[ILUG] EU constitution

[Bryan O'Donoghue]

Michael Conry wrote:
> This make some sense to me.  Even if the constitution is not perfect,
> if it's better and leads to a better EU (better == more
> democratic/representative, at least in my opinion), then the future
> changes arising out of an improved EU should also lead to further
> movement in this direction.  


Just to be clear.

I don't support a Federal Union, however, I acknowledge as do most 
Federalists, that the European governmental structure, ,is extremely 
badly designed.

As someone who opposes a Federal Euopean Union (precisely because I 
doubt in it's ability to govern in place of an Irish parliment [1]), I 
don't see an advantage to giving more power to the EU, as a necessary 
evil, in reducing the flawed structure of European governance.

I just don't have that sort of optimistic outlook, that defies the facts 
as they present themselves.

Even if, the Constitution is ratified, the Comission will essentially 
still hold most of the cards... Bernhard who I think it's fair to say, 
is clearly in favour of a more Federal union, posted a link to this

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/quick_guides/04/europe_european_union_constitution/html/1.stm

Essentially so long as the Comission is _more_ powerful then the 
Parliment, that there is _no_ way, I can vote with a good concience, in 
favour of giving _any_ more power, to the Union.

Exactly how many treaties will have to be ratified, giving more and more 
power, to Europe, before we can get a "Democratic" structure ?

As, someone who is reticient about Federalism... the current methodology 
of enunciating Federalism, under the guise of "vote for this... it 
brings democracy", doesn't give me confidence in the EU.

It's a flawed structure, Europe, is supposed to be made up of a 
conglomeration of nominally democratic entities, but, the structure of 
the EU, is not a democracy... quite clearly. Yes, apparently, that's the 
fault of those of us, who don't want a Federal Union... and alarmingly, 
the "fix" the Federalists seem to be proposing is A) Not to make any 
real moves to reforming the Fundamental structure of having the 
Comission at the Apex of European legislative enunciation B) to make it 
easier, for large voting blocs in the quasi-Democratic [2] Comission to 
push proposals through the Comission and C) to give more power to the 
EU, in the process.

To my mind, the only accountable, entity with a competence at Euopean 
level is the European Parliment and unfortunately, the proposals of the 
constitution _don't_ put that democratic entity at the Apex of governance.

Thus I oppose giving any more power to Europe until the Parliment or 
(Democracy) is the foundation of the Union, and I _reject_ in the 
strongest possible terms, that ceding power, to Europe, because "some" 
of the EU constituion "sort of fixes" EU structures, but, doesn't change 
the fundamental failure of the EU, to be first and foremost a Democratic 
entity that represents the view of it's people "directly" is an 
appropiate means of "fixing" Europe, because, what giving more power to 
Europe, under the constituion will do, is effectively give more power to 
the Comission and I oppose that.

I realise, being seen to be non-nationalist is trendy, but, I think that 
the brain should be engaged slightly, before blithely voting for 
something, because it's trendy to be Federalist. Perhaps people think 
that's a little unfair, to say, but, I suspect, quite strongly, that's 
it's largely true.

I'd have confidence in a Europe, with a directly elected parliment at 
the Apex of governance. I don't have confidence in ceding power, over 
_my_ governance, the governance of this country, or the governance of 
the rest of Europe, to any lesser entity.

The Australians, for example, voted against having the Queen as head of 
state, but, wouldn't vote for the alternative, form of Government. This 
was by design on the part of the people who drafted the legislation, 
but, that's not the issue. The point is, that it is possible to be in 
favour of a Federal Union, without voting for something just because it 
throws shapes at being it. If we are moving to a Federalised structure, 
I think, that it should be done right, before the balance of power 
shifts from National, to Euopean governance. I welcome a debate on 
Federalism, hell, I might even _vote_ for it, but, I won't vote for 
something broken, just because, it's trendy or popular, or half of what 
is a _bare_ requirement, in terms of democratic governance.

Finally, I personally don't _want_ a Federal Europe and I don't _want_ 
to have to vote Ireland into a Federal Europe, in little baby steps, 
under the guise of "fixing" European Governmental structures, 
incrementally. It might be possible to convince me, that a Federal Union 
was in Ireland's interests, but, whatever about the _nature_ of the 
Union, I think it's a circular argument to give more power, to a 
strucutre that's broken... will continue to be broken...and might 
_never_ get fixed, on the hopeful assertion that "things should get 
better". For all the failures of national government, at least, the 
views are 'representative' nominally, of the views of the electorate.

Fix the structures, demonstrate that Europe _can_, work as a real 
democracy, and I'll _consider_ allowing it to supercede Irish 
democracy... but, I'm not going to be gullable enough to vote for the 
20% of the consitution, that I favour, when fundementally, we'll just 
end up ceding more power to an undeomcratic euracracy.

<sigh>


[1] Recent events with the patent fiasco, only reaffirm the belief that 
the EU, is incompetent to govern effectively.

[2] And I think I'm being very magnimous in calling the Comission even 
"quasi" in it's Democratic intent or structure.