The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
Thanks for your comments. It seems indeed Newropeans' website had some rest today, maybe because we're sunday... But here I found the link towards Newropeans' programme here: http://www.newropeans.eu/spip.php?article=22&lang=en
but Newropeans' core programme to democratize the European Union is really the 'heart' of Newropeans' project. Our goal is to democratize the EU, and this is a full job to do over the next decade at least... So here are Newropeans' 16 proposals to democratize the EU here: http://www.newropeans.eu/spip.php?article=68&lang=en
Now regarding this small foreword I can answer your questions. Lisbon, Newropeans is against the EU constitution which is exactly the same thing than the treaty of Lisbon because people voted now in 3 countries... and probably more if you consider that National parliaments don't represent well people in lots of European countries... See the Parliament in France who agreed to the EU constitution at 90% when French people voted against..
Social market. Newropeans wants to preserve the European social model as Europeans people want!
Common taxation system: Newropeans is in favor of a European tax directly paid by European citizens to finance the EU. This would not be a tax in more but a new way to finance the EU, make European citizen feel directly involved in the EU, and prevent this kind of wild deals one can see between national governments at the last 2007 - 2013 budget voting!? Governments and national parties are only behaving egoistically to preserve their self national interests.. nothing more..
And when they play the game of the EU it's only to state then than they have no choice but to go in the way Brussels decided while they've been directly associated through the European Council and with the European commission to these European laws and directives.. Newropeans is totally opposed to this decide without people way of proceeding!! And one of its 16 proposals is to give the EU parliament the right of initiative to propose laws. Which is the only right of the European Commission (which is also part of the executive power in Europe, another unique situation in our European democracies...)
We're planning to run in several countries, candidates have already been elected for Germany and Italy for collecting signatures reason.. others candidates will be announced in the weeks to come for France, Belgium, Spain, Netherlands, Austria, Slovenia, Czech Republic and Slovakia
However I would be happy with a referendum in all 27 member stares if (say) a two thirds majority of citizens and a four fifths majority of member states was all that were required for constitutional change.
It is not sufficiently democratic to give e.g. Malta - a right to block all change - that tilts the balance too far towards conservatism and stasis.
However we do desperately need greater popular involvement in decision making and so the idea of popular referenda in all 27 member states is a good one - provided 51% of Malta is not sufficient to block all change. notes from no w here
Here is the content of Newropeans' proposal on the trans-european referendum:
2. Ratify systematically the main changes of community treaties, and in particular enlargements by trans-European referenda.
To allow citizens to decide the main future orientations of the EU to avoid having an elite, disconnected from the citizens and peoples, impose its choices. These trans-European referenda will use a double majority in order to ensure democratic respect of minorities: more than 50% of the votes cast across the whole of the EU and more than 50% of the Member States voting in favour would be necessary to secure passage of a proposal.
As you can see one country can not block the others. best David
Many thanks. If anything, your proposal will be unacceptable to some smaller member states, for precisely the opposite reason! I.e. it reduces their power of veto too much!
The big problem with ANY change right now is that it requires the unanimous agreement of ALL member states (however their view is arrived at - by plebiscite, or by parliament) and there is no credible reason why smaller member states should agree to the removal of their veto powers when that is the one power that places them on a par with larger states.
In a perverse way, the Irish NO to Lisbon campaign, whilst claiming to want a more democratic EU, actually want a LESS Democratic EU, and oppose Lisbon because it provides for greater weighted majority voting, and greater consolidation of powers at President of the Council and EU High Representative for CFSP level.
The President of the Council is currently rotated between ALL member states on the basis of Equality. Under Lisbon, it might be expected that both posts will be dominated by nominees from the larger states.
So the problem becomes: If the EU cannot secure agreement even for the minor increases in weighted majority voting and strengthening of EU institutions as contained in Lisbon, what chance is there of achieving unanimity on the double majority system you propose? notes from no w here
That would indeed be an actual european decision...
PS: I know that a lot of french left wing parties are quite sensitive to the debate on the constitution. I feel it wrong, because a constitution is only what people make out of it, with or without an actual text or document. If you consider important to defend a specific policy on that point, that's up to you. But i feel you energy would be much better used elsewhere.
This vote was not pan-european, there were distincts votes not even referendum in 80% of the members states... These votes were made by parliamentaries which in their majority voted yes when (like forecast in France, Holland, Ireland, Germany... ) when people were in majority against!? A Newropeans' request would have been to have a referendum the same day in all member states with the same question, YES or NO, as a treaty like enlargments are important decisions for which Europeans have to be consulted. Not sure the constitution would have been more successful this way... and if yes then Newropeans would have been in favor of it.. because people would have decided to vote YES! Simple.. Democracy.. No more no less... no left or right approach... just democracy. Best David
If yes, then welcome to a truly pan european federal state (and election).
If not, you're simply transferring the usual government veto mode to a more popular basis, without modifying the way Europe is considered (and decided upon).
I don't know where your party is located, but I feel that in France, a lot of left wing parties are positioned on the second one, which is no different than the classical euroskeptic defense of unanimity.
by Frank Schnittger - Oct 2 6 comments
by gmoke - Sep 27
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 17
by Oui - Oct 13
by Oui - Oct 12
by Oui - Oct 121 comment
by Oui - Oct 112 comments
by Oui - Oct 11
by Oui - Oct 10
by Oui - Oct 101 comment
by Oui - Oct 9
by Oui - Oct 91 comment
by Oui - Oct 81 comment
by Oui - Oct 8
by Oui - Oct 74 comments
by Oui - Oct 67 comments
by Oui - Oct 56 comments
by Oui - Oct 4
by Oui - Oct 42 comments
by Oui - Oct 31 comment
by Oui - Oct 24 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Oct 26 comments
by Oui - Oct 214 comments