Turn on thread page Beta

Referendum to be held on EU Constitutional Treaty watch

    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    http://www.euabc.com/upload/pdf/draf...itution_en.pdf

    I found that. I know the beginning is right because I have read that in a print copy. Could you have a quick glimpse to see if it's OK vienna?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vienna95)
    evidently a 'younger' member...
    Your point being? I am 18 and therefore old enough to vote on this. I don't see why my age makes my oppinion any less valid. I was just trying to make the point that the tories generally do try and scare people into voteing their way. I don't really mean that they are going to use that argument.




    (Original post by vienna95)
    righto...id generally stick with allies rather than neighbours.
    Personally I don't think that America have britains interests any closer to heart than Europe do. They don't seem to listen to our oppinion on anything which opposes them. I have read the proposals for the constitution and there are few things that I disagree with. I personally think that we should be moving to a more united europe. Just because I am younger doesn't mean that I don't know what I am talking about.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by randdom)
    Just because I am younger doesn't mean that I don't know what I am talking about.
    Well said. You can be ignorant at any age.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    Well said. You can be ignorant at any age.
    True but I don't consider myself ignorant I have researched the topic and feel that I know enough about the constitution to have an oppinion it. Not saying it is right but I am not ignorant on the matter.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by randdom)
    True but I don't consider myself ignorant I have researched the topic and feel that I know enough about the constitution to have an oppinion it. Not saying it is right but I am not ignorant on the matter.
    You're about the only person in Britain that does know anything about it then!

    Tell me. What does it say? You seem to be quite enthusiastic about it. What draws you to it? What does it contain that you think would be good for the country.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    You're about the only person in Britain that does know anything about it then!

    Tell me. What does it say? You seem to be quite enthusiastic about it. What draws you to it? What does it contain that you think would be good for the country.
    This is what I think is wrong with the referendum - so many people will be voting, myself included, without knowing the full ramifications of the constitution. There will be a lot of people voting based upon xenophobia. Surely we elect governments to make these kind of decisions for us?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by elpollodiablouk)
    This is what I think is wrong with the referendum - so many people will be voting, myself included, without knowing the full ramifications of the constitution. There will be a lot of people voting based upon xenophobia. Surely we elect governments to make these kind of decisions for us?
    Yes and No. On the one hand, of course political decisions are for the government to decide. However, on issues regarding the fundamental nature of Britain, the government isn't necessarily that much more qualified than your average joe. Referanda are held to resolve dilemmas such as this.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by elpollodiablouk)
    This is what I think is wrong with the referendum - so many people will be voting, myself included, without knowing the full ramifications of the constitution. There will be a lot of people voting based upon xenophobia. Surely we elect governments to make these kind of decisions for us?
    I'd disagree with your last statement.

    I don't think we should rely on a party politisized government through an excess of power in Parliament to make far reaching constitutional decisions like this.

    If governments want to drive through legislation to ban dogs from ******** in public parks then fine. If they want to drive through legislation that changes the entire British constitution when such an idea didn't even appear in their manifesto then I SAY NO.

    Major constitutional changes are a matter for the people, and not for government.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    with europe our voice is stronger on the world stage yes, take american steel tariffs, europes threat to place tariffs on american products collectively forced the USA to back down.

    surely the constitution would make the EU's treaties more legally enforcable? that would make sure that european countries pull their weight?

    anyway with the expansion with the EU and supposedly continued expansion some consolidation of EU policies is needed?

    anyway you argue we are handing over powers, if anything from my (albiet limited) point of view all we are doing is signing up to principles in areas of justice, human rights, economic success that we will (and already) adhere too.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    I'd disagree with your last statement.

    I don't think we should rely on a party politisized government through an excess of power in Parliament to make far reaching constitutional decisions like this.

    If governments want to drive through legislation to ban dogs from ******** in public parks then fine. If they want to drive through legislation that changes the entire British constitution when such an idea didn't even appear in their manifesto then I SAY NO.

