Netherlands to vote Nee on the European Constitution

[Shi Huangdi]

You know, I was seeing that Dutch politicians, in trying to sell this Constitution, made the argument that voting yes would enhance Dutch influence in Europe. Similarly, in France they made the argument that France would no longer be influential in Europe in the event of a "non".

I don't really understand this argument that agreeing makes you more powerful and influential. If the Eurocrats know that your support can be taken for granted, then they have no incentive to pay attention to any of your concerns. If on the other hand they know your support must be won, they they cannot take you for granted and would be more likely to make concessions to you.

I think the French and Dutch people sent a signal to the Eurocrats that they cannot be taken for granted and their concerns must be taken into account if the EU wishes to move forward.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
no wins, 63-37.

wow

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
I don't really understand this argument that agreeing makes you more powerful and influential. If the Eurocrats know that your support can be taken for granted, then they have no incentive to pay attention to any of your concerns. If on the other hand they know your support must be won, they they cannot take you for granted and would be more likely to make concessions to you.

I agree with you. I don't understand this argument either.

But since the "non", I have been thinking about one thing: while the States aren't weakened by a rejection of the constitution, the heads of State are considerably weakened. Chirac and Balkenende, who backed this constitution, have lost considerable legitimacy on European issues, and the European partners may want to exploit this personal weakness.

[CapTVK]

Well, the public has spoken and we´ll have to move from here.


To everyone here: Do not ignore reality In the upcoming years we´ll have to make some tough decisions. Politicians will have to make them and citizens as well.

[CapTVK]

Terrific, I already hear comments on the Radio from fellow Dutch if we can have a referendum about "all those foreigners over here".....


We´re off to a good start

[Lawrence of Arabia]

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Spiffor

I agree with you. I don't understand this argument either.

But since the "non", I have been thinking about one thing: while the States aren't weakened by a rejection of the constitution, the heads of State are considerably weakened. Chirac and Balkenende, who backed this constitution, have lost considerable legitimacy on European issues, and the European partners may want to exploit this personal weakness.

You might replace your heads of state easier than an ill thought out constitution.

Take that from a Canadian.

[Spiffor]

BTW, a to the BBC. During the campaign, I felt that the Beeb was largely pro-Yes, as it was fairly caricatural of the French Non side. Since the sound defeat of the treaty, they seem to be trying to be more balanced. I see nothing really biased in this piece:

Q&A: EU constitution - what happens next?
The Netherlands appears to have firmly rejected the EU constitution, just three days after France's "Non" to the text cast uncertainty over the European project.

The BBC News website looks at what is in store for the EU constitution.

What is at stake with the Dutch vote?

Although the result of the Dutch vote is non-binding, a second vote against the EU constitution - from another founding member of the EU - could create a domino effect throughout the union.

The constitution cannot come into effect unless it is ratified by all 25 EU members - this is made clear in Article IV-447 of the draft constitution.

So a Dutch "No", following France's rejection, makes the chances of the treaty's revival even slimmer.

What are the next steps?

An EU summit, known as the European Council, is being held on 16-17 June in Brussels. This will have to examine whether it is worth carrying on with the ratification process in other member states or whether to declare the treaty dead. The treaty itself simply assumes that all member states will go through their ratification procedures.

Is there a plan B?

Not really. However, there is a procedure to discuss deadlock. The draft constitution says (in Article IV-443-4) that if, after two years from the treaty being signed (which was on 29 October 2004), 20 member states have ratified it and others "have encountered difficulties", the "matter will be referred to the European Council".

It does not say what the European Council should do. It is possible that the Council might seek to revive the treaty in some way but that is for a decision at the time.

Can the EU manage without a constitution?

Yes. It will continue to function on the basis of the existing treaties. It is the future direction of the EU which is now called into question.

Could the constitution be renegotiated?

It is possible that some governments will propose a "treaty lite", but that would take several years to negotiate. Others might suggest some lesser reforms which would not require a treaty change. Some might even try to forge ahead with integration on their own to form an inner core.

But nothing is likely to happen in a hurry.

Who has ratified the treaty already?

Austria, Hungary, Italy, Germany, Greece, Lithuania, Slovakia, Slovenia and Spain.

Who else is having a referendum?

