Skip to main content

Nederlander zegt overtuigend 'nee' tegen Europese grondwet

"(Novum) - Nederland heeft woensdag een duidelijk 'nee' laten horen op de vraag of de Europese grondwet moet worden ingevoerd. Rond middernacht waren bijna alle stemmen gesteld. Daaruit bleek dat 61,6 procent van de kiezers de komst van de grondwet verwerpt, terwijl 38,4 procent voorstander is. De opkomst bedroeg 62,8 procent."

What the referenda are showing is a clear lack of trust in the "European Project".

The big question, however, is whether there will be any attempt to draw in the European Institutions and reduce their powers.

One of the things I have always seen as an objective would be to be much more restrictive about the "competancies" of the European Union. There needs to be a mechanism to determine subsidiarity which has a bias against centralisation rather than a bias for centralisation.

Clearly anyone working in the EU institutions will be more positively inclined towards them.

One suggestion I have proposed is that a directive is not issued unless

a) There is no opposition .... or
b) There is a clear and defined demand for the resolution of a defined problem

It is clear that the Single European Act of 1987 was required and that an element of majoritarian and qualified majoritarian voting is needed. Moving emphasis onto the European Parliament for determining decisions is helpful. However, the competancy of the European Union needs to be restricted. One restriction that works is the requirement for unanimity in the European Council. However, a wider restriction is really needed.

The key point is that the European Parliament is not the appropriate body to decide on matters of subsidiarity.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

I have only just found this one which I think is accurately reported below (but if it is not please give me an accurate report).

KING’S BENCH DIVISION

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

November 9 1923

Editor’s comments in bold.

Here, the magistrates’ clerk retired with the bench when they were considering a charge of dangerous driving. The clerk belonged to a firm of solicitors acting in civil proceedings for the other party to the accident. It was entirely irrelevant that there had been no evidence of actual influence brought to bear on the magistrates, and the conviction was duly quashed.

LORD HEWART CJ:
It is clear that the deputy clerk was a member of the firm of solicitors engaged in the conduct of proceedings for damages against the applicant in respect of the same collision as that which gave rise to the charge that the justices were considering. It is said, and, no doubt, truly, that when that gentleman retired in the usual way with the justices, taking with him the…

Statement re Police investigation into Harassment and Perverting the Course of Justice.

It was recently reported that the police were not investigating the allegations of Perverting the Course of Justice that I had made. This came as a surprise to me as I had been told for some time that my allegations were to be considered once the VRR had been rejected. I have now had a very constructive meeting with Staffordshire police on Friday 29th June 2018 and the misunderstandings have been resolved. At that meeting the evidence relating to the perversion of the course of justice and the harassment campaign against my family were discussed. The police have decided to investigate both the perversion of the course of justice and also the harassment campaign. I would like to thank them for changing their decision and I accept their apology for the way in which they did that. I am also in possession of written confirmation a police force would be investigating allegations that a vulnerable witness has been harassed for trying to expose the campaign against me. I hope that the aut…