    Major constitutional changes are a matter for the people, and not for government.
    Point taken, although I'd be worried that a lot of people will see the word 'Europe' and vote against it without fully understanding the consequences of the consitution. I have no problem with a referendum if people know *why* they're voting for/against it, but I fear this may not be the case. We can hardly rely on the parties for an objective description of it, as obviously Labour'll be pushing it through and the tories will oppose it. Looks like I'll have to rely on the good ol' BBC for my information
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by elpollodiablouk)
    This is what I think is wrong with the referendum - so many people will be voting, myself included, without knowing the full ramifications of the constitution. There will be a lot of people voting based upon xenophobia. Surely we elect governments to make these kind of decisions for us?
    its in the wording, they may attempt to make it more ambigious...that its in or out of the EU.

    its risky, seeing the popularity of traditionally euro-sceptic papers, daily mail,telegraph
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MattG)
    with europe our voice is stronger on the world stage yes, take american steel tariffs, europes threat to place tariffs on american products collectively forced the USA to back down.

    surely the constitution would make the EU's treaties more legally enforcable? that would make sure that european countries pull their weight?

    anyway with the expansion with the EU and supposedly continued expansion some consolidation of EU policies is needed?

    anyway you argue we are handing over powers, if anything from my (albiet limited) point of view all we are doing is signing up to principles in areas of justice, human rights, economic success that we will (and already) adhere too.
    We already have trading agreements with the EU and have been pursuing protectionist policies for years. Why do we suddenly need a constitution to carry on doing this?

    What's the point in signing up to principles we already adhere to?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    The main point that I am keen on the is idea that the EU will be more uniformed in it's view on asylem which would hopefull mean a more even distribution of people who are seeking asylum as where they are located will be a decision made by the central EU government, so individual countries will find it harder to pass the buck.
    I also quite like the idea that the EU precidency will be on a 6 month rotation which will mean that smaller countries who have joined more recently are likely to get a chance earlier
    More power is going to be given to the EU over individual countries which should lead to a more united frount on Europe however there is going to be a clause which allows countries to reject laws that could be delt with better on a local level. Britain is part of europe but still keeps it's legal inderpenance.
    There would be a congress which would meet once an year and deal with any problems that any member states may have with the way the EU is being run. This would consist of mp from the different states.
    The EU would present itself as one on the world stage again meening a more united europe. This would enable the EU to be seen as a more powerful union internationally generally gaining more respect to carry out policies that are agreed on.
    Cross border crime would be delt with on a EU level which in my mind would make it easier to solve these crimes and there is talk of an international court to try these international criminals. Which I think is benificial for everyone really.

    This is what I feel is good about the EU constitution I am not saying that everyone has to agree with me but this is why I am personally supporting the EU constitution which is only a rough draft anyway and may change.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Vienna95)
    you can order a copy from the EU website. in true EU style, it takes about a fortnight to arrive
    it hasn't been written yet if you look at the link that H&E posted :rolleyes:
    (Original post by Howard)
    How would it get more trade?
    it would encourage closer links to the EU and considering the fact that its impossible to say outside of the constiution but with in Europe it would led to us signing up to the Euro, something that would would strengthen our links with europe and thus lead to more trade.
    (Original post by Howard)
    Because some countries, like Spain take their christianity more seriously than other countries, like the UK.
    however considering the fact that europe is made up of more than one religion and politics in the EU is many secular putting in the chirsitian history of Europe into the Preamble is going to be pointless in real terms today. Spain and Poland may well be v.Catholic however they still have to respect the views of other nations.
    (Original post by Vienna95)
    evidently a 'younger' member...
    instead of insulting people why don't you post constructivly and explain why you think he is wrong. You have had the benfit of more years of life on this planet and therefore its sure not unreasonable to allow others to benfit from this insight rather than you just dismissing it out of hand
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    "I also quite like the idea that the EU precidency will be on a 6 month rotation which will mean that smaller countries who have joined more recently are likely to get a chance earlier"

