[pp.int.general] results

[Reinier Bakels]

> > Didn't Ireland reject this disguised constitution?
>
> It's a complicated matter, calling it a "disguised constitution"
> really doesn't live up to that.

I hate this debate about a "disguised constitution", becase it focuses on 
the wrong things.

Is the question: "constitution yes/no?" No, it is not. Any by-law (written 
or unwritten) of a (supra-)national organisation is a kind of constitution.
So what is the question then? It is whether the Lisbon treaty is better than 
the Nice treaty, in the right direction.
What is "the right direction?" Populists argue: "less Europe". I would argue 
that the EU is an unavoidable reality, so one should concentrate on a proper 
policy maing process, includiing a proper division of tasks between memer 
states and the Union. But that is exacly an aspect of "Lisbon".
Is a referendum indispensable? I don't think so. Referenda should be on 
basic yes/no questions. The Lisbon treaty is about the complicated question 
how to organise the EU in the future. For such questions, we invented *the 
representative democracy*. Professional politicians should articulate the 
issues.
But isn't a referendum needed anyway because the Lisbon treaty is equivalent 
to a national constitution change? Well, that depends on whether national 
constitution changes require a referendum. In NL, the process to change the 
constitution is that twice an absolute majority is needed, with (general) 
elections in between, and the constitution explitly says that the same 
procedure (not less, not more) should be followed for constitution-like 
treaties.

The European project is in crisis. Nationalism is the new fashion. The 
problem is exacerbated by the present economic crisis. "Our own people 
first" is the slogan of the neo-facists. Imho saving European solidarity is 
a priority. But admittedly a lot must be changed. Like the EU should get a 
truly European parliament, where people can directly vote politicians from 
other countries.

reinier