Luxembourg: 10 July; Denmark: 27 September; Ireland: Late 2005; Portugal: Late 2005; UK: April to June 2006?; Czech Republic: June 2006?; Poland: No date set.

Will other countries go ahead with their votes?

It is up to them. The UK government is waiting to see if the constitution is formally abandoned but will probably not hold its proposed referendum. On the other hand, Ireland says it will go ahead. Poland is debating the issue. Not all countries are holding referendums.

Why did the French vote "No"?

They did partly as a protest against the government, especially over the economy.

On the left, many voters believed that the constitution would create an ultra-free market economy within the EU.

On the right, voters were concerned that France is ceding too much sovereignty to the EU.

Commentators say there is little chance of the French government submitting the EU treaty to another referendum.

What is at stake for the EU?

The EU has to decide what it wants to be - a tight organisation in which member states surrender or share sovereignty or a looser grouping of nation-states. The constitution laid out a track whereby it would become more integrated in many areas while leaving veto rights with member states in such matters as foreign policy, taxation and defence.

The EU also has to face the problem of the mismatch between the views of the people and the views of the politicians. This was highlighted in the French referendum.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by CapTVK
Terrific, I already hear comments on the Radio from fellow Dutch if we can have a referendum about "all those foreigners over here".....

Is the identity crisis in the Netherlands that bad? Do you know of any polls that measure its extent (by any chance)?

[Spiffor]

Actually, I've found polls that seem like they describe what the Dutch are thinking. Only problem, it's in Dutch

Can any of our Dutchmen tell me the gist of these polls? Thanks

http://www.referendumwijzer.nl/ReferendumWijzerEUGrondwet2005/scores_stellingen.htm

http://www.referendumwijzer.nl/ReferendumWijzerEUGrondwet2005/waarderingeu.htm

[BeBMan]

"Europese burgers"

[Ted Striker]

[DeathByTheSword]

ok here we go the second one shows what the general idea is of dutch people over the EU...they are all most for every point to expand and strengthen the EU...but they dont want to give extra power to brussels...


the first one is all the results of the internetsite where you could answer questions to see if you were for or against the constitution. the yellow things is what the constitution say about an subject and behind that you can see what the people think. eens = agree and oneens = not agree...the other one is nutreal...

you can see that on religous and culture thinks dutch people almost all vote against the constitution while for the instuttions the all vote for the constitution and actually almost for everything they for for the constitution so if you would see this chart you would think they voted YES...

stupid irrational voters...think before you act...i voted yes yesterday...just like the rest of my floor the floor below us (we dont like them in general they are a bunch of pussies (and they probably think the same about us)) voted no. so even the students are devided on this

[Locutus]

The first link is a famous Dutch website that helps people to decide what to vote during elections (and now the referendum). The modus operandi is always the same: it lists a number of issues from the political programs of all participating parties (in this case, a number of things that is set out in the constitution) and let's people vote agree/disagree/neutral on each of these issues. Afterwards, people get to see a breakdown in percentages that indicates to what extent they agree with the program of each party (or in this case, the content of the constitution), and it also lists for the party that most closely matches their choices (or in this case the constitution itself), how their choices compare with it. That is what you see in the link: the first column lists all the issues people had to vote on, the second column lists whether the constitution itself agrees or disagrees with it, the final column is of course the total result of all participants (normally this would display the choice that the participant of the poll made him/herself, so (s)he can see for each individual issue how his/her opinion compares to the constitution).

I don't think too highly of this site myself, but in general it's seen as trustworthy in the Netherlands and it's very popular. In my experience, for the last 2 or 3 national elections, many of the poitically not-so-well-informed people relied almost exclusively on the outcome of this poll to determine what to vote in the real election. On the one hand it's good people aren't relying on whims or emotions to vote, but on the other that gives the people who run this site more power than I would entrust to anyone... Anyway, for this referendum I haven't heard nearly as much about this site in the mainstream media as before and IIRC they've gotten less than half the 'usual' number of respondants for parliamentary elections. Still, 850k+ respondants is still a very high number for a purely Dutch website (it's more than 10% of the number of people who voted in the referendum).

Translation of the issues (I did this pretty fast, I hope I got the meaning across properly, some of these issues can be rather subtle):

The second column lists the 3 choices people had for each issue: Agree, Neutral, Disagree (in that order). The yellow indicates what the Constitution itself says on the issue.

