Comments on: Dealing with the Parliament II http://crookedtimber.org/2005/04/14/dealing-with-the-parliament-ii/ Out of the crooked timber of humanity, no straight thing was ever made Sat, 26 May 2012 16:42:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Henry http://crookedtimber.org/2005/04/14/dealing-with-the-parliament-ii/comment-page-1/#comment-67920 Henry Fri, 15 Apr 2005 12:42:40 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2005/04/14/dealing-with-the-parliament-ii/#comment-67920 Doug - the Romania reshuffle thing is from the FT article - according to the FT it happened last year. And while there's surely something to your claims about petulance, your argument that the Parliament hasn't produced an "iota of policy change" is flat-out wrong. Doug – the Romania reshuffle thing is from the FT article – according to the FT it happened last year. And while there’s surely something to your claims about petulance, your argument that the Parliament hasn’t produced an “iota of policy change” is flat-out wrong.

]]> By: Andrew Boucher http://crookedtimber.org/2005/04/14/dealing-with-the-parliament-ii/comment-page-1/#comment-67912 Andrew Boucher Fri, 15 Apr 2005 11:22:55 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2005/04/14/dealing-with-the-parliament-ii/#comment-67912 EU Constitution post: Jacques Chirac appeared on French television last night to plead for a yes vote on the EU Constitution. He should have stayed home. The format had been chosen by the President's daughter and communications manager, Claude Chirac; it was not a debate with Constitution opponents, but a question-and-answer session in front of a selection of the nation's young. Nothing probably appeared easier; French youth have been consistently more pro-European than their elders and were probably expected to toss the President a few softball questions. Instead their queries were mostly negative and mostly aggressive. The youth were also very French, in that they were looking to the government, now in the form of the EU Constitution, to solve all their problems. The line of questioning wasn't far from, "I don't have a job. Will the EU Constitution help me get one?" Chirac's reasons for the Constitution were mostly negative. Should the "no" vote win, France would lose influence in Europe. Worse, the United States wanted a "no" vote, because it wanted Europe to stay weak. About the only positive reason given was that Europe would finally have a Constitution which enshrined "French" values. But the youth would have none of it. In the end an exasperated Chirac admitted that he didn't understand why people were voting no. "I don't understand you," from a President to his people, is a cry of distress. It is, however, not the kind of convincing argument that is likely to help get the Constitution passed. EU Constitution post:
Jacques Chirac appeared on French television last night to plead for a yes vote on the EU Constitution. He should have stayed home. The format had been chosen by the President’s daughter and communications manager, Claude Chirac; it was not a debate with Constitution opponents, but a question-and-answer session in front of a selection of the nation’s young. Nothing probably appeared easier; French youth have been consistently more pro-European than their elders and were probably expected to toss the President a few softball questions.

Instead their queries were mostly negative and mostly aggressive. The youth were also very French, in that they were looking to the government, now in the form of the EU Constitution, to solve all their problems. The line of questioning wasn’t far from, “I don’t have a job. Will the EU Constitution help me get one?”

Chirac’s reasons for the Constitution were mostly negative. Should the “no” vote win, France would lose influence in Europe. Worse, the United States wanted a “no” vote, because it wanted Europe to stay weak. About the only positive reason given was that Europe would finally have a Constitution which enshrined “French” values.

But the youth would have none of it. In the end an exasperated Chirac admitted that he didn’t understand why people were voting no. “I don’t understand you,” from a President to his people, is a cry of distress. It is, however, not the kind of convincing argument that is likely to help get the Constitution passed.

]]> By: Doug Muir http://crookedtimber.org/2005/04/14/dealing-with-the-parliament-ii/comment-page-1/#comment-67904 Doug Muir Fri, 15 Apr 2005 09:21:59 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2005/04/14/dealing-with-the-parliament-ii/#comment-67904 <i>Even more interesting is that the Parliament has been taking more of a hands-on role in the enlargement process;</i> Remind me again why this is a good thing. Case in point: Croatia. The EU Commission very correctly told the Croats that their application for membership would go nowhere until Croatia's war criminals were handed over to the Hague. The EU Parliament, on the other hand, was much more sympathetic... much too sympathetic; had it been up to them, they'd have given the Croats a green light, mass murderers and all. More generally, the EU Parliament's few forays into foreign policy have shown a distressingly high tendency towards pointless gestures and petulant displays. You can argue that its very irrelevance encourages it to behave badly, and I wouldn't disagree. But that "hands-on role", so far, has consistent of a lot of second-guessing; many trees have died, but there hasn't been an iota of actual policy change. <i> a highly critical Parliament report on corruption in Romania (which is an EU candidate state) triggered a government reshuffle there. </i> Um? I live in Romania, and we haven't had a government reshuffle. We got a new government in December, but that was after elections. It had nothing to do with any Parliamentary report. You might want to go back and check that one. Doug M. Even more interesting is that the Parliament has been taking more of a hands-on role in the enlargement process;

Remind me again why this is a good thing.

Case in point: Croatia. The EU Commission very correctly told the Croats that their application for membership would go nowhere until Croatia’s war criminals were handed over to the Hague. The EU Parliament, on the other hand, was much more sympathetic… much too sympathetic; had it been up to them, they’d have given the Croats a green light, mass murderers and all.

More generally, the EU Parliament’s few forays into foreign policy have shown a distressingly high tendency towards pointless gestures and petulant displays. You can argue that its very irrelevance encourages it to behave badly, and I wouldn’t disagree. But that “hands-on role”, so far, has consistent of a lot of second-guessing; many trees have died, but there hasn’t been an iota of actual policy change.

a highly critical Parliament report on corruption in Romania (which is an EU candidate state) triggered a government reshuffle there.

Um? I live in Romania, and we haven’t had a government reshuffle. We got a new government in December, but that was after elections. It had nothing to do with any Parliamentary report.

You might want to go back and check that one.

Doug M.

]]> By: John Quiggin http://crookedtimber.org/2005/04/14/dealing-with-the-parliament-ii/comment-page-1/#comment-67875 John Quiggin Thu, 14 Apr 2005 22:33:31 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2005/04/14/dealing-with-the-parliament-ii/#comment-67875 Henry, the FT link doesn't work for me - I don't get an error, but it doesn't load either. I agree with p o'neill that we need a post on the Constitution, preferably from our Northern hemisphere team :-). Henry, the FT link doesn’t work for me – I don’t get an error, but it doesn’t load either.

I agree with p o’neill that we need a post on the Constitution, preferably from our Northern hemisphere team :-).

]]> By: P ONeill http://crookedtimber.org/2005/04/14/dealing-with-the-parliament-ii/comment-page-1/#comment-67864 P ONeill Thu, 14 Apr 2005 20:16:33 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/2005/04/14/dealing-with-the-parliament-ii/#comment-67864 Surely the wildcard in the path towards a stronger foreign policy voice for the EU is fate of the EU Constitution -- about which I think we need some CT posts <em>soon</em>. If the Constitution tanks in France, then the next few years in the EU will be consumed with yet another "crisis," undercutting the ability of the Union to project even moral power externally. Surely the wildcard in the path towards a stronger foreign policy voice for the EU is fate of the EU Constitution—about which I think we need some CT posts soon. If the Constitution tanks in France, then the next few years in the EU will be consumed with yet another “crisis,” undercutting the ability of the Union to project even moral power externally.

]]>