side of the future? I don't think so. Unless you see the future as some kind of corporatist heaven. The Eurozone is no advertisement for the Euro: their economies are all in the doldrums even though the three main members have all excused themselves from meeting the criteria they themselves bullied everyone else into conforming with.

Hey, skunk, I dislike Chirac as much as you do. I think Schröder is busy trying to do to German Social Democrats what Blair did to Labour politics. In other words, I don't like either of them terribly much. I'm all for resisting much of their policies as they impact ordinary French and German citizens.

What I'm not against is carving out a future in which European integration is achieved through peaceful means and on the basis of standards that enable all Europeans to have basic rights and protections. That looks to me as a pretty good future, with a lot of bumps and struggling along the way. I also see tremendous resistance in the form of nationalist politics to this integration from many countries, including from your own Tories and folks like the UKIP. So when I see Blair's politics, in essence, caving into the rhetoric of Howard and others with his "red lines" and intransigence on the Constitution - yeah, it looks to me as if objectively the French and Germans are more in the camp of the future than the Labour leadership. I wish that were not so as Labour's history is certainly something I'm much more comfortable with than Chirac's arrogance. I would hope that the left in Labour would aggressively push its own vision of a future Britain, tied to Europe. What it seems like from over here is nothing more than attempts to mollify the right, while doing little to win folks to a progressive agenda. Heck, the Liberal-Democrats have a better position!

My own interest in this is one of hope for a multipolaral world in which there exists alternatives to US economic and political domination from a democratic and progressive tradition. It seems to me you folks in the EU best represent that hope and it drives me nuts when you all have similar nationalist problems as we do here, which could destroy that alternative. So kindly forgive the rantings of an American Trade Unionist who would love to have a Labour Party of his own, instead of the disorganized jumble of Democratic politics. ;)


Having just heard Kinnock wittering on the radio for 5 minutes this morning, I am reminded what a complete twat he really is. Talks ENDLESS drivel and says absolutely NOTHING. The real challenge is staying awake till he gets to the end of a sentence.

LOL, our standards are not as high as yours. Heck, not that long ago (ok, it was over 15 years ago - I'm getting old) one well known US politician, Sen. Joe Biden, was caught plagiarizing Kinnock's speeches and we thought they were pretty good until we found out they weren't his own.