The first column lists the issues themselves:


Theme: European institutions

1. One million European citizens should have the right to put a topic on the European agenda (agree: 70.4%, disagree: 16.8%)

2. The European parliament should be able to decide on laws on more European areas of policy. (agree: 47.8%, disagree: 34.0%)

3. The Dutch parliament should together with a number of other parliaments be able to send a proposal back to the Union. (agree: 87.8%, disagree: 7.3%)

4. The veto right of the member states should be kept intact for all areas of policy. (agree: 59.4%, disagree: 28.3%)

5. The Council of Ministers should deliberate behind closed doors. (agree: 12%, disagree: 73.4%)

6. Every member state should have the right to cancel their membership of the European Union. (agree: 84.7%, 9.6%)

7. The concept of a rotating chairman of the EU should remain intact. (agree: 70.8%, disagree: 18.4%)

Theme: social policy and economy

8. The EU should regularly consult with churches. (agree: 18.2%, disagree: 59.1%)

9. The EU should set down a number of basic rights for her citizens. (agree: 74.9%, disagree:16.9%)

10. The European Parliament should be able to decide on laws about discrimination (agree: 72.3%, disagree: 18.5%)

11. Laws about art and culture are exclusively a matter for the individual member states (agree: 59.6%, disagree: 23.2%)

12. The EU should be able to make trade agreements without consulting the European Parliament (agree: 30.66, disagree: 51.8%)

Theme: Environment and agriculture

13. The EU should be able to act in case of multi-national threats to public health. (agree: 90.8%, disagree: 5.4%)

14. The EU should protect animal rights. (agree: 77.5%, 9.9%)

15. The EU should in all her policies take the environment into account. (agree: 81.4%, 8.9%)

16. Stimulating durable energy sources by the EU is unnecessary. (agree: 14.2%, disagree: 74.0%)

Theme: Justice

17. The agriculture subsidies are exclusively a matter for the Council of Ministers, not the European Parliament. (agree: 30.0%, disagree: 47.4%)

18. Fighting terrorism is exclusively matter for the individual member states. (agree: 11.1%, disagree: 82.1%)

19. The existing European agreements about immigration are sufficient (agree: 21.7%, disagree: 56.2%)

20. A European public prosecutor is undesirable. (agree: 37.3%, 40.8%)

Theme: Defense and foreign policy:

21. Memberstates should recognize the rulings of judges of other member states. (agree: 48.8%, disagree: 35.8%)

22. A number of European member states should be able to form a spearhead group when it comes to defense policy. (agree: 31.4%, disagree: 51.8%)

23. There should be a European minister of foreign affairs. (agree: 40.4%, disagree: 44.0%)

24. If another member state asks for help in case of terrorism or disasters, the Netherlands should have the option to refuse. (agree: 59.1%, 31.6%)

25. Fighting global poverty should be an important goal for the foreign policy of the Union. (agree: 63.8%, disagree: 21.6%)

[Locutus]

The second link is from the same site but not part of the 'official' poll to determine what to vote for. After the poll in the first link, people are asked if they also want to participate in this one as well, but only for statistical purposes, it doesn't affect their voting advice.

The poll shows how people generally appreciate the Europe. It lists 7 European issues and people's opinion on them. I'm not quite clear on what the yellow indicates here, presumably the European policy in general.

Translation of the issues:

The resonses translate as follows (from top to bottom): Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly Disagree.

The issues themselves:

1. The Euro as common currency is a good thing. (41.4% agrees, 18.9% disagrees, 15.4% strongly agrees)

2. The EU should limit itself to economical cooperation. (41.1% disagrees, 29.0% agrees)

3. The free market economy should be the foundation of the EU. (42.1% agrees, 22.6% is neutral, 19.9% disagrees)

4. The decision-making proces of Europe is too far removed from the citizens. (52.2% agrees, 38.1% strongly agrees)

5. The Netherlands should not turn over more power to Europe. (38.9% agrees, 23.2% strongly agrees, 21.7% is neutral)

6. Cooperation between European member states is necessary to maintain peace in Europe. (49.8% agrees, 17.6% strongly agrees)

7. The EU should play a major role in the international community and therefore boost internal cooperation. (47.1% agrees, 21.3% is neutral, 15.8% strongly agrees)