European Constitution Referendum in Nederland ?

[Kemal]

Rik, you really think that when you state this in a debate

quote:
This used to be true and used to be a valid argument. However, nowadays in the 21st century, there are way too many well-informed (and usually better-informed than the representatives) educated citizens that this argument is no longer valid.

I usually end a post with IMHO, but this is far beyond MHO and the truth.
Even if there are many people who fit your discription there are too many who don't to generalise the population.

that it is than up to the other party to come up with claims to the contrary?

I'm sorry but if you're going to make claims about knowing the one and only truth, you're going to have to back them up with facts. Simple as that.

Btw, you do realize that at most 25% of the people aged 25-65 has had a VWO or better education? And as Swingue states, the treaty revolves about very difficult matters of state and politics which simply is above the level of education (and, at least as crucial, interest) of the "average Jan" in Holland.

[Rik Meleet]

Kemal: start a new thread on that topic and keep this thread on-topic.

[Kemal]

Well, if these are the answers I get on imho very reasonable questions, yeah I'm out of the thread.

[Swingue]

quote:Originally posted by Kingreno

Of course we need another Referendum. Whether it should have been held in the first place is not an issue. If you ask once and get no you cannot simply not ask the next time.

This is actually the only valid reason to hold another referendum.
Cause we had some idiot politicians 2 years ago to have a referendum there is a valid point in Kingreno's argument here.

For the rest I stay with my earlier comment.
1. it is way to complex to vote on easily in a referendum
2. it is a conservative tool to prevent change
3. it is going to be hijacked by some parties for other reasons

[Matrix]

quote:Originally posted by Rik Meleet

Kemal: start a new thread on that topic and keep this thread on-topic.

But this is the very heart of the matter! There can only be a referendum if you trust that the whole population has enough information and knowledge to properly consider their vote. You say they are, most of the rest of us say they're not.

[Furiey]

quote:Originally posted by Kingreno

Of course we need another Referendum. Whether it should have been held in the first place is not an issue. If you ask once and get no you cannot simply not ask the next time.

Agreed. I remember talking to Rik in the chat at the time of the last vote and saying that despite promising the UK a referendum the government had chickened out and we weren't going to get one. We won't get one now either. We had a referendum to join the European Economic Communtity (which is all it was then) in the first place, but will get nothing now that it is so much more.

[sz_matyas]

If you want an American's opinion (and even if you don't)

1) They put this to a referendum the first time, there should be a clear reason given if they suddenly don't the second time simply because they didn't get the result they wanted the first time. A number of what turned out to be very bad laws have been passed in the Midwest where I live, because of this type of manuvering (the leaders tend to be much more liberal than their constiuents in SD, MN and WI where I have lived).

2) There needs to be some body with potentially conflicting interests to vote on something of this magnitude in my opinion. In the US we require 3/4 of the states to approve any constitutional ammendment keeping a form of check and balance on national legislators. This review process often exposes weaknesses that can then be corrected, removes conflicts of interest and prevents a single influential person in a body from dominating the procedings, knowing he has the votes to do so. Without a system like state approval, I believe that a referendum may be in order.

Still I'm not Dutch and you have some weird laws and systems over there that I have no intention to learn. May as well knock yourselves out for what I care.

[Lt. Killer M]

While I think the ´no´ was not a smart vote, I do have my doubts about the proposed text. But that aside:

If you let people vote, and then go behind their back to do the opposite of what they decided, then that is not democratic. Period.

[