Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct: 
Feedback: 
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
| [ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ] |
| Subject: EU "Constitution" | |
Author: Dave (UK) | [ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
] Date Posted: 11:18:38 01/31/05 Mon In reply to: Ed Harris (London) 's message, "Ah, metaphysics..." on 00:07:18 01/31/05 Mon I fear that you are right in that will be lumbered with this constitution eventually, however long it takes. I wonder just how meaningful this referendum will be. We have seen the tactics of Governments in the past when dealing with Euro-creep. When the Irish rejected an EU treaty (was it the Treaty of Nice?), the Irish Government merely waited a couple of years until the public were indoctrinated into voting the "correct" way the next time. I see no reason for things to change here. Mr. Blair has already signed the document hasn't he? His use of Royal Prerogative will doubtless enable him to sign treaties in the name of Her Majesty without the approval of Parliament. I wonder then what relevance this referendum has in law. Is Parliamentary approval even required? I rather suspect that Blair, given his propensity for sidelining Parliament, would rather avoid the inefficiency of getting 600 MPs to agree with him, rather than just his ministerial yes-men. It certainly begs the question why the process of ratification is being done arse-about-face: sign the treaty, Parliamentary debate, and then a referendum. There was an interesting article in the Telegraph recently that summed how unacceptable EU ideas become law. To paraphrase from memory, it involved thus: 1. No, that idea is a red line for us, we will never agree to it. 2. OK, they are talking about it, but it will not get very far, we are against it. 3. OK, we have agreed to it in principle, but it does not mean in reality what you think it does. 4. OK, it has been agreed, but it is too late for us to do anything about it now. This “constitution” is another fait accomplish, in a long tradition of the betrayal of our nation by deceiving the public. If we vote no, another treaty will be pulled miraculously from the hat with some offending words altered. The spirit, purpose, and indeed the interpretation of the treaty by European courts, will remain the same. Michael Howard’s recent immigration policy has been declared unlawful by the EU. We will be going into an election, where the issues being debated are no longer the remit of our Parliament. Howard’s response to this uninvited return from EU bureaucrats was simply “we will take those powers back”. Clearly, only one man can save this country from obscurity, and bring about the belated showdown with our self-appointed political masters. [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] |
| [> [> [> Subject: Ah but... | |
|
Author: Ed Harris (London) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 12:34:39 01/31/05 Mon That's all very well, and there ain't much in what you said with which I disagree: even if we reject the Euro-'constitution' they will somehow find some way in which to foist it upon us anyway. However, I don't know if you've seen ICM's latest polls on the official Euro-question. Apparently, the No campaign is ahead by only 2%. The results were as follows: Hooray, let's destroy our nation, Mr Blair will be pleased [yes]: 39% Piss off you garlic-munching, fish-stealing, lamb-burning workshy bastards [no]: 41% D'uh? Whaddayamean? Woss a consitooshuun? [don't know]: 20% This leads me to worry that we'll just pass the thing anyway, since only about 5% of the population will read it and the government will spend so much of our own money on convincing us that it means something completely different from what the Europeans say that it means, that we will blindly sign away our freedoms to a polyglot bureaucracy which meets in secret in a foreign capital. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> Subject: There is Hope (not much) | |
|
Author: Dave (UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 13:16:25 01/31/05 Mon I did indeed see this poll at the weekend, and it did induce much frothing at the mouth and involuntary limb movements. However, I am hopeful that the results form some kind of aberration, as they run contrary to most other polls undertaken on the subject. It leads me to believe that the sample was taken at the Liberal Democrat party conference. I like to believe that the people of this country, despite voting for Blair twice, are not that stupid, and are firmly in the “burn jacques santer at the stake” camp rather than the “corruption, unaccountability, dictatorship: Oui, Merci” camp. I certainly hope my conception is based on an inherent understanding of the mood of the British people, and is not based on a misguided delusion, for all our sakes. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |