Blair caught in the EU crossfire
by BENEDICT BROGAN,
Daily Mail
07:39am
31st May 2005
Tony Blair is under pressure from all sides to press ahead with a referendum on the EU constitution despite the resounding French 'Non' vote.
Mr Blair would have seen the French rejection as his way out of holding a referendum next year - and an almost certain defeat.
That would have allowed him a triumphal handover of power to Gordon Brown.
But the pressure is now mounting from an unlikely coalition of opponents that he must hold the referendum anyway, which could ruin his political legacy and be seen as a vote by the British people on his Premiership.
Brussels bureaucrats want the British vote to go ahead to give the treaty respectability, ensuring the whole idea is not scrapped before it gets off the ground. The French want the British vote to go ahead because they don't want to be seen as the only one of Europe's big players to be responsible for the treaty's failure.
And adding to the pressure, the Conservatives are pressing hard for the vote to be held because, as well as finally killing off the treaty, they can sense the humiliation a No vote would bring to Mr Blair and his Government.
The whole issue also introduces a dangerous new crack in the Brown-Blair relationship. The referendum, whatever the result, was always seen as the natural handover point.
'No single member state has a veto'
Without a vote, there would be no obvious timetable for the leadership change and Mr Brown could remain frustrated and out of power for longer than he was willing to accept. That means he could be ready to cause Mr Blair trouble as he fights for power.
Last night, Mr Blair was scrambling to find other EU allies who will publicly call for the ratification process to be formally scrapped.
But his efforts are up against a determined attempt by the Brussels machine to ignore the will of the voters and get the constitution on to the statute books 'by the back door' by pressing ahead with ratification - and adopting it piecemeal if that fails.
Even though France has convincingly rejected the constitution - and Holland is expected to follow suit tomorrow - it looks as if vast swathes of the treaty could be forced on the citizens of Europe.
Senior officials, led by Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson, even suggested France could be asked to vote again until it came up with the right answer - a Yes vote. He warned: "No single member state has a veto over a constitutional treaty of this sort."
And Javier Solana, the EU's external relations supremo, claimed the parts of the constitution that dealt with foreign policy could be introduced even without approval by the 25 member states.
They were backed by an official statement from the Commission which made it clear that those who run the European machine want the ratification process to continue in the hope that, if enough countries ratify the document, it will be pushed through against French and Dutch objections. The drumbeats from Brussels prompted Tory spokesman John Redwood to warn: "If there is any danger of any part of this constitution being smuggled in by the back door they should have to take it through the front door and the British people should have the same chance as the French people of having a decisive view expressed on it."
Yesterday, Mr Blair refused to say whether Britain would press ahead with the referendum pencilled in for next spring. Instead, he called for 'time for reflection'.
Blair off the hook
But there was no disguising the sense of relief in Downing Street at the way the French - and the Dutch tomorrow - have got Mr Blair off the hook.
He and senior ministers are understood to believe that the constitution is now dead and there is no point in troubling the voters with a referendum the Government is almost certain to loose.
Foreign Secretary Jack Straw will make a statement to the Commons when the House returns on Monday, setting out the British reaction. But he is likely to play for time on the referendum question in the hope that other EU countries, in particular the Scandinavians, will come forward and call for the ratification process to be halted.
Mr Blair faces implacable opposition from President Jacques Chirac, who will lead calls for the countries that have still not ratified the treaty - including Britain - to press ahead.
The humiliated French leader will want to see Mr Blair face a similar ordeal at the hands of the British voters.
Public enthusiasm for a referendum was made plain two years ago when the Daily Mail staged a landmark national poll.
It found that nine out of ten people wanted a say on the draft treaty and sent a clear warning to Downing Street that Mr Blair could not afford to ignore the British people.
This story first appeared in the Daily Mail
Tuesday, May 31, 2005
Is the Parrot Dead...or Just Stunned?
Letters to the Editor
Daily Echo
Bournemouth BH2 6HH
Sir,
Political commentators are saying the EU constitution is dead and the British do not need a referendum. Like the parrot, can we be sure it is not just stunned?
According to Dan Hannan MEP, even before the constitution has been fully ratified, the commisars of Brussels are already:
Daily Echo
Bournemouth BH2 6HH
Sir,
Political commentators are saying the EU constitution is dead and the British do not need a referendum. Like the parrot, can we be sure it is not just stunned?
According to Dan Hannan MEP, even before the constitution has been fully ratified, the commisars of Brussels are already:
- Turning EU Trade Delegations into Embassies - we need a referendum on that.
- Setting up an EU Foreign Ministry - we need a referendum on that.
- Harmonising criminal justice - we need a referendum on that.
- Incorporating the Charter of Fundamental Rights - we need a referendum on that!
The EU is a monument to Stealth. It is time the people of this country had their say.
Yours sincerely,
Tony Woodcock (Cllr. Civic Centre, Poole)
From the Horse's Mouth...Ratification of the Constitution
Ratification of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe
Interactive map displaying the state of play in the Member States
Background
On 29 October 2004, the Heads of State or Government of the 25 Member States and the 3 candidate countries signed the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe which was unanimously adopted by them on 18 June of the same year.
This Treaty can only enter into force when it has been adopted by each of the signatory countries in accordance with its own constitutional procedures: this is called the ratification of the Treaty by the Member States.Depending on the countries' legal and historical traditions, the procedures laid down by the constitutions for this purpose are not identical: they comprise either or both of the following two types of mechanism:
Interactive map displaying the state of play in the Member States
Background
On 29 October 2004, the Heads of State or Government of the 25 Member States and the 3 candidate countries signed the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe which was unanimously adopted by them on 18 June of the same year.
This Treaty can only enter into force when it has been adopted by each of the signatory countries in accordance with its own constitutional procedures: this is called the ratification of the Treaty by the Member States.Depending on the countries' legal and historical traditions, the procedures laid down by the constitutions for this purpose are not identical: they comprise either or both of the following two types of mechanism:
- the "parliamentary" method: the text is adopted following a vote on a text ratifying an international Treaty by the State's parliamentary Chamber(s);
- the "referendum" method: a referendum is held, submitting the text of the Treaty directly to citizens, who vote for or against it.
There may be variants or combinations of these two methods, depending on the country, or other requirements, e.g. when the ratification of the Treaty entails a prior adjustment of the national Constitution because of the content of the text.
Once the Treaty has been ratified and the ratification has been officially notified by all the signatory States (lodging of the ratification instruments), the Treaty can enter into force and become effective, in principle, according to the Treaty, on 01 November 2006.
SERIOUS MISREPRESENTATION OF THE LEGAL FACTS IN TODAY'S "IRISH TIMES"
SERIOUS MISREPRESENTATION OF THE LEGAL FACTS IN TODAY'S "IRISH TIMES"
Statement by Anthony Coughlan
THE NATIONAL PLATFORM EU RESEARCH AND INFORMATION CENTRE
24 Crawford Avenue
Dublin 9
SERIOUS MIRSREPRESENTATION OF LEGAL FACTS ON THE EU CONSTITUTION RATIFICATION BY IRISH TIMES EUROPEAN CORRESPONDENT DENIS STAUNTON
Under the heading "No vote will not kill constitution"(P.11) the Irish Times's EU Correspondent, Denis Staunton, makes a seriously inaccurate statement which could well mislead the Irish public regarding what could or should be done following a posssible French or Dutch No vote in their referendums.
Staunton writes: "According to the constitution, if at least four-fifths of the member states ratify it by November next year and the others are unable to do so, 'the matter will be referred to the European Council' of EU leaders."
Contrary to what Denis Staunton states, this is NOT "according to the constitution". The EU Constitution contains no such provision, and even if it did, how could States be bound by the provisions of a document that is not yet ratified?
What Mr Staunton misleadingly refers to as "part of the constitution" is a political Declaration, No.30, which is attached to the Constitution but is not legally part of it, and which was adopted by the Intergovernmental Conference that drafted the final Treaty-cum-Constitution. This Declaration reads as follows: "The Conference notes that if, two years after the signature of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, four fifths of the Member States have ratified it and one or more Member States have encountered difficulties in proceeding with ratification, the matter will be referred to the European Council."
Note that the Declaration states that "IfSfour fifths of the Member States have ratified." This is not the same as an obligation on them to proceed with ratification if one Member State has said No and the others decide to respect that No. States are free to abandon the ratification process if they choose. The terms of this Declaration, which is not itself a Treaty or legally binding, make quite clear that the decision by other EU States to ignore a possible No vote in France or the Netherlands and to proceed with their ratifications as if a French or Dutch No could be reversed or over-ruled, is a purely political matter, but has no legal imperative behind it. It would be merely an attempt by EU politicians, bureaucrats and propagandists to bully the people of the country concerned.
This is to contemplate the kind of outrageously undemocratic behaviour that Ireland's political elite engaged in when Irish voters rejected the Nice Treaty in June 2001. When that happened Taoiseach Bertie Ahern could have told his EU partners that he wished the ratification process to stop to take acount of the Irish people's vote. Instead he went to the EU summit in Gothenburg the weekend afterwards to apologise to his EU colleagues in effect for the way the Irish had voted, told them to ignore that vote and to go ahead with ratifying the Nice Treaty. He promised that he would re-run the referendum and get a different result by changing the referendum rules and securing their help in due course to threaten, bully and cajole the Irish electorate a second time around.
French Prime Minister Raffarin has stated that there will be no second vote in France - thereby showing more respect for his people than Taoiseach Ahern did for his - and showing also that, unlike Mr Staunton, he is aware of the legal/political significance attaching to a Treaty Declaration. The only reason for Taoiseach Ashern proposing to hold a referendum in Ireland in the event of a French or Dutch No vote would be that he contemplates us joining in a general EU exercise of bullying or trickery vis-a-vis French or Dutch voters, just as their politicians helped Bertie Ahern to bully and cajole us in our Nice Two referendum.
Denis Staunton dredges up some Professor of Politics in Edinburgh - presumably the holder of some Jean Monnet ideological chair - to state, quite falsely, that there is an obligation under international law for the EU Member States to continue trying to ratify this Treaty when one State has rejected it.
There is no such "obligation". Where could such an obligation come from? The Declaration referred to is not an international treaty and imposes no legal obligation whatever. It is a statement of intention in hypothetical circumstances: namely, that the 25 Governments would discuss the matter if four-fifths of EU States did not ratifiy the Treaty. But that does not amount to a requirement that they should go ahead with their own ratifications while ignoring No votes in some countries, contrary to what Mr Staunton and his Edinburgh Politics Professor imply. That would be a political decision, a decision by politicians to ignore a people's vote. It would be quite typical of the arrogant EU-elite, but let us not pretend that it would have some mandatory legal force behind it.
It is surprising that such an experienced correspondent as the Irish Times's Denis Staunton does not seem to know the difference between a Declaration attached to a Treaty, which is a political statement but not legally binding, and a Treaty's substantive Articles and Protocols, which are. If Mr Staunton had enquired a little harder he might have found someone properly qualified in international law who would have been be able to tell him what was in the EU Constitution and what was not, and who could explain the legal/political weight that attaches to political Delarations annexed to treaties.
One suspects that Mr Staunton is merely echoing and seeking to drum up support for the policy line now being pushed by the eurocrats of the EU Commission and by the many eurofanatics and eurobullies across the EU who want to ignore a possible No vote by the people of either France or Holland in their referendums, so as to keep their precious EU Constitution project on the road, from which they stand to gain much personally themselves.
This is playing politics and making EU propaganda, not good journalism. It us unfortunate that so many European correspondents who "go native" in Brussels seem unable to tell the difference.
Signed: Anthony Coughlan
Statement by Anthony Coughlan
THE NATIONAL PLATFORM EU RESEARCH AND INFORMATION CENTRE
24 Crawford Avenue
Dublin 9
SERIOUS MIRSREPRESENTATION OF LEGAL FACTS ON THE EU CONSTITUTION RATIFICATION BY IRISH TIMES EUROPEAN CORRESPONDENT DENIS STAUNTON
Under the heading "No vote will not kill constitution"(P.11) the Irish Times's EU Correspondent, Denis Staunton, makes a seriously inaccurate statement which could well mislead the Irish public regarding what could or should be done following a posssible French or Dutch No vote in their referendums.
Staunton writes: "According to the constitution, if at least four-fifths of the member states ratify it by November next year and the others are unable to do so, 'the matter will be referred to the European Council' of EU leaders."
Contrary to what Denis Staunton states, this is NOT "according to the constitution". The EU Constitution contains no such provision, and even if it did, how could States be bound by the provisions of a document that is not yet ratified?
What Mr Staunton misleadingly refers to as "part of the constitution" is a political Declaration, No.30, which is attached to the Constitution but is not legally part of it, and which was adopted by the Intergovernmental Conference that drafted the final Treaty-cum-Constitution. This Declaration reads as follows: "The Conference notes that if, two years after the signature of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, four fifths of the Member States have ratified it and one or more Member States have encountered difficulties in proceeding with ratification, the matter will be referred to the European Council."
Note that the Declaration states that "IfSfour fifths of the Member States have ratified." This is not the same as an obligation on them to proceed with ratification if one Member State has said No and the others decide to respect that No. States are free to abandon the ratification process if they choose. The terms of this Declaration, which is not itself a Treaty or legally binding, make quite clear that the decision by other EU States to ignore a possible No vote in France or the Netherlands and to proceed with their ratifications as if a French or Dutch No could be reversed or over-ruled, is a purely political matter, but has no legal imperative behind it. It would be merely an attempt by EU politicians, bureaucrats and propagandists to bully the people of the country concerned.
This is to contemplate the kind of outrageously undemocratic behaviour that Ireland's political elite engaged in when Irish voters rejected the Nice Treaty in June 2001. When that happened Taoiseach Bertie Ahern could have told his EU partners that he wished the ratification process to stop to take acount of the Irish people's vote. Instead he went to the EU summit in Gothenburg the weekend afterwards to apologise to his EU colleagues in effect for the way the Irish had voted, told them to ignore that vote and to go ahead with ratifying the Nice Treaty. He promised that he would re-run the referendum and get a different result by changing the referendum rules and securing their help in due course to threaten, bully and cajole the Irish electorate a second time around.
French Prime Minister Raffarin has stated that there will be no second vote in France - thereby showing more respect for his people than Taoiseach Ahern did for his - and showing also that, unlike Mr Staunton, he is aware of the legal/political significance attaching to a Treaty Declaration. The only reason for Taoiseach Ashern proposing to hold a referendum in Ireland in the event of a French or Dutch No vote would be that he contemplates us joining in a general EU exercise of bullying or trickery vis-a-vis French or Dutch voters, just as their politicians helped Bertie Ahern to bully and cajole us in our Nice Two referendum.
Denis Staunton dredges up some Professor of Politics in Edinburgh - presumably the holder of some Jean Monnet ideological chair - to state, quite falsely, that there is an obligation under international law for the EU Member States to continue trying to ratify this Treaty when one State has rejected it.
There is no such "obligation". Where could such an obligation come from? The Declaration referred to is not an international treaty and imposes no legal obligation whatever. It is a statement of intention in hypothetical circumstances: namely, that the 25 Governments would discuss the matter if four-fifths of EU States did not ratifiy the Treaty. But that does not amount to a requirement that they should go ahead with their own ratifications while ignoring No votes in some countries, contrary to what Mr Staunton and his Edinburgh Politics Professor imply. That would be a political decision, a decision by politicians to ignore a people's vote. It would be quite typical of the arrogant EU-elite, but let us not pretend that it would have some mandatory legal force behind it.
It is surprising that such an experienced correspondent as the Irish Times's Denis Staunton does not seem to know the difference between a Declaration attached to a Treaty, which is a political statement but not legally binding, and a Treaty's substantive Articles and Protocols, which are. If Mr Staunton had enquired a little harder he might have found someone properly qualified in international law who would have been be able to tell him what was in the EU Constitution and what was not, and who could explain the legal/political weight that attaches to political Delarations annexed to treaties.
One suspects that Mr Staunton is merely echoing and seeking to drum up support for the policy line now being pushed by the eurocrats of the EU Commission and by the many eurofanatics and eurobullies across the EU who want to ignore a possible No vote by the people of either France or Holland in their referendums, so as to keep their precious EU Constitution project on the road, from which they stand to gain much personally themselves.
This is playing politics and making EU propaganda, not good journalism. It us unfortunate that so many European correspondents who "go native" in Brussels seem unable to tell the difference.
Signed: Anthony Coughlan
UK rejection may recover democracy
UK rejection may recover democracy-Financial Times
By David Barnby
May 31 2005
From Mr David Barnby.
Sir, France has spoken.
The British people must now be given their chance to vote on a treaty.
Should it result in rejection of the treaty for a constitution for Europe, then this should trigger moves to recover democracy and reduce centralisation. This was the intention of the Laeken Declaration in 2001 on Europe's future that was hijacked by French President Jacques Chirac and Valery Giscard d'Estaing, former French president, to produce a constitution that does the opposite.
David Barnby, Witney OX28 1PA
By David Barnby
May 31 2005
From Mr David Barnby.
Sir, France has spoken.
The British people must now be given their chance to vote on a treaty.
Should it result in rejection of the treaty for a constitution for Europe, then this should trigger moves to recover democracy and reduce centralisation. This was the intention of the Laeken Declaration in 2001 on Europe's future that was hijacked by French President Jacques Chirac and Valery Giscard d'Estaing, former French president, to produce a constitution that does the opposite.
David Barnby, Witney OX28 1PA
Chirac ready to turn his anger on Blair if France votes Non
By Toby Helm, Chief Political Correspondent
The Daily Telegraph
What's all the fuss about?
Tony Blair and Jacques Chirac will be pitched into a furious six-month dispute over the future direction of the European Union if the French people vote No to the EU constitution tomorrow.
Government sources are braced for the French president to round on the Prime Minister and blame him for making the constitution too "Anglo-Saxon" on economic issues and for plunging Europe into crisis as a result. The French people go to the polls on Sunday
They also expect Mr Chirac to launch a fresh assault on Britain's £3 billion rebate from the EU budget.
British diplomats believe that Mr Chirac will call for France, Germany and other nations to form a "core Europe" in which they can push ahead with integration without being held back by laggards such as Britain.
However, Mr Blair and Gordon Brown, the Chancellor, want to use Britain's six-month EU presidency, which begins on July 1, to argue that eurozone economies need flexible British and American-style economies rather than heavy regulation and tax harmonisation.
Speaking in Rome yesterday after talks with Silvio Berlusconi, his Italian counterpart, before the G8 summit in July, Mr Blair described economicreform as "essential".
He said: "The big issue that faces our citizens now in Europe is how do weincrease our prosperity in an era of globalisation, in an era of intense competition - not just within Europe but outside Europe."
Mr Blair is spending the bank holiday in a Tuscan villa with his wife,Cherie, and son, Leo, five. Downing Street would not confirm that the Blairs were staying as guests of Prince Girolomo Strozzi near Sienna.
Government officials say Mr Blair will give no quick response about the implication for a British referendum of a French No. Ministers are expected to hold emergency discussions with their EU counterparts and the European Commission before any decisions are taken.
A YouGov poll for The Daily Telegraph today finds that 42 per cent of voters believe that, even if the French say No, a referendum should go ahead here because relations with the EU are so important.
By Toby Helm, Chief Political Correspondent
The Daily Telegraph
What's all the fuss about?
Tony Blair and Jacques Chirac will be pitched into a furious six-month dispute over the future direction of the European Union if the French people vote No to the EU constitution tomorrow.
Government sources are braced for the French president to round on the Prime Minister and blame him for making the constitution too "Anglo-Saxon" on economic issues and for plunging Europe into crisis as a result. The French people go to the polls on Sunday
They also expect Mr Chirac to launch a fresh assault on Britain's £3 billion rebate from the EU budget.
British diplomats believe that Mr Chirac will call for France, Germany and other nations to form a "core Europe" in which they can push ahead with integration without being held back by laggards such as Britain.
However, Mr Blair and Gordon Brown, the Chancellor, want to use Britain's six-month EU presidency, which begins on July 1, to argue that eurozone economies need flexible British and American-style economies rather than heavy regulation and tax harmonisation.
Speaking in Rome yesterday after talks with Silvio Berlusconi, his Italian counterpart, before the G8 summit in July, Mr Blair described economicreform as "essential".
He said: "The big issue that faces our citizens now in Europe is how do weincrease our prosperity in an era of globalisation, in an era of intense competition - not just within Europe but outside Europe."
Mr Blair is spending the bank holiday in a Tuscan villa with his wife,Cherie, and son, Leo, five. Downing Street would not confirm that the Blairs were staying as guests of Prince Girolomo Strozzi near Sienna.
Government officials say Mr Blair will give no quick response about the implication for a British referendum of a French No. Ministers are expected to hold emergency discussions with their EU counterparts and the European Commission before any decisions are taken.
A YouGov poll for The Daily Telegraph today finds that 42 per cent of voters believe that, even if the French say No, a referendum should go ahead here because relations with the EU are so important.
France is poised to shatter European complacency
France is poised to shatter European complacency - Telegraph Leader Comment
The Daily Telegraph
The big guns have fired their final salvo and fallen silent, awaiting tomorrow's verdict of the French people on the European constitution. President Jacques Chirac, part wheedling, part threatening, has reminded voters of their grave responsibility. One of his predecessors, Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, yesterday used the occasion of German ratification of his brainchild to urge France to follow its neighbour's example. (But "Germany"did not ratify: it was the German Parliament, not the German people -CCComment)
On the other side of the political divide, the Spanish prime minister, José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, whose country overwhelmingly endorsed the constitution in February, last night addressed a Socialist rally in Lille.Gerhard Schröder, the German chancellor, did the same in Toulouse. Despitethese exhortations, the latest polls suggest that the French remain stubbornly sceptical and will vote Non by a much larger margin than they voted Oui for the Maastricht Treaty in 1992.
The electorate can be forgiven its suspicion of the constitution. It is averbose and opaque document open to a bewildering variety of interpretations Mr Chirac sees it as a defence against an "ultra-liberal" Europe. The Left attacks it as an Anglo-Saxon plot to introduce "free and unbridled competition". Nicolas Sarkozy, a potential presidential candidate for 2007, has suggested that a country vying to host the world at the Olympic Games in 2012 should not begin by saying No to Europe. Equally bizarrely, Jean-Marie Le Pen, the far-Right leader, has claimed that the constitution will place France "under the American protectorate of Nato".
As the flag-bearer for the constitution, Mr Chirac does not cut an impressive figure. In his television address on Thursday, he told viewers both that the referendum had nothing to do with the dismal performance of his government and hinted that he would make ministerial changes after tomorrow. His refusal to resign if things go against him indicates that he will seek a scapegoat for his miscalculation in calling for a vote on the constitution in the first place. Compare that with de Gaulle's decision to step down in 1969, so far the only occasion since the founding of the Fifth Republic that a head of state has lost a referendum.
Likewise, French men and women with a touch of Bastille bolshiness in their veins will not be impressed by the apparent determination of the European political elite to ignore the consequences of a No vote. Mikolaj Dowgielewicz, a European Commission spokesman, said yesterday that the referendums in France and Holland (due next Wednesday) were not simply national votes but concerned the future of the European Union, its global role and its political and economic prospects. "It is clear that all 25 governments and all the European institutions... remain united in the desireto see the constitution enter into force eventually," he added.
By their own words, they are condemned. Mr Dowgielewicz's attitude encapsulates the contempt for the nation state and the electorate felt by unelected bureaucrats in Brussels. It is tempting to remind this arrogant official that the constitution was supposed to bring Europe closer to its peoples by narrowing the democratic deficit, and that the best way of doing this is to submit its terms to a popular vote. But his words suggest he is impervious to such arguments.
The French tomorrow and the Dutch on Wednesday threaten to shatter such complacency. Rejection by two founder members will be the biggest ever setback to the European "project" and will rock the ruling establishment in each country. We await the results with delicious expectancy.
The Daily Telegraph
The big guns have fired their final salvo and fallen silent, awaiting tomorrow's verdict of the French people on the European constitution. President Jacques Chirac, part wheedling, part threatening, has reminded voters of their grave responsibility. One of his predecessors, Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, yesterday used the occasion of German ratification of his brainchild to urge France to follow its neighbour's example. (But "Germany"did not ratify: it was the German Parliament, not the German people -CCComment)
On the other side of the political divide, the Spanish prime minister, José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, whose country overwhelmingly endorsed the constitution in February, last night addressed a Socialist rally in Lille.Gerhard Schröder, the German chancellor, did the same in Toulouse. Despitethese exhortations, the latest polls suggest that the French remain stubbornly sceptical and will vote Non by a much larger margin than they voted Oui for the Maastricht Treaty in 1992.
The electorate can be forgiven its suspicion of the constitution. It is averbose and opaque document open to a bewildering variety of interpretations Mr Chirac sees it as a defence against an "ultra-liberal" Europe. The Left attacks it as an Anglo-Saxon plot to introduce "free and unbridled competition". Nicolas Sarkozy, a potential presidential candidate for 2007, has suggested that a country vying to host the world at the Olympic Games in 2012 should not begin by saying No to Europe. Equally bizarrely, Jean-Marie Le Pen, the far-Right leader, has claimed that the constitution will place France "under the American protectorate of Nato".
As the flag-bearer for the constitution, Mr Chirac does not cut an impressive figure. In his television address on Thursday, he told viewers both that the referendum had nothing to do with the dismal performance of his government and hinted that he would make ministerial changes after tomorrow. His refusal to resign if things go against him indicates that he will seek a scapegoat for his miscalculation in calling for a vote on the constitution in the first place. Compare that with de Gaulle's decision to step down in 1969, so far the only occasion since the founding of the Fifth Republic that a head of state has lost a referendum.
Likewise, French men and women with a touch of Bastille bolshiness in their veins will not be impressed by the apparent determination of the European political elite to ignore the consequences of a No vote. Mikolaj Dowgielewicz, a European Commission spokesman, said yesterday that the referendums in France and Holland (due next Wednesday) were not simply national votes but concerned the future of the European Union, its global role and its political and economic prospects. "It is clear that all 25 governments and all the European institutions... remain united in the desireto see the constitution enter into force eventually," he added.
By their own words, they are condemned. Mr Dowgielewicz's attitude encapsulates the contempt for the nation state and the electorate felt by unelected bureaucrats in Brussels. It is tempting to remind this arrogant official that the constitution was supposed to bring Europe closer to its peoples by narrowing the democratic deficit, and that the best way of doing this is to submit its terms to a popular vote. But his words suggest he is impervious to such arguments.
The French tomorrow and the Dutch on Wednesday threaten to shatter such complacency. Rejection by two founder members will be the biggest ever setback to the European "project" and will rock the ruling establishment in each country. We await the results with delicious expectancy.
Brussels in denial over the gathering storm
Brussels in denial over the gathering storm
By David Rennie in Brussels and Toby Helm
The Daily Telegraph
European Commission officials insisted yesterday that Britain was obliged to hold a referendum on the draft EU constitution, even if the treaty were rejected tomorrow by France.
However, a British official rejected the demand and said it was "utterlyunhelpful".
By tomorrow night, the European Union may have been plunged into its deepest political crisis in decades, if France votes No. Three days later, on June1, Holland holds its own referendum on the constitution, and polls there also show the No vote is in the lead.
In Brussels, a two-pronged strategy was becoming clear.
First: deny any hint of a crisis, and declare business as usual. Then keep the constitution alive by insisting that all 25 nations have a legal obligation to carry on putting the treaty to ratification votes, either in national parliaments, or by referendum.
Nine countries have ratified the text so far. The Commission has long argued that an obscure annexe to the draft constitution can be interpreted to meanthat all nations must vote on it.
"Declaration 30" calls for an EU summit if four fifths of member states approve the text and others reject it. If some countries do not vote, the argument goes, how can EU leaders at that summit know who thinks what?
Commission officials unveiled a fresh legal argument, drawn from the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. This declares that once a state has signed a treaty - and Britain has signed the EU constitution treaty - it must "refrain from acts which would defeat the object and purpose of a treaty". A Commission official said Britain could not declare the constitution dead. "Your prime minister signed it, you can't just say it's not valid," he said.
The reaction from the Government was categorical.
"Taking an overly legalistic view of these things is utterly unhelpful," theBritish official said. "The EU is ultimately a political club, albeit one with very strong legal rules."
In Brussels, keeping the constitution alive is the top priority. Assuming the French vote No, a first reaction will come from the Commission headquarters in Brussels tomorrow night.
Plans call for Jean-Claude Juncker, the prime minister of Luxembourg, and current holder of the rotating EU presidency, to appear with the Commission president, Jose Manuel Barroso, as soon as the French result is official. MrJuncker, a master of the dark arts of EU politics, previewed his thoughts this week, in an interview with a Belgian newspaper. He backed those who think No-sayers should be made to vote a second time, until they get the answer right.
It has been done before: Denmark was forced to vote again, after rejecting the Maastricht treaty, and Ireland was asked to vote a second time on the Treaty of Nice. Both voted Yes, second time around.
Mr Juncker said: "We must wait for the process of ratification to be completed across the European Union. If, at the end of the process, we cannot solve our problems, then countries should ask themselves the question again." In Britain voters are split on whether there should be a referendum in this country if the French vote No, according to a YouGov poll for The Daily Telegraph.
By David Rennie in Brussels and Toby Helm
The Daily Telegraph
European Commission officials insisted yesterday that Britain was obliged to hold a referendum on the draft EU constitution, even if the treaty were rejected tomorrow by France.
However, a British official rejected the demand and said it was "utterlyunhelpful".
By tomorrow night, the European Union may have been plunged into its deepest political crisis in decades, if France votes No. Three days later, on June1, Holland holds its own referendum on the constitution, and polls there also show the No vote is in the lead.
In Brussels, a two-pronged strategy was becoming clear.
First: deny any hint of a crisis, and declare business as usual. Then keep the constitution alive by insisting that all 25 nations have a legal obligation to carry on putting the treaty to ratification votes, either in national parliaments, or by referendum.
Nine countries have ratified the text so far. The Commission has long argued that an obscure annexe to the draft constitution can be interpreted to meanthat all nations must vote on it.
"Declaration 30" calls for an EU summit if four fifths of member states approve the text and others reject it. If some countries do not vote, the argument goes, how can EU leaders at that summit know who thinks what?
Commission officials unveiled a fresh legal argument, drawn from the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. This declares that once a state has signed a treaty - and Britain has signed the EU constitution treaty - it must "refrain from acts which would defeat the object and purpose of a treaty". A Commission official said Britain could not declare the constitution dead. "Your prime minister signed it, you can't just say it's not valid," he said.
The reaction from the Government was categorical.
"Taking an overly legalistic view of these things is utterly unhelpful," theBritish official said. "The EU is ultimately a political club, albeit one with very strong legal rules."
In Brussels, keeping the constitution alive is the top priority. Assuming the French vote No, a first reaction will come from the Commission headquarters in Brussels tomorrow night.
Plans call for Jean-Claude Juncker, the prime minister of Luxembourg, and current holder of the rotating EU presidency, to appear with the Commission president, Jose Manuel Barroso, as soon as the French result is official. MrJuncker, a master of the dark arts of EU politics, previewed his thoughts this week, in an interview with a Belgian newspaper. He backed those who think No-sayers should be made to vote a second time, until they get the answer right.
It has been done before: Denmark was forced to vote again, after rejecting the Maastricht treaty, and Ireland was asked to vote a second time on the Treaty of Nice. Both voted Yes, second time around.
Mr Juncker said: "We must wait for the process of ratification to be completed across the European Union. If, at the end of the process, we cannot solve our problems, then countries should ask themselves the question again." In Britain voters are split on whether there should be a referendum in this country if the French vote No, according to a YouGov poll for The Daily Telegraph.
'The EU was France's baby. We can't throw her out now'
'The EU was France's baby. We can't throw her out now'
The Daily Telegraph
By Alice Thomson
"It's the Asterix complex," says the German ambassador to France. A French businessman agrees: "The French have got it into their heads that if they vote for this constitution, the sky will fall on their heads."
It is Asterix and The Great Divide wherever you go in France at the moment.Everyone is arguing over the referendum.
The French are revelling in it. "We love a good philosophical debate," says Marie-Laure Vigreux, a publisher. Like 50 million other French citizens, she and her husband, François, were sent a copy of the constitution by post.
"We read it in bed together," says Mrs Vigreux. "My husband says he will vote No but, in the end, I think we will both vote Yes. The European Union was France's baby. We conceived her, we nurtured her - we can't throw her out now."
The Yes campaign is hoping for this kind of last-minute about-turn. According to the soothsayers, more than 23 per cent are undecided. But for the last few weeks, the No campaign has appeared to be winning.
Many Frenchmen have become convinced that the EU has turned into a bogeyman who is trying to curtail their long lunches and summer holidays. Some believe that it is the cause of their high unemployment, of beggars on the street, even of the sogginess in baguettes.
Asterix and Obelix do not want Polish plumbers in their village. They do not want Anglo-Saxons flying in on their cheap Ryanair tickets when Air France is floundering. They have had enough of those Brussels directives that tell them they cannot shoot little birds because the English have an obsession with animals.
It is bad enough that Europe is now made up of 25 members, but adding Turkey, a Muslim country of 100 million, would be too much for many Frenchmen.
In the Tuileries in Paris, mothers are watching their children bounce on trampolines. Annabel Roberts, a British journalist married to a Frenchman, says: "This referendum is about expansion. People here always thought they controlled Europe, but now they can't any more and they're frightened. The French only like being on the European train if they think they are in the driving seat."
Romain Seitlinger, an investment banker sitting in a café, is more blunt.
"Everyone used to go to state schools - it was what I liked about this country, the egalité. But how can I send my sons there when they are filled with children who don't speak French?"
The waiter overhears our conversation. "I say yes, yes, yes - but no toTurkey," he says. "They do not respect our way of life." For many, the referendum is not about the constitution, it is about the way Europe has drifted.
"We should never have allowed more than eight countries into Europe," says Robert Bobet, who runs a chain of bakeries in Paris. "It is not selfish to say we can't pay for Lithuania and Latvia."
His friend, Gilles LeClerc, is voting No as a protest against President Chirac. "Every time we get rid of him, he comes back; he's been messing up France for 40 years," says Mr LeClerc.
He is not impressed by Mr Chirac's promise to slash VAT on restaurant bills if there is a Yes vote. "We don't have revolutions or guillotines any more, but this referendum will decapitate him."
At a No rally at Port Dauphine, people cite other reasons for voting No.
Mr Chirac has given warning that a No vote will turn France into a black sheep, but the first speaker does not care. "The black sheep is up in arms,the black sheep won't say Yes, the black sheep is going to make a meal of the wolf," he says.
Everyone thinks that he or she understands the constitution. It may have been written by a Frenchman, Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, but they believe it is an Anglo-Saxon plot. They are convinced that it will bring in British and American working practices, longer working hours, free markets, cheapburgers and inferior bras. The French are worried that they will not be able to compete.
Carole Myard, a beautician, explains: "Life is not worth living if you only get two weeks' holiday a year."
Serge Saugues, a mechanic, agrees. "The Americans and British work like dogs. We need our evenings and our holidays to drink wine, see our women,watch the world."
Mr Chirac has produced the singer Johnny Hallyday, the film-makers Jean-Jacques Annaud and Claude Lelouch, the actor Jeanne Moreau and the singer Marianne Faithfull to underline the message that France will not lose its cultural identity under the proposed constitution.
But Arnaud Leparmentier, the European editor of Le Monde, says that this ploy has not worked. "This constitution is seen as a British plot:pro-America, pro-free markets and against the French way of life."
Down the road, however, they are extolling the constitution at a meeting for Liberté Cherie. Sabine Herold, their spokesman, says: "I think that only the European Union can break the hold of the unions and drag France into the 21st century. We have 10 per cent unemployment, we are in a rut. We need to become more Anglo-Saxon."
The No campaign in France never complains about bendy cucumbers, the banning of vitamin pills or the amount of bureaucrats wasting money in Brussels.They like bureaucrats, as long as they speak French and are not Polish.
But they are angry about the rules and regulations with which even the French are being forced to comply. They do not like being made to sell British beef or to put their battery-farm chickens into larger boxes.
The fact that the newspapers and television stations are solidly behind the Yes campaign has only angered the No voters.
Claude Dessolas, a radio reporter, cannot understand. "France was doing so well. We had won the argument over Iraq. We could hold our heads up high.This turns us into an embarrassment."
Dimitry Panitza, the European editor of Reader's Digest, says: "A No vote will put the domineering Franco-German axis in the deep freeze. Europe will be messy, disorganised, dysfunctional and bitter."
The business community is amazed. "If it is a No vote, it is an earthquake,"says Laurent Cohen-Tanugi, a solicitor and author. "The Government won't stand the tremors."
Francois Bujon de l'Estaing, a former ambassador and chairman of Citigroup, Europe, says: "If we say No there will be no winners, only losers.
"France will be weakened in the eyes of the world. The average person in Oklahoma or China will think the European project is over. The psychological impact will last for years."
Business leaders admit that they were slow off the mark. Dominique Mine, a retailer, says: "It never occurred to us that there would be so much fuss about the treaty. But a No vote will be catastrophic for our markets."
At a breakfast for the Atlantic Partnership, the bipartisan think tank that promotes good relations between Europe and America, the French elite meet with Joseph Nye, the American foreign policy guru. As they sit in the gilded dining-room of the British Embassy, they discuss why the "paysans" have revolted.
Nicholas de la Mornière, the chairman of a luxury goods company, explains:"They are frightened of competition. The idea of wealth creation doesn't exist in this country."
They agree that a No vote is not a Eurosceptic vote. "This is not a rejection of the project," says one. "The 10 reasons the British would vote No to Brussels are the 10 reasons we would vote Yes."
Lord Powell of Bayswater, the chairman of the Atlantic Partnership, says:"Somehow or other, the French will find a way to say Yes."
The British ambassador to France is keeping his distance. But every other European ally has been wheeled in to help support the Yes vote. Mr Chirac has called on Poland's president, Germany's chancellor and Spain's primeminister.
In Britain, the French referendum has divided camps in bizarre ways. Many pro-Europeans want the French to vote No because then the talk will all be about France's gripes: employment law and social policy. If the French vote Yes, and the British vote No, the arguments will be about far more serious issues, such as sovereignty and democracy, according to Denis MacShane, the former Europe minister.
But the ardent pro-European still wants a Yes vote, and a referendum in Britain. "If we don't agree to this constitution, Europe will go back to increasing bureaucracy, no role for national parliaments and no role for individual citizens."
Liam Fox, the shadow foreign secretary, says: "The French have an opportunity to speak for a lot of people across the continent. They have taken to Euro-scepticism with a particularly Gallic passion."
But Lord Pearson of Rannoch, a leading No campaigner in Westminster, wants a"petit oui" in France.
"It is in the French interests to vote Yes. But it is in our interests they vote No."
