{"id":507,"date":"2005-05-24T14:28:00","date_gmt":"2005-05-24T14:28:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.jcm.org.uk\/blog\/2005\/05\/24\/the-french-referendum-debate\/"},"modified":"2008-02-27T13:18:45","modified_gmt":"2008-02-27T13:18:45","slug":"the-french-referendum-debate","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/jcm.org.uk\/blog\/2005\/05\/the-french-referendum-debate\/","title":{"rendered":"The French referendum debate"},"content":{"rendered":"

The French press, unsurprisingly considering their hard-fought referendum is due at the end of the week, has been analysing the EU like never before, with major newspapers Le Monde<\/a> and Le Figaro<\/a> devoting reams of copy to dissecting that damned constitution from every possible angle. It’s a great shame more of the French discussion isn’t filtering to this side of the Channel, ‘cos there’s some interesting ideas and interpretations being kicked around.<\/p>\n

Le Figaro currently reports the two sides split 53% to 47%<\/a>, to the “Non” vote’s advantage, though also notes that 29% still haven’t made their final choice with just four days to go. These figures are based on an expected turnout of 67%.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, Val\u00ef\u00bf\u00bdry Giscard d’Estaing – old adversary of Roy Jenkins while he headed the Commission and the man responsible for drawing up the bloody thing in the first place – has been on the attack to win his fellow countrymen over to his baby<\/a>. He actually makes some rather good points (as well as some overblown and unjustified ones, which I’ll neglect to quote), and ones which would apply just as well to Britain, with the appropriate name substitutions, as to France (my substandard translations):<\/p>\n

“1. Il n’existe aucune possibilit\u00ef\u00bf\u00bd d’aboutir \u00ef\u00bf\u00bd un consensus des vingt-cinq Etats europ\u00ef\u00bf\u00bdens sur les th\u00ef\u00bf\u00bdmes, d’ailleurs contradictoires, avanc\u00ef\u00bf\u00bds au cours de la campagne du r\u00ef\u00bf\u00bdf\u00ef\u00bf\u00bdrendum en France par les partisans du non. Nos partenaires estiment que la Convention est d\u00ef\u00bf\u00bdj\u00ef\u00bf\u00bd all\u00ef\u00bf\u00bde tr\u00ef\u00bf\u00bds loin \u00ef\u00bf\u00bd et pour certains trop loin \u00ef\u00bf\u00bd en direction des demandes fran\u00ef\u00bf\u00bdaises. Nous n’obtiendrons pas mieux. Nous obtiendrions sans doute moins.”<\/i><\/p>\n

“1. There is no possibility of a consensus among the twenty-five European States on the areas, which are often contradictory, advanced during the course of the French referendum’s No campaign. Our [EU] partners feel that the Convention has already conceded much – and for some too much – towards French requests. We will not obtain better. We would undoubtedly obtain worse.”<\/p>\n

“2. Le projet de Constitution ne menace personne. Son seul objet est de corriger les d\u00ef\u00bf\u00bdfauts actuels de l’Union europ\u00ef\u00bf\u00bdenne, jug\u00ef\u00bf\u00bde trop compliqu\u00ef\u00bf\u00bde, peu efficace, et insuffisamment d\u00ef\u00bf\u00bdmocratique. Le rejet du projet nous ram\u00ef\u00bf\u00bdnerait purement et simplement \u00ef\u00bf\u00bd la situation actuelle, qui fait l’objet de toutes les critiques, sans nouvel espoir d’en sortir.”<\/i><\/p>\n

“2. The Constitutional project does not threaten anybody. Its only objective is to correct the current deficiencies of the European Union, which is considered too complicated, inefficient and insufficiently democratic. Rejection of the constitution would purely and simply take us back to the current situation, which is the source of all these criticisms, without any hope of relief.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Meanwhile, in Le Monde, Pierre de Lauzun (a deputy manager of the French Banking Federation, apparently) has an interesting alternative take<\/a> where we’d all be better off scrapping the current constitution and starting all over again:
\n<\/i><\/p>\n

“Au fond, on sait que l’Europe ne se construit que sur la base des Etats-nations. C’est pour cela que ce qu’on appelle Constitution est un trait\u00ef\u00bf\u00bd international. Mais on n’en tire pas la conclusion : le mythe de l’Europe substitution est une utopie, et l’Europe est d’abord la mise en commun d’outils, dont les v\u00ef\u00bf\u00bdritables autorit\u00ef\u00bf\u00bds politiques, nationales, ont jug\u00ef\u00bf\u00bd qu’il valait mieux les mettre en \u00ef\u00bf\u00bduvre ensemble que s\u00ef\u00bf\u00bdpar\u00ef\u00bf\u00bds. Et, si on voulait aller plus loin, il faudrait d\u00ef\u00bf\u00bdfinir positivement ce que les peuples d’Europe ont en commun, objectivement, et cesser de proc\u00ef\u00bf\u00bdder par construction abstraite.<\/p>\n

