No one’s asking me, but I’d vote “oui”. Should you be interested to know why, I’ve laid out my reasons in luckily idiomatically edited French in my replies to publius’ questions, which they posted yesterday. They also posted the Eulogist’s replies as well as a plethora of their own reasons for their personal final decisions (publius).
Continue reading
Tag Archives: EU
Blogging The French Referendum
Update I: Participation rates at 19:00 have just been released: 66,24 %. This means that it will surely clearly surpass the Maastricht final participation of 69,69 %. The poll estimates are talking about a final participation of 75%. This is big for a topic which many said was ‘abstract’. In Spain, the particpation was in the mid forties. The majority of polling stations close at 20:00 (in 40 minutes) but in Paris and Lyon they close at 22:00.
Well it’s a beautiful hot & sunny spring day here in Barcelona. I’ve got my web-radio tuned to France Inter (France Info) and I’m working quietly away updating some things on my website. I think today is an important day for Europe, and I’m going to be blogging live as the news comes in.
Continue reading
The EU and the case for a ‘non’ (Updated)
A couple of weeks ago, Versac from the French blog Publius sent me a bunch of questions concerning my views on the EU and the Constitution. They’re interviewing a number of non-French bloggers in this way. I thought I’d publish my answers here. A sample:
The main negative thing is that it’s giving the EU more power, competences, and I think that’s inappropriate before the democratic deficit is addressed. Also, it may lead to more judicial activism, which is bad.
Voting no is a bit of a gamble, since you can’t be sure it will push the governments in the desired direction, and not for example rule out Turkish membership to get it passed, or end up drafting an even worse constitution. But the happy scenarios seem likelier than the bad ones. We need to bloody the politician’s noses. Above all the present situation is unacceptable, and no real reform seems imminent. We need to seize the rare chance to set the EU on a new course, towards democracy and accountability. By rejecting the constitution, all bets are off.
Full interview under the fold.
Continue reading
The thing about referendums
I’m quite fond of representative democracy, and don’t think replicating the Swiss or Californian system would be a particularly good idea. I do however think that referendums are an occasionally vital and necessary part of democracy, and to do away with them, like the German constitution does, would be a great mistake.
There are situations where referendums are the only acceptable alternative. As a supporter of representative democracy I disagree with people who say that this or that issue is too important to be dealt with by the normal electoral process. But I do think I think referendums are necessary when an issue is 1) divisive 2) vitally important and 3) the normal partisan system cannot properly deal with, because the fault lines are different. As a corollary, anytime sovereignty is involved, I think an issue has to be pretty minor for you not to hold a referendum.
Most of the referendums on EU memberships are textbook cases of this situation. In the case of Sweden, nearly half of voters opposed Swedish entry and for most of the campaign the no side led. Without a referendum they would have had to vote for the Green or Left parties if they wanted to stop our entry. Both quite radical non-mainstream parties who together held less than 10% of the vote. In some countries all parties were for membership. In these instances I feel not holding a referendum would be undemocratic, and would to some degree disenfranchise (to use an American term) the whole electorate.
Continue reading
Blog Roundup, referendum edition
DJ Nozem: Spinning the ‘No’
Euan MacDonald (Transatalantic Assembly): A little more on the EU Constitution
S?bastien Llorca (The Fundamental principles of…) Towards a NO in France? Why?
Nosemonkey: Europe is not ambitious enough
Jerome a Paris (Daily Kos): France Votes (VII). It’s tomorrow. My bet.
Ulrich Speck: Making Sense of The French Vote. A Study in Orwellianism
Belgravia Dispatch: Why the Likely Non?
Jasper Emmering:
Maybe I just don’t get it…..
Guy on the Dutch referendum debate.
Les raisons de mon “oui”, par Emmanuel (Publius)
Marek (The Agonist): Lies and Xenophobia – the Bankruptcy of the French Left
La R?volution continue.
Edward has already pointed to an interesting post by Henry Farrell regarding European politics in the last post, but I think the argument is important enough for a separate pointer and a little more explanation.
Continue reading
The Morning After
Speculation is already rife about what might happen on Monday following Sunday’s vote in France. One small detail that I hadn’t thought about before, Monday is a bank holiday in the UK, so most traders won’t be working, Bloomberg’s Mark Gilbert feels that could even add to euro volatility.
One thing that is clear is that there are a mounting catalogue of issues to fuel ‘negative sentiment’ next week. The latest of these is the reported statement from German CDU EU spokesman – Peter Hintze – that if the French vote no, then the entry of Bulgaria and Rumania should be temporarily suspended.
“Our position is clear: inclusion of Bulgaria and Romania must be put off if the French vote no,” said the party’s parliament spokesman on the EU, Peter Hintze, in a telephone interview today.
So on May 30th we may have an EU where in one of the main countries the electorate have just passed an effective motion of ‘no confidence’ in their government, whilst in another of the ‘key states’ the existing government already has a ‘sell-by’ date. Add to this the uncertainty over deficits and the SGP, the absence of growth, and the growing unease about what exactly is happening at the ECB and, if you ask me, you have all the ingredients of a major currency crisis. Well, next week we’ll know.
If At First You Don’t Succeed…..
Well people are already busy positioning themselves in the face of what seems like an increasingly possible ‘no’ vote in France on Sunday. Yesterday it was Giscard D’Estaing, today it is the turn of the current EU president Jean-Claude Juncker. His basic point, if French and Dutch voters don’t say ‘yes’ the first time, then don’t give up, try and try and try again.
Continue reading
Spain and the Upcoming Budget Reform
As efforts continue to resolve the deadlock over the forthcoming reform of the EU budget, this article from reuters give some background on what the impact on Spain might be.
“Spain is set to be the big loser in tough negotiations on the EU’s 2007-2013 budget as the bloc’s paymasters led by cash-strapped Germany seek to limit their contributions and divert scarce resources to poorer new members in eastern Europe. Madrid has received a net 93 billion euros in EU funds since joining the EU in 1986, a cash injection that Spanish officials say surpasses U.S. aid to other European countries received under the Marshall Plan after World War Two”.
A Question of Credibility
Here’s the link to the Eurostat report on Italy’s deficit revisions. The language is very formal, but between the lines it isn’t hard to see the frustration with the kind of data they’ve been getting.
It is recalled that Eurostat was not in a position to validate the figures for Italy in the context of the March 2005 EDP notification. Apart from the three issues mentioned above, this was mainly due to the recording of transactions with the EU budget, to inconsistencies between data on cash and accrual bases and to statistical discrepancies in government accounts. It is expected that Eurostat will shortly receive from the Italian authorities the information requested on these issues and will then be able to clarify these issues in co-operation with ISTAT. Depending on the outcome of the examination, this could lead to a further upward revision in the government deficit for the period between 2001 and 2004.