<nelson> ha ha </nelson>
Now, I’m staunchly pro-European (ending centurys of internicine warfare can’t be bad, right?), but I’m really glad that the French have rejected the constitution, and I hope that the Dutch vote shortly will finish it off. Not because I think having a written constitution governing the EU would be bad, but because I think ~400 pages of intense legalise is not appropriate for a constitution. I think one of the strengths of the US constiution is that it’s reasonably short, easily understood by most people and, most importantly, contains not just the mechanisms for governance, but the principles upon which that government is to operate. I’m not saying that it’s perfect, but it’s a damn sight better than what we were being offered.
I think a (much) shorter document which enshrined democratic government as the only legitimate government, which recognised that our freedom is best protected through honest, fair and equitable partnership with other free peoples, that protected our basic rights against authoritarian government and was as much about the responsibilities of a government to it’s people as it was about it’s powers over them would easily find acceptance across all member states and would thus provide the necessary framework to take The Project forward with a legitimacy and commonality of purpouse which has been sadly lacking from the (corrupt, undemocratic) state which it is in today.
Certain points would, of course, prove trickier than others, particularly the necessary elevation of the European Parliament as the supreme decision making body and the associated removal of the Council of
Cronys Ministers which would probably upset some people, but it would, should, must be doable.