He is determined that the British should be allowed their own referendum to show Tony Blair that they have had enough of Brussels.
Asterix the Gaul and Obelix hold the key to Britain's future, as well as that of France. If they decide to repel the marauding hordes from Brussels, it will be up to Mr Blair, who takes over the presidency of the EU in July, to sort out the mess.
The Daily Telegraph
By Alice Thomson
"It's the Asterix complex," says the German ambassador to France. A French businessman agrees: "The French have got it into their heads that if they vote for this constitution, the sky will fall on their heads."
It is Asterix and The Great Divide wherever you go in France at the moment.Everyone is arguing over the referendum.
The French are revelling in it. "We love a good philosophical debate," says Marie-Laure Vigreux, a publisher. Like 50 million other French citizens, she and her husband, François, were sent a copy of the constitution by post.
"We read it in bed together," says Mrs Vigreux. "My husband says he will vote No but, in the end, I think we will both vote Yes. The European Union was France's baby. We conceived her, we nurtured her - we can't throw her out now."
The Yes campaign is hoping for this kind of last-minute about-turn. According to the soothsayers, more than 23 per cent are undecided. But for the last few weeks, the No campaign has appeared to be winning.
Many Frenchmen have become convinced that the EU has turned into a bogeyman who is trying to curtail their long lunches and summer holidays. Some believe that it is the cause of their high unemployment, of beggars on the street, even of the sogginess in baguettes.
Asterix and Obelix do not want Polish plumbers in their village. They do not want Anglo-Saxons flying in on their cheap Ryanair tickets when Air France is floundering. They have had enough of those Brussels directives that tell them they cannot shoot little birds because the English have an obsession with animals.
It is bad enough that Europe is now made up of 25 members, but adding Turkey, a Muslim country of 100 million, would be too much for many Frenchmen.
In the Tuileries in Paris, mothers are watching their children bounce on trampolines. Annabel Roberts, a British journalist married to a Frenchman, says: "This referendum is about expansion. People here always thought they controlled Europe, but now they can't any more and they're frightened. The French only like being on the European train if they think they are in the driving seat."
Romain Seitlinger, an investment banker sitting in a café, is more blunt.
"Everyone used to go to state schools - it was what I liked about this country, the egalité. But how can I send my sons there when they are filled with children who don't speak French?"
The waiter overhears our conversation. "I say yes, yes, yes - but no toTurkey," he says. "They do not respect our way of life." For many, the referendum is not about the constitution, it is about the way Europe has drifted.
"We should never have allowed more than eight countries into Europe," says Robert Bobet, who runs a chain of bakeries in Paris. "It is not selfish to say we can't pay for Lithuania and Latvia."
His friend, Gilles LeClerc, is voting No as a protest against President Chirac. "Every time we get rid of him, he comes back; he's been messing up France for 40 years," says Mr LeClerc.
He is not impressed by Mr Chirac's promise to slash VAT on restaurant bills if there is a Yes vote. "We don't have revolutions or guillotines any more, but this referendum will decapitate him."
At a No rally at Port Dauphine, people cite other reasons for voting No.
Mr Chirac has given warning that a No vote will turn France into a black sheep, but the first speaker does not care. "The black sheep is up in arms,the black sheep won't say Yes, the black sheep is going to make a meal of the wolf," he says.
Everyone thinks that he or she understands the constitution. It may have been written by a Frenchman, Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, but they believe it is an Anglo-Saxon plot. They are convinced that it will bring in British and American working practices, longer working hours, free markets, cheapburgers and inferior bras. The French are worried that they will not be able to compete.
Carole Myard, a beautician, explains: "Life is not worth living if you only get two weeks' holiday a year."
Serge Saugues, a mechanic, agrees. "The Americans and British work like dogs. We need our evenings and our holidays to drink wine, see our women,watch the world."
Mr Chirac has produced the singer Johnny Hallyday, the film-makers Jean-Jacques Annaud and Claude Lelouch, the actor Jeanne Moreau and the singer Marianne Faithfull to underline the message that France will not lose its cultural identity under the proposed constitution.
But Arnaud Leparmentier, the European editor of Le Monde, says that this ploy has not worked. "This constitution is seen as a British plot:pro-America, pro-free markets and against the French way of life."
Down the road, however, they are extolling the constitution at a meeting for Liberté Cherie. Sabine Herold, their spokesman, says: "I think that only the European Union can break the hold of the unions and drag France into the 21st century. We have 10 per cent unemployment, we are in a rut. We need to become more Anglo-Saxon."
The No campaign in France never complains about bendy cucumbers, the banning of vitamin pills or the amount of bureaucrats wasting money in Brussels.They like bureaucrats, as long as they speak French and are not Polish.
But they are angry about the rules and regulations with which even the French are being forced to comply. They do not like being made to sell British beef or to put their battery-farm chickens into larger boxes.
The fact that the newspapers and television stations are solidly behind the Yes campaign has only angered the No voters.
Claude Dessolas, a radio reporter, cannot understand. "France was doing so well. We had won the argument over Iraq. We could hold our heads up high.This turns us into an embarrassment."
Dimitry Panitza, the European editor of Reader's Digest, says: "A No vote will put the domineering Franco-German axis in the deep freeze. Europe will be messy, disorganised, dysfunctional and bitter."
The business community is amazed. "If it is a No vote, it is an earthquake,"says Laurent Cohen-Tanugi, a solicitor and author. "The Government won't stand the tremors."
Francois Bujon de l'Estaing, a former ambassador and chairman of Citigroup, Europe, says: "If we say No there will be no winners, only losers.
"France will be weakened in the eyes of the world. The average person in Oklahoma or China will think the European project is over. The psychological impact will last for years."
Business leaders admit that they were slow off the mark. Dominique Mine, a retailer, says: "It never occurred to us that there would be so much fuss about the treaty. But a No vote will be catastrophic for our markets."
At a breakfast for the Atlantic Partnership, the bipartisan think tank that promotes good relations between Europe and America, the French elite meet with Joseph Nye, the American foreign policy guru. As they sit in the gilded dining-room of the British Embassy, they discuss why the "paysans" have revolted.
Nicholas de la Mornière, the chairman of a luxury goods company, explains:"They are frightened of competition. The idea of wealth creation doesn't exist in this country."
They agree that a No vote is not a Eurosceptic vote. "This is not a rejection of the project," says one. "The 10 reasons the British would vote No to Brussels are the 10 reasons we would vote Yes."
Lord Powell of Bayswater, the chairman of the Atlantic Partnership, says:"Somehow or other, the French will find a way to say Yes."
The British ambassador to France is keeping his distance. But every other European ally has been wheeled in to help support the Yes vote. Mr Chirac has called on Poland's president, Germany's chancellor and Spain's primeminister.
In Britain, the French referendum has divided camps in bizarre ways. Many pro-Europeans want the French to vote No because then the talk will all be about France's gripes: employment law and social policy. If the French vote Yes, and the British vote No, the arguments will be about far more serious issues, such as sovereignty and democracy, according to Denis MacShane, the former Europe minister.
But the ardent pro-European still wants a Yes vote, and a referendum in Britain. "If we don't agree to this constitution, Europe will go back to increasing bureaucracy, no role for national parliaments and no role for individual citizens."
Liam Fox, the shadow foreign secretary, says: "The French have an opportunity to speak for a lot of people across the continent. They have taken to Euro-scepticism with a particularly Gallic passion."
But Lord Pearson of Rannoch, a leading No campaigner in Westminster, wants a"petit oui" in France.
"It is in the French interests to vote Yes. But it is in our interests they vote No."
He is determined that the British should be allowed their own referendum to show Tony Blair that they have had enough of Brussels.
Asterix the Gaul and Obelix hold the key to Britain's future, as well as that of France. If they decide to repel the marauding hordes from Brussels, it will be up to Mr Blair, who takes over the presidency of the EU in July, to sort out the mess.
Chirac struggling for victory in his own backyard
Chirac struggling for victory in his own backyard
The Daily Telegraph
By Colin Randall in Sarran
In the enchanting village where Jacques Chirac and his wife Bernadette have their country retreat, two images offer snapshots of the limits of the president's sway in a country preparing to cast judgment on his European gamble.
The first, greeting visitors on the main road leading into Sarran, tucked away in the soft green hills of the Corrèze in south-western France, is the lavishly-funded museum named after the president.
Inside is a display of thousands of gifts collected on Mr Chirac's world travels during 10 years in office. There are cowboy boots from President Clinton, items honouring Mr Chirac's beloved Sumo wrestling and a porcelain bowl from Tony Blair.
The second image meets the eye deeper into the village. At the polling station where inhabitants will cast their votes in tomorrow's referendum on the EU constitution, rival campaigners have plastered their posters side byside. In tune with the overwhelming majority of polls throughout the 10-week campaign, Non outnumbers Oui.
The Corrèze enjoys no immunity from the potent mix of anger, fear andtruculent defiance that has swept France.
Exasperated with high unemployment and a weak and accident-prone government committed to unpopular reform of health, education and labour practices, the electorate has so far resisted its president's pleas to distinguish between the referendum question and domestic discontent.
If the 72-year-old French leader fails to win over the army of wavering voters, it will be a judgment on his presidency as much as a rejection of the unloved text.
"Political leaders have lost a great deal of the credibility and respect they once had," said Michel Caillard, who leads Mr Chirac's UMP party inTulle.
"It is not all the fault of media caricatures. The political class fails to connect as it should with citizens, and we see the consequences in this difficult campaign."
Although both of the main parties have implored the country to vote Yes, enthusiasm for the treaty is also muted among their own faithful. The broader public is even less persuaded of its merits.
The Socialist leader, François Hollande, is Tulle's mayor and MP but has struggled locally as well as nationally to impress the voters with his Yes campaign.
When he toured the town's riverside market recently, even the cheesemonger was prominently displaying a No slogan beside the products on his stall.