“Mais on a pr\u00ef\u00bf\u00bdf\u00ef\u00bf\u00bdr\u00ef\u00bf\u00bd poursuivre le mythe politique. Faute de contenu, la solution retenue est donc proc\u00ef\u00bf\u00bddurale : prendre des principes abstraits et juger de toute d\u00ef\u00bf\u00bdcision \u00ef\u00bf\u00bd partir d’une d\u00ef\u00bf\u00bdclinaison de ces principes. Le proc\u00ef\u00bf\u00bddural et le juridique envahissent enti\u00ef\u00bf\u00bdrement le champ du d\u00ef\u00bf\u00bdbat. Il ne faut donc pas s’\u00ef\u00bf\u00bdtonner de l’indiff\u00ef\u00bf\u00bdrence, et parfois de l’hostilit\u00ef\u00bf\u00bd des peuples, malgr\u00ef\u00bf\u00bd leur bienveillance a priori. L’Europe est ce paradoxe d’une construction non d\u00ef\u00bf\u00bdmocratique mais \u00ef\u00bf\u00bd fondement d\u00ef\u00bf\u00bdmocratique. Elle reste plus le fruit d’une volont\u00ef\u00bf\u00bd des \u00ef\u00bf\u00bdlites que d’une construction populaire. Chaque \u00ef\u00bf\u00bdtape a \u00ef\u00bf\u00bdt\u00ef\u00bf\u00bd d\u00ef\u00bf\u00bdcid\u00ef\u00bf\u00bde en haut et ratifi\u00ef\u00bf\u00bde au mieux a posteriori. D\u00ef\u00bf\u00bdmocratique, son fonctionnement ne l’est pas plus, malgr\u00ef\u00bf\u00bd le’Parlement europ\u00ef\u00bf\u00bden’ : il n’y a pas de d\u00ef\u00bf\u00bdbat public entre deux \u00ef\u00bf\u00bdquipes ou deux programmes, sanctionn\u00ef\u00bf\u00bd par les urnes, dans un espace politique commun.”<\/i><\/p>\n

“At heart, they know that Europe is not built on the basis of nation states. It’s for that reason that what they call the Constitution is actually an international treaty. But they do not draw the right conclusion from this: the myth of substituting Europe is a Utopia; Europe is above all the pooling of tools, whose true political authorities – national – judged were better to implement together than separately. And, if they want to go further, it is necessary positively to define what the people of Europe have in common, objectively, and to cease trying to proceed with a constitution that’s so abstract.”<\/p>\n

“But they prefer to continue with the political myth. Lacking content, the adopted solution has become procedural: taking abstract principles and judging any decisions based on their variation from them. The procedural and legal approach entirely invades the language of debate. We should not therefore be surprised by the indifference and sometimes hostility of the people, in spite of their previous benevolence. Europe is the paradox of a being an undemocratic construction based on a democratic foundation. It remains more the fruit of the will of the elites than of the people. Each stage was decided from above and was ratified, as well as it could be, after the fact. Being democratic is not its aim, in spite of the European Parliament’: there is no public discussion between two parties or two programmes, sanctioned by the ballot boxes, in a common political space.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

These are just two small examples from one day’s press coverage, and d’Estaing is probably a poor choice to give an indication of the level of debate. In terms of detail, genuine desire to understand the implications, and respect for its audience’s intelligence it far surpasses anything this country saw in the run-up to the general election (remember Polly sodding Toynbee and her “nose peg” bollocks?), and has doubtless already surpassed whatever passes for a debate over the constitution in the run up to our own referendum – should it ever happen.<\/p>\n

Of course, round the edges there is political spin from both sides, and on the extremes have been name-calling, muck-slinging and stupidness, but the central debate itself has not felt the need to resort to simplifying what is not a simple matter. There has been little of the recent British tendency to focus in on single issues at the expence of the wider picture.<\/p>\n

The French people are being genuinely well served by their press and are responding with genuine interest and engagement as a result in a debate which, in this country, has yet to catch the interest of the Prime Minister, let alone the man in the street. Vive la france, as they say.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The French press, unsurprisingly considering their hard-fought referendum is due at the end of the week, has been analysing the EU like never before, with major newspapers Le Monde and Le Figaro devoting reams of copy to dissecting that damned … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[14],"tags":[178,179],"class_list":["post-507","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-france","tag-eu","tag-france"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/jcm.org.uk\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/507","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/jcm.org.uk\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/jcm.org.uk\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jcm.org.uk\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jcm.org.uk\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=507"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/jcm.org.uk\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/507\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/jcm.org.uk\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=507"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jcm.org.uk\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=507"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jcm.org.uk\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=507"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}