White Paper on the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe
Whilst I have been away the Foreign & Commonwealth Office has released the governments “White Paper on the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe†with a foreword by the Prime Minister.
Our Tone has
“no hesitation in commending it to the country as a success and as a major step forward in creating the kind of Europe that the British people wantâ€
Sorry did I miss something? How does he know that the British people want the kind of (EU not Europe Mr Blair) that the Constitution will bring? I thought that was what the Referendum was about, or is he preparing the ground for a further referendum if they loose this one?
Mr Blair starts by saying that the Constitution was begun with the Convention on the future of Europe but fails to mention that the Convention did not fulfil its remit from the Laeken agreement which set it up. He also fails to mention that in at the time he was against a Constitution, Warsaw 2002 “This Statement of Principles would be a political, not a legal document. It could therefore be much simpler and more accessible to Europe’s citizensâ€.
White Paper…
“I think it represents a good result for Britain and for Europe. We can be proud of the strong part we played in shaping the Treaty†…“It is an example of how a Britain strongly engaged in the European Union has much greater political influence than a Britain disengaged from Europeâ€.
Yes quite! when you do not want a Constitution but want a simple statement of principals that would not be legally binding, I can see how this legally binding Constitution is evidence of how much we can achieve politically by being strongly engaged in the Union. Why is it now a cause for pride when he has achieved exactly the opposite of his stated intentions is beyond me?
Mr Blair then goes on with a load of claptrap about how the Constitution is necessary for the enlargement of Europe (no The EU, Mr Blair) again, no Mr Blair we do not need a Constitution to make the EU work better or more efficiently after enlargement, we had the Niece Treaty to do that.
“The Constitution will bring real improvements to make Europe more effective, more accountable and easier to understand. For the first time, the powers, rights and duties of this Union are set out in a single treatyâ€.
No not Europe Mr Blair The EU, We really do need to make our minds up is this a treaty or is it a Constitution? The two thing are different this seems to be a treaty that sets up a constitution? As yet nobody has been able to explain (not event Dr MacShane) exactly, legally, a treaty between sovereign nation states can also be a constitution for a state and the people of that state. Let us not get to involved with the rules for a golf club. It would be nice if Mr Blair had explained exactly how this Constitution makes the EU more accountable, and because it so easy it is to understand there can be no doubt that when the Constitution states.
“Where the Constitution provides in Part III for the Council of Ministers to
act unanimously in a given area, the European Council can adopt, on its
own initiative and by unanimity, a European decision allowing the Council
to act by qualified majority in that area. Any initiative taken by the
European Council under this subparagraph shall be sent to national
Parliaments no less than four months before any decision is taken on it.â€
We can be quite certain that all of Mr Blairs red lines are safe.
“It provides a voting system for the Council which is both simpler and fairer. It provides for a significant strengthening of the voice of national governments within the EU, through the creation of a permanent President of the European Council. For the first time, it gives national parliaments a power to scrutinise proposals from the Commission at the draft stage and to send them back if parliaments are not satisfied the EU needs to actâ€.
A simple system of voting would be one country one vote the only reason for the complicated voting system is to ensure that France and Germany still retain their power. If the EU were democratic the fact that France and Germany have more MEP`s would suffice.
The strengthening of the member states is in fact a weakening now they have get together to ask the Commission to think again but the commission can simply ignore the states and carry on regardless of the member states wishes. The Subsidiary clause is empty of any power for the member states.
“The Treaty also makes it plain that the European Union is not and will not
be a federal superstate. Rather, it establishes clearly where the EU can and
cannot act, and confirms that the EU is a union of nation states, which has
only the powers given to it by these statesâ€.
Well he is right there, a federation of nation states would demand real limits to the power of the EU, the Constitution offers no limits to its powers, the door is left firmly open for the EU to increase its powers. If this Constitution is ratified the states will at one time only give powers to the Union, from that point on the states do not have control over those powers, it is a one time passing power from the nation state to the EU, which will also for the first time be an independent actor on the world stage the Constitution in facts sets up the EU as a state.