One of Mr Caillard's colleague's who leads the UMP youth section in the same constituency is also rooted in the No camp, driven by concern over the loss of French sovereignty in an enlarged and more integrated Europe.
The UMP mayor of Beynac-et-Cazenac, Pascal Coste, will vote Yes but with deep reluctance. Mr Coste is closely linked to the farming community.
"They dislike the bureaucracy imposed by Brussels, "Mr Caillard said. "I only hope that we have persuaded them that a strong France within a strong Europe offers the best chance of protecting their interests."
The Corrèze famously voted no in the 1992 Maastricht referendum. In the squeaky clean office where extracts from the 2005 treaty are displayed alongside hostile analysis, Left-wing activists from Tulle's People and Culture Association are upbeat about the prospects of another upset. "I want the message from here to be that we were not prepared to vote for a bad constitution just because we were told it was the least worst option," said Manée Teyssandier, 56, a school careers' adviser and president of the association.
Dominique Albaret, 51, in charge of the office, said: "The fact that we have to explain the text, that many people find they cannot understand it, is the very first reason why no one should vote for it.
"Whatever Chirac says, he has to renegotiate it."
The most eye-catching part of the montage borrows the words of 18th-century French revolutionaries who declared that people forever retained the right to revise and reform a constitution but had no right to subject future generations to its laws.
"That may have come from people who cut off a lot of heads," Mr Albaretsaid. "But it neatly sums up what we feel today."
The Daily Telegraph
By Colin Randall in Sarran
In the enchanting village where Jacques Chirac and his wife Bernadette have their country retreat, two images offer snapshots of the limits of the president's sway in a country preparing to cast judgment on his European gamble.
The first, greeting visitors on the main road leading into Sarran, tucked away in the soft green hills of the Corrèze in south-western France, is the lavishly-funded museum named after the president.
Inside is a display of thousands of gifts collected on Mr Chirac's world travels during 10 years in office. There are cowboy boots from President Clinton, items honouring Mr Chirac's beloved Sumo wrestling and a porcelain bowl from Tony Blair.
The second image meets the eye deeper into the village. At the polling station where inhabitants will cast their votes in tomorrow's referendum on the EU constitution, rival campaigners have plastered their posters side byside. In tune with the overwhelming majority of polls throughout the 10-week campaign, Non outnumbers Oui.
The Corrèze enjoys no immunity from the potent mix of anger, fear andtruculent defiance that has swept France.
Exasperated with high unemployment and a weak and accident-prone government committed to unpopular reform of health, education and labour practices, the electorate has so far resisted its president's pleas to distinguish between the referendum question and domestic discontent.
If the 72-year-old French leader fails to win over the army of wavering voters, it will be a judgment on his presidency as much as a rejection of the unloved text.
"Political leaders have lost a great deal of the credibility and respect they once had," said Michel Caillard, who leads Mr Chirac's UMP party inTulle.
"It is not all the fault of media caricatures. The political class fails to connect as it should with citizens, and we see the consequences in this difficult campaign."
Although both of the main parties have implored the country to vote Yes, enthusiasm for the treaty is also muted among their own faithful. The broader public is even less persuaded of its merits.
The Socialist leader, François Hollande, is Tulle's mayor and MP but has struggled locally as well as nationally to impress the voters with his Yes campaign.
When he toured the town's riverside market recently, even the cheesemonger was prominently displaying a No slogan beside the products on his stall.
One of Mr Caillard's colleague's who leads the UMP youth section in the same constituency is also rooted in the No camp, driven by concern over the loss of French sovereignty in an enlarged and more integrated Europe.
The UMP mayor of Beynac-et-Cazenac, Pascal Coste, will vote Yes but with deep reluctance. Mr Coste is closely linked to the farming community.
"They dislike the bureaucracy imposed by Brussels, "Mr Caillard said. "I only hope that we have persuaded them that a strong France within a strong Europe offers the best chance of protecting their interests."
The Corrèze famously voted no in the 1992 Maastricht referendum. In the squeaky clean office where extracts from the 2005 treaty are displayed alongside hostile analysis, Left-wing activists from Tulle's People and Culture Association are upbeat about the prospects of another upset. "I want the message from here to be that we were not prepared to vote for a bad constitution just because we were told it was the least worst option," said Manée Teyssandier, 56, a school careers' adviser and president of the association.
Dominique Albaret, 51, in charge of the office, said: "The fact that we have to explain the text, that many people find they cannot understand it, is the very first reason why no one should vote for it.
"Whatever Chirac says, he has to renegotiate it."
The most eye-catching part of the montage borrows the words of 18th-century French revolutionaries who declared that people forever retained the right to revise and reform a constitution but had no right to subject future generations to its laws.
"That may have come from people who cut off a lot of heads," Mr Albaretsaid. "But it neatly sums up what we feel today."
Monday, May 30, 2005
"No excuses Blair. No reflection...we demand our say." No Campaign Press Release
Press Release
The People's No Campaign
Monday 30th May 2005
"Don't You Dare Mr. Blair...We Demand Our Referendum!"
Following the predicted rejection of the European Constitution by the French, The People's No Campaign demands that Tony Blair does not shirk away from his party's manifesto pledge.
We demand that we get our referendum.
The Dutch will vote No on Wednesday in their referendum and Blair will be desperate to avoid the debate in this country.
We demand that he goes to the European Council meeting on 16th June in Brussels and fight for the ratification process to continue so that the British people are able to express their opinion on the European Constitution.
He must fulfil his party's promise to the electorate.
The question which must be asked of Blair and his Government is, "Why did you sign the Constitution document on behalf of the British people if you are now telling us that there are serious doubts . He should be saying we are going ahead. The inquest should only begin after the whole process has been completed.
There is no need for 'a period of reflection.' The situation is quite clear and we want our say. Blair himself has said that the EU is unworkable without a constitution so where are we going?
Campaign Director, Neil Herron states, "For once The People's No Campaign is in agreement with the European Commission and that is that we must not leave the situation like this. It is important that every country is allowed to give its opinion on the Constitution and it would be an outrage if the British people were denied this right. The Prime Minister signed along with Jack Straw on our behalf but without our consent. We demand that the Prime Minister defend our right to have our referendum at the forthcoming European Council meeting on 16th June, as he promised.
However, what is becoming apparent to all is that this is really now about the elites and the people. To seek retrospective approval for something which has never come from the people but which has been proposed by an arrogant, out of touch political elite was always going to be the bridge too far for the European Project.
We will accept nothing less than a full debate on Britain's current position with the European Union. "
ENDS
Contact:
Campaign Director
Neil Herron
07776 202045
0845 147 2006
Notes for Editors:
1. The People's No Campaign is a cross/non-party grassroots coalition which launched on 25th May 2005. Funded by public donation the campaign team are drawn from across thye country and from all walks of life. Recent successes include the North East referendum.
2. Analysis of the French result can be seen on our website http://www.eureferendum.blogspot.com/
3. Campaign Details at http://www.thepeoplesnocampaign.co.uk/
4. EU Constitution picture and media opportunity in advance of the Dutch referendum decision. Location London. To be advised 10am Wednesday 1st June.
The People's No Campaign
Monday 30th May 2005
"Don't You Dare Mr. Blair...We Demand Our Referendum!"
Following the predicted rejection of the European Constitution by the French, The People's No Campaign demands that Tony Blair does not shirk away from his party's manifesto pledge.
We demand that we get our referendum.
The Dutch will vote No on Wednesday in their referendum and Blair will be desperate to avoid the debate in this country.
We demand that he goes to the European Council meeting on 16th June in Brussels and fight for the ratification process to continue so that the British people are able to express their opinion on the European Constitution.
He must fulfil his party's promise to the electorate.
The question which must be asked of Blair and his Government is, "Why did you sign the Constitution document on behalf of the British people if you are now telling us that there are serious doubts . He should be saying we are going ahead. The inquest should only begin after the whole process has been completed.
There is no need for 'a period of reflection.' The situation is quite clear and we want our say. Blair himself has said that the EU is unworkable without a constitution so where are we going?
Campaign Director, Neil Herron states, "For once The People's No Campaign is in agreement with the European Commission and that is that we must not leave the situation like this. It is important that every country is allowed to give its opinion on the Constitution and it would be an outrage if the British people were denied this right. The Prime Minister signed along with Jack Straw on our behalf but without our consent. We demand that the Prime Minister defend our right to have our referendum at the forthcoming European Council meeting on 16th June, as he promised.
However, what is becoming apparent to all is that this is really now about the elites and the people. To seek retrospective approval for something which has never come from the people but which has been proposed by an arrogant, out of touch political elite was always going to be the bridge too far for the European Project.
We will accept nothing less than a full debate on Britain's current position with the European Union. "
ENDS
Contact:
Campaign Director
Neil Herron
07776 202045
0845 147 2006
Notes for Editors:
1. The People's No Campaign is a cross/non-party grassroots coalition which launched on 25th May 2005. Funded by public donation the campaign team are drawn from across thye country and from all walks of life. Recent successes include the North East referendum.
2. Analysis of the French result can be seen on our website http://www.eureferendum.blogspot.com/
3. Campaign Details at http://www.thepeoplesnocampaign.co.uk/
4. EU Constitution picture and media opportunity in advance of the Dutch referendum decision. Location London. To be advised 10am Wednesday 1st June.
Sunday, May 29, 2005
Vote No and Leave the EU...Chirac says.
Taken from the Sunday Telegraph, Christopher Booker’s ‘Notebook’, today, Sunday 29th May: “Any country voting “no” to the constitution, according to President Chirac, must leave the EU. He may not wish to be reminded of it today, but this was what he told journalists in Paris on April 28, 2004, just after Tony Blair announced that he was to hold a British referendum. Chirac, already under pressure to follow suit, was angry with Mr Blair and said, as the Financial Times reported two days later, it was a matter of “ratify or quit”.”
What if France or Netherlands votes No?
The European Constitution:
"How to Proceed If France or the Netherlands votes "NO"."