    I thought it already was? It's a bit flawed - it means Luxembourg, population ~400k, get it as often as Germany who have a population many many times larger.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by randdom)
    The main point that I am keen on the is idea that the EU will be more uniformed in it's view on asylem which would hopefull mean a more even distribution of people who are seeking asylum as where they are located will be a decision made by the central EU government, so individual countries will find it harder to pass the buck.
    I also quite like the idea that the EU precidency will be on a 6 month rotation which will mean that smaller countries who have joined more recently are likely to get a chance earlier
    More power is going to be given to the EU over individual countries which should lead to a more united frount on Europe however there is going to be a clause which allows countries to reject laws that could be delt with better on a local level. Britain is part of europe but still keeps it's legal inderpenance.
    There would be a congress which would meet once an year and deal with any problems that any member states may have with the way the EU is being run. This would consist of mp from the different states.
    The EU would present itself as one on the world stage again meening a more united europe. This would enable the EU to be seen as a more powerful union internationally generally gaining more respect to carry out policies that are agreed on.
    Cross border crime would be delt with on a EU level which in my mind would make it easier to solve these crimes and there is talk of an international court to try these international criminals. Which I think is benificial for everyone really.

    This is what I feel is good about the EU constitution I am not saying that everyone has to agree with me but this is why I am personally supporting the EU constitution which is only a rough draft anyway and may change.
    Well fair enough. I appreciate your point of view. It does however prove that bone person's heaven is another person's purgutary doesn't it?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by elpollodiablouk)
    "I also quite like the idea that the EU precidency will be on a 6 month rotation which will mean that smaller countries who have joined more recently are likely to get a chance earlier"

    I thought it already was? It's a bit flawed - it means Luxembourg, population ~400k, get it as often as Germany who have a population many many times larger.
    Yes it is.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    True but we also avoid the problems we had with the Italien President/ primeminister (?) not being able to be tried for something for a while because he was te EU presidency at least I think it was the EU precisdency any one know what I mean because I am not sure of the exact details.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    [

    anyway you argue we are handing over powers, if anything from my (albiet limited) point of view all we are doing is signing up to principles in areas of justice, human rights, economic success that we will (and already) adhere too.[/QUOTE]

    Im not sure most people would agree thats all we would be agreeing to.
    I agree the public will reject it due to fear of the unknown but shouldn't the govt have done more to educate us rather than just forge ahead as he has tried to?
    Personally I welcome the idea of a referendum, we are talking about handing over decisions on law, taxation and immigration not just principles here.
    If we dont like our government we can vote them out at the next general election, what happens if after a couple or years we arent happy in the EU? Can we just pull out and no hard feelings? I think it may be a little more complicated.
    Maybe long term we will be better in than out but with so many people unhappy about it why rush it through. If we need more time to have a system we are happy with then let us take more time, not plunge in and live to regret it.
    I admit to being pretty ignorant in political arguement so I could anyone tell me why we should join? It may not be a very PC question but one most of us want to know...."whats in it for us?"
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by markie)
    [

    anyway you argue we are handing over powers, if anything from my (albiet limited) point of view all we are doing is signing up to principles in areas of justice, human rights, economic success that we will (and already) adhere too.
    Im not sure most people would agree thats all we would be agreeing to.
    I agree the public will reject it due to fear of the unknown but shouldn't the govt have done more to educate us rather than just forge ahead as he has tried to?
    Personally I welcome the idea of a referendum, we are talking about handing over decisions on law, taxation and immigration not just principles here.
    If we dont like our government we can vote them out at the next general election, what happens if after a couple or years we arent happy in the EU? Can we just pull out and no hard feelings? I think it may be a little more complicated.
    Maybe long term we will be better in than out but with so many people unhappy about it why rush it through. If we need more time to have a system we are happy with then let us take more time, not plunge in and live to regret it.
    I admit to being pretty ignorant in political arguement so I could anyone tell me why we should join? It may not be a very PC question but one most of us want to know...."whats in it for us?"[/QUOTE]

    Some good points.

    Surely if the European Constitution was such a great thing the government might have a bit of a stab at explaining it the people. If it's so good sell it to us!
 
 
 
Poll
Who is most responsible for your success at university
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.