THE EUROPEAN CONSTITUTION
(Comments: tony.papard@btinternet.com)
Now that the European Constitution has been rejected in the French and Dutch referenda, is there any point in continuing with the ratification process, since all 25 countries in the current EU have to ratify it. Clearly not.
All sorts of issues are raised by this state of affairs. First of these, is how many people in France and the Netherlands who voted 'No' to the Constitution actually read and understood the lengthy, immensely complicated document?
There is no point whatsoever having a referendum on a document which few people have read, and even fewer understand. Who knows why the Dutch and French voted 'No'? Maybe they wanted to register a protest against their own governments, maybe they were confused as to what the Constitution actually meant.
Clearly something as important as a Constitution for the European Union is a suitable subject for referenda, but it has to be kept very simple and very general. It is pointless putting to the European public an immensely complicated document and expecting them to vote unanimously in favor.
The Constitution should be whittled down to one page of 10-20 main points, setting out the basic principles of the European Union and how it will function. More detailed matters should be decided by elected parliamentarians, who have the time, knowledge and expertise to study, discuss and vote on the complicated, detailed documents.
We elect parliamentarians to draw up and wade thru complicated documents and then vote on them on our behalf. The public should only be invited to vote on general principles, such as: do we want a federal Europe, do we want a single European currency, do we want a Socialist Europe, do we want an EU of independent nation states but with an elected EU President and more power to the EU parliament, do we want a looser economic Union of nation states, etc. The details of all these options must be left to our elected representatives. It may well be that we have to put ALL these generalized options to the public, and we may get different votes in countries across Europe. If so, we must move forward on that basis, and abandon a 'one size fits all' idea of the EU.
On national issues, we don't have referenda on every single issue. Far from being democratic, this would be handing over the running of the country to the tabloid press in most cases. It is quite possible a referendum on capital punishment, sending back all asylum seekers or on castration of sex offenders would come out in favor of these policies, especially if the tabloid press urged people to vote that way. Certainly if we had a referendum to reduce taxes to a minimum most people would vote, quite irresponsibly, in favor, oblivious of the disastrous consequences for pensions, education, the health and other public services. The public are not always right - remember that Hitler and the Nazis were elected to power in a democratic election.
Certain matters are not suitable for direct democratic involvement of the uninformed, or misinformed, public. Taxes are one area which should, in my view, be taken out of party politics altogether. An unelected body should be set up to decide what revenue is needed every year to finance basic public services - good public transport, education, health service, a pension everyone can live on comfortably, etc.. This need not all be financed by personal income tax. Company profits can be taxed, the big financial institutions (banks, insurance companies, building societies, etc.) could all be taken into public ownership and their considerable funds used to finance the public services. Putting taxes in the realm of party politics is asking for trouble. Of course every party will try to promise low taxes in order to win votes, and then struggle to finance the basic public services. Once all the basics are funded, then let political parties formulate policies to raise further revenue if they so wish, or else keep to the basic level of taxes needed for the country to function efficiently.
As to Europe, where do we go from here? There are several possibilities. The Constitution can be rewritten and simplified and then put back to the vote. It may well be that it needn't be ratified by all 25 countries. Perhaps the EU has grown too big, and we need to split up into smaller groupings. Some European states may want one kind of Union, some may want another kind.
For instance, some countries may want a federal union with a single currency, a sort of United States of Europe. Others may want a looser economic union, with greater political autonomy for nation states. Still others may want a Socialist European Union, maybe even a revival of the Soviet Union along democratic lines. One thing is certain, individual nation states cannot survive in isolation.
Is there any future for an EU of 25 or more nation states, and if so what sort of Union will it be? Perhaps the EU could become a very loose Union, and within that Union could be an assortment of international groupings along the lines described above. The EU could contain a federal United States of Europe which would consist of far less than the 25 or more members of the EU. There is no need for every country in the EU to have exactly the same relationship within the Union. The United Nations Organization contains federations like the United States, tiny individual countries like Luxemburg, the United Kingdom, and it once also contained the Soviet Union. Perhaps the European Union should develop along these lines, allowing those countries which want closer political union within the EU to go ahead and form federations inside the Union.
The whole process and idea of European Union needs to go back to the drawing board. It is unrealistic to expect 25 and more individual nations with different languages, cultures, historical backgrounds, religions, etc. to agree on a single form of European Union. How can monarchies and republics, for instance, become part of a single federal state? A two, three or four speed European Union is perfectly feasible, and in fact is already in place. We have the Eurozone countries with a single currency, we have the Schengen group which have abolished border controls, we have unions of countries/states within the EU like the UK and the Federal Republic of Germany. One size fits all is not an option - let every country develop in its own way and at its own pace.
Back to the drawing board with the EU Constitution which must be simplified and much more generalized. Then let individual member states work out their own relationships within the greater European Union. The most successful mini-unions will be the ones the other European states will be clamoring to join in the long run.