Read the report here or visit www.eureferendum.blogspot.com
"How to Proceed If France or the Netherlands votes "NO"."
Read the report here or visit www.eureferendum.blogspot.com
Friday, May 27, 2005
France Says No...
"Then begins the Battle for Britain...but first the first skirmish will be to ensure that the slippery PM is not allowed to wriggle away from his obligation."
The U.K government must honour their manifesto commitment to the people to carry out a referendum to ratify the E.U. constitution.
The government do not have the power to cancel the E.U. Constitution. However, events in Brussels may bring about, through the European Council meeting on 12th June, an attempt to prevent any further ratification in countries still to do so, including U.K. Mr Blair will of course be attending any such meeting.
The Question
Will Mr Blair, on behalf of the people of the U.K., insist on our referendum going ahead at any such meeting. He must be made aware by people, press and media that cancellation of the referendum is not an option.
It is usually the case that the issue put is agreed by concensus unless one or more member state objects. If there were a formal vote it would be agreed by a majority, but it is unlikely that they will wish to be seen to be divided.
The Council has no power or formal authority.
However, it is usually the case that the first communiqué is that they are all agreed…then we will only have the accounts from the politicians themselves.
So, Mr. Blair, we expect you to demand that the British people be allowed their referendum regardless of the vote in France and regardless of the result in Holland.If you do not then the wrath of the British people will be too great for you to hide from.
The U.K government must honour their manifesto commitment to the people to carry out a referendum to ratify the E.U. constitution.
The government do not have the power to cancel the E.U. Constitution. However, events in Brussels may bring about, through the European Council meeting on 12th June, an attempt to prevent any further ratification in countries still to do so, including U.K. Mr Blair will of course be attending any such meeting.
The Question
Will Mr Blair, on behalf of the people of the U.K., insist on our referendum going ahead at any such meeting. He must be made aware by people, press and media that cancellation of the referendum is not an option.
It is usually the case that the issue put is agreed by concensus unless one or more member state objects. If there were a formal vote it would be agreed by a majority, but it is unlikely that they will wish to be seen to be divided.
The Council has no power or formal authority.
However, it is usually the case that the first communiqué is that they are all agreed…then we will only have the accounts from the politicians themselves.
So, Mr. Blair, we expect you to demand that the British people be allowed their referendum regardless of the vote in France and regardless of the result in Holland.If you do not then the wrath of the British people will be too great for you to hide from.
Herron seeks poll promise
May 25 2005
By Zoe Hughes Political Editor, The Journal
A North-East campaigner last night demanded a referendum on the European constitution, even if other EU nations say no to the plans.
Neil Herron of Sunderland is preparing to launch his own People's No campaign today but says Cabinet ministers must keep their promise to hold a vote on the treaty amid growing speculation that it could be ditched.
Polls for the vote in France indicate that the no campaign could win on Sunday, with fears mounting that the constitution would be left dead in the water without the participation of one of its founding member states.
Unveiling legislation which will pave the way for the Government's own referendum, Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said there would be a vote as long as there was something to vote on.
But Mr Herron has demanded a firm commitment from ministers. "Regardless of the result in France, this debate has to be held," he said.
"We want a serious grown-up debate that is free from party politics - our campaign will obviously deliver the people's perspective."
He is set to launch the a grassroots No campaign in London today, adding: "Quite simply, our argument is that we are not prepared to surrender further powers to the European Union."
Durham North West MP and Chief Whip Hilary Armstrong who said it was important to have a Europe that "recognises and respects the nation state but also brings together people to avoid wars in the future."
France is expected to say no to the plans on Sunday. The Netherlands, which is expected to say yes, will vote on June 1.
By Zoe Hughes Political Editor, The Journal
A North-East campaigner last night demanded a referendum on the European constitution, even if other EU nations say no to the plans.
Neil Herron of Sunderland is preparing to launch his own People's No campaign today but says Cabinet ministers must keep their promise to hold a vote on the treaty amid growing speculation that it could be ditched.
Polls for the vote in France indicate that the no campaign could win on Sunday, with fears mounting that the constitution would be left dead in the water without the participation of one of its founding member states.
Unveiling legislation which will pave the way for the Government's own referendum, Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said there would be a vote as long as there was something to vote on.
But Mr Herron has demanded a firm commitment from ministers. "Regardless of the result in France, this debate has to be held," he said.
"We want a serious grown-up debate that is free from party politics - our campaign will obviously deliver the people's perspective."
He is set to launch the a grassroots No campaign in London today, adding: "Quite simply, our argument is that we are not prepared to surrender further powers to the European Union."
Durham North West MP and Chief Whip Hilary Armstrong who said it was important to have a Europe that "recognises and respects the nation state but also brings together people to avoid wars in the future."
France is expected to say no to the plans on Sunday. The Netherlands, which is expected to say yes, will vote on June 1.
Thursday, May 26, 2005
The People's No Campaign Launch...The Gathering of the Clans
Wednesday 25th May 2005
Abingdon House,
Little College Street,
Westminster
The first floor conference room in Abingdon House at 2pm yesterday witnessed the first high profile 'Gathering of the Clans.'
Many groups, organisations and individuals were represented.
The meeting commenced at 2pm precisely and the room was bursting beyond capacity with many forced to stand outside in the hallway. Late arrivals were refused entry by security because the event was over capacity and had to wait outside.
The meeting opened up with room sponsor, Independent Labour eer Lord Stoddart, delivering a passionate introduction. This was followed with a rousing address by Maastricht rebel and Chairman of the Freedom Association, Christopher Gill.
Sky TV and German Television were present and the room was littered with copies of the European Constitution, kindly provided free of charge by the European Parliament building in London that very morning.
The media made the most of the shot of a pile of them sticking out of a House of Lords 'Recycle Your Rubbish' bin.
Neil Herron in his usual style delivered the background to what the campaign was about, where it had come from and where the fight was to be taken. Rousing applause again...and a few laughs.
Colin Moran, former Strategy Director of the North East No Campaign then detailed 'What If?' in relation to the French situation.
Dr. Richard North, the backroom research specialist for the campaign, 'blinked as he was allowed out in daylight.' He detailed the electronic networks and how they would work in what was to be the first internet driven referendum.
Questions came from the press and the media and from the floor. The atmosphere was absolutely electric...people knew this was 'the happening.'
Sky News had been running the launch since the breakfast programme where Neil Herron was interviewed live from the studio. Clips from the London office were also run in the preamble and played throughout the day.
The meeting was a huge success and people went away enthused. We are busy collating the offers of support and preparing to link the various groups that wish to work with us.
Over 500 individuals have already registered as campaign supporters in the space of 24 hours.
Abingdon House,
Little College Street,
Westminster
The first floor conference room in Abingdon House at 2pm yesterday witnessed the first high profile 'Gathering of the Clans.'
Many groups, organisations and individuals were represented.
The meeting commenced at 2pm precisely and the room was bursting beyond capacity with many forced to stand outside in the hallway. Late arrivals were refused entry by security because the event was over capacity and had to wait outside.
The meeting opened up with room sponsor, Independent Labour eer Lord Stoddart, delivering a passionate introduction. This was followed with a rousing address by Maastricht rebel and Chairman of the Freedom Association, Christopher Gill.
Sky TV and German Television were present and the room was littered with copies of the European Constitution, kindly provided free of charge by the European Parliament building in London that very morning.
The media made the most of the shot of a pile of them sticking out of a House of Lords 'Recycle Your Rubbish' bin.
Neil Herron in his usual style delivered the background to what the campaign was about, where it had come from and where the fight was to be taken. Rousing applause again...and a few laughs.
Colin Moran, former Strategy Director of the North East No Campaign then detailed 'What If?' in relation to the French situation.
Dr. Richard North, the backroom research specialist for the campaign, 'blinked as he was allowed out in daylight.' He detailed the electronic networks and how they would work in what was to be the first internet driven referendum.
Questions came from the press and the media and from the floor. The atmosphere was absolutely electric...people knew this was 'the happening.'
Sky News had been running the launch since the breakfast programme where Neil Herron was interviewed live from the studio. Clips from the London office were also run in the preamble and played throughout the day.
The meeting was a huge success and people went away enthused. We are busy collating the offers of support and preparing to link the various groups that wish to work with us.
Over 500 individuals have already registered as campaign supporters in the space of 24 hours.
Monday, May 23, 2005
EU Constitution must have support of majority
The Daily Telegraph,
21st May 2005
SIR-We, the undersigned, believe that unless at least 50 per cent of those eligible to vote Yes to the question in the forthcoming referendum on the European Constitution, the Government should not proceed with the treaty (report, May 18)
To have a government elected by as little as 21-5 per cent of the electorate is one thing, but to change the whole basis of our nation’s constitutional settlement on less than a clear majority of all those eligible to vote is quite another.
Proceeding to adopt an alien constitution without an unequivocal mandate is totally unacceptable and can only, in the long run, lead to entirely avoidable trouble and strife.
For more than 300 years, the British have enjoyed the benefits of a peaceful and settled society. To abandon that happy state without a clear indication that it is the will of the majority of those on the electoral register would be wholly irresponsible and reckless in the extreme.
Christopher Gill
Hon Chairman
The Freedom Association
Neil Herron
People’s No Campaign
Ruth Lea
Centre for Policy Studies
Ian Milne
Global Britain
Robert Oulds
Bruges Group
Lord Stoddart of Swindon
Campaign for an Independent Britain
21st May 2005
SIR-We, the undersigned, believe that unless at least 50 per cent of those eligible to vote Yes to the question in the forthcoming referendum on the European Constitution, the Government should not proceed with the treaty (report, May 18)
To have a government elected by as little as 21-5 per cent of the electorate is one thing, but to change the whole basis of our nation’s constitutional settlement on less than a clear majority of all those eligible to vote is quite another.
Proceeding to adopt an alien constitution without an unequivocal mandate is totally unacceptable and can only, in the long run, lead to entirely avoidable trouble and strife.
For more than 300 years, the British have enjoyed the benefits of a peaceful and settled society. To abandon that happy state without a clear indication that it is the will of the majority of those on the electoral register would be wholly irresponsible and reckless in the extreme.
Christopher Gill
Hon Chairman
The Freedom Association
Neil Herron
People’s No Campaign
Ruth Lea
Centre for Policy Studies
Ian Milne
Global Britain
Robert Oulds
Bruges Group
Lord Stoddart of Swindon
Campaign for an Independent Britain
Sunday, May 22, 2005
Invite to Launch...Please Register
Please Register your support by e-mailing administrator@thepeoplesnocampaign.co.uk
Dear Supporter,
You are warmly invited to the Launch of the People’s No Campaign on Wednesday 25th May at 2p.m. at Abingdon House, 13 Little College Street, London SW1P 3SH.
The People’s No Campaign has been formed as a grass roots, non party political opposition to the Constitution.
Neil Herron and the Campaign Team have an excellent record of effective campaigning. The Metric Martyrs Campaign alerted the general public to the fact that EU law has supremacy over that made in Westminster, and has in essence prevented further prosecutions for trading in imperial measures. The Referendum04 Campaign, which created a broad coalition including Labour Euro-safeguards, the Democracy Movement, the Campaign for an Independent Britain, the Freedom Association and many regional and local groups, helped force the Government to hold a referendum. More recently, the North East No Campaign, again a genuine coalition from across the socio-political spectrum, resulted in a massive defeat for John Prescott’s regionalisation plans.
For a generation, the British people have been denied a proper debate on our country’s relationship with the European Union. We now have, however, an opportunity to make our voices heard as the referendum on the EU Constitution approaches.
It is vital that the electorate is fully informed about the nature of the proposals. This is too important an issue to be left to party politics, particularly now that many people are suspicious of professional politicians: we will work with people from all backgrounds, with different party loyalties or none at all; people who simply wish to say “No” to the increasing erosion of the UK’s right of self-government.
We hope very much that you, or a representative of your organisation will be able to join us on 25th May for the media launch.
Please confirm attendance.
Yours sincerely
Colin Moran
On behalf of the No Campaign
www.thepeoplesnocampaign.co.uk
Tel. No. Office 0191 565 7143
Neil Herron (mobile) 07776 202045
Registered Office:
12 Frederick Street
Sunderland
SR1 1NA
Company Number 5309969
Dear Supporter,
You are warmly invited to the Launch of the People’s No Campaign on Wednesday 25th May at 2p.m. at Abingdon House, 13 Little College Street, London SW1P 3SH.
The People’s No Campaign has been formed as a grass roots, non party political opposition to the Constitution.
Neil Herron and the Campaign Team have an excellent record of effective campaigning. The Metric Martyrs Campaign alerted the general public to the fact that EU law has supremacy over that made in Westminster, and has in essence prevented further prosecutions for trading in imperial measures. The Referendum04 Campaign, which created a broad coalition including Labour Euro-safeguards, the Democracy Movement, the Campaign for an Independent Britain, the Freedom Association and many regional and local groups, helped force the Government to hold a referendum. More recently, the North East No Campaign, again a genuine coalition from across the socio-political spectrum, resulted in a massive defeat for John Prescott’s regionalisation plans.
For a generation, the British people have been denied a proper debate on our country’s relationship with the European Union. We now have, however, an opportunity to make our voices heard as the referendum on the EU Constitution approaches.
It is vital that the electorate is fully informed about the nature of the proposals. This is too important an issue to be left to party politics, particularly now that many people are suspicious of professional politicians: we will work with people from all backgrounds, with different party loyalties or none at all; people who simply wish to say “No” to the increasing erosion of the UK’s right of self-government.
We hope very much that you, or a representative of your organisation will be able to join us on 25th May for the media launch.
Please confirm attendance.
Yours sincerely
Colin Moran
On behalf of the No Campaign
www.thepeoplesnocampaign.co.uk
Tel. No. Office 0191 565 7143
Neil Herron (mobile) 07776 202045
Registered Office:
12 Frederick Street
Sunderland
SR1 1NA
Company Number 5309969
Tuesday, May 17, 2005
No Campaign against European Constitution Launches
No Campaign against the European Constitution launches
The People's No Campaign
Press Release...15th May 2005
"No Campaign against European Constitution Announces Official Launch "
The official launch of The People's No Campaign (against the European Constitution) is to take place at:
Location :
Conference Room Abingdon House
13 Little College Street
WestminsterLondon
SW1P 3SH.
Time: 2pm Wednesday 25th May
The No Campaign has been created as a genuine non / cross-party grassroots coalition to help deliver an overwhelming and emphatic rejection of the European Constitution.
Campaign Director, Neil Herron states, " It is essential that a genuine grassroots campaign helps to deliver the reasons for saying 'NO' in a plain, no nonsense style, free from party politics. We are creating the broadest coalition from across the socio-political spectrum and intend to replicate the achievement of the North East No Campaign which rejected the Government's and John Prescott's proposals in the recent Regional Assembly Referendum by the biggest margin in modern political history. The Constitution represents further surrender of power to Brussels and this is quite simply unacceptable. The debate preceding the referendum will be the first opportunity for the British public to examine the true nature of the whole 'European Project.' A full examination of the consequences of political and economic integration. A debate that we have been denied for over thirty years."
Dr Richard North, Research Director states, " This is a genuine,important and fundamental move by the people of Britain to reclaim theirown destiny."
The timing of the launch is to show solidarity with the French 'No' Campaign, and to send a message to our domestic politicians that theywill not be in for an easy ride. If the French vote 'oui' on 29th May then it is 'game on' for our domestic Constitution referendum battle. Details of the growing alliance will be posted on the website shortly where we have a full analysis of news and events as they unfold. More statements to follow.
Contact:
Neil Herron
Campaign Director Office
0191 56517143
Mobile 07776202045
www.thepeoplesnocampaign.co.uk
www.thepeoplesnocampaign.blogspot.com
Information Line...0845 147 2006
Registered Office:
The People's No Campaign
12 Frederick Street
Sunderland
SR1 1NA
The People's No Campaign
Press Release...15th May 2005
"No Campaign against European Constitution Announces Official Launch "
The official launch of The People's No Campaign (against the European Constitution) is to take place at:
Location :
Conference Room Abingdon House
13 Little College Street
WestminsterLondon
SW1P 3SH.
Time: 2pm Wednesday 25th May
The No Campaign has been created as a genuine non / cross-party grassroots coalition to help deliver an overwhelming and emphatic rejection of the European Constitution.
Campaign Director, Neil Herron states, " It is essential that a genuine grassroots campaign helps to deliver the reasons for saying 'NO' in a plain, no nonsense style, free from party politics. We are creating the broadest coalition from across the socio-political spectrum and intend to replicate the achievement of the North East No Campaign which rejected the Government's and John Prescott's proposals in the recent Regional Assembly Referendum by the biggest margin in modern political history. The Constitution represents further surrender of power to Brussels and this is quite simply unacceptable. The debate preceding the referendum will be the first opportunity for the British public to examine the true nature of the whole 'European Project.' A full examination of the consequences of political and economic integration. A debate that we have been denied for over thirty years."
Dr Richard North, Research Director states, " This is a genuine,important and fundamental move by the people of Britain to reclaim theirown destiny."
The timing of the launch is to show solidarity with the French 'No' Campaign, and to send a message to our domestic politicians that theywill not be in for an easy ride. If the French vote 'oui' on 29th May then it is 'game on' for our domestic Constitution referendum battle. Details of the growing alliance will be posted on the website shortly where we have a full analysis of news and events as they unfold. More statements to follow.
Contact:
Neil Herron
Campaign Director Office
0191 56517143
Mobile 07776202045
www.thepeoplesnocampaign.co.uk
www.thepeoplesnocampaign.blogspot.com
Information Line...0845 147 2006
Registered Office:
The People's No Campaign
12 Frederick Street
Sunderland
SR1 1NA
Friday, May 13, 2005
European Constitution No Campaign to launch
The People's No Campaign (against the European Constitution) is preparing to launch in advance of the French referendum which takes place on Sunday May 29th.
Campaign Director Neil Herron states, "We have been supporting the French 'No' campaign but it is apparent that the polls are now narrowing and it is becoming increasingly likely that a 'Yes' vote will be returned. It is important that we make our presence felt in the arena regardless of the French result because the debate about the whole of the 'European Project' is one that is long overdue. However, a French 'Yes' vote will mean the fuse will be lit for the first real debate on the European Question for thirty years. The People's No Campaign is a cross / non-party coalition with the intention of not only rejecting the European Constitution, but doing so in such an overwhelming and emphatic way that the 'elephant in the room' can no longer be ignored."
Details of the timing and location of the official launch will be posted shortly here and on the campaign website www.thepeoplesnocampaign.co.uk
Latest news and analysis can be seen at Dr. Richard North's EU Referendum blog www.eureferendum.blogspot.com
To contact the campaign for more information call 0845 147 2006
Campaign Director Neil Herron states, "We have been supporting the French 'No' campaign but it is apparent that the polls are now narrowing and it is becoming increasingly likely that a 'Yes' vote will be returned. It is important that we make our presence felt in the arena regardless of the French result because the debate about the whole of the 'European Project' is one that is long overdue. However, a French 'Yes' vote will mean the fuse will be lit for the first real debate on the European Question for thirty years. The People's No Campaign is a cross / non-party coalition with the intention of not only rejecting the European Constitution, but doing so in such an overwhelming and emphatic way that the 'elephant in the room' can no longer be ignored."
Details of the timing and location of the official launch will be posted shortly here and on the campaign website www.thepeoplesnocampaign.co.uk
Latest news and analysis can be seen at Dr. Richard North's EU Referendum blog www.eureferendum.blogspot.com
To contact the campaign for more information call 0845 147 2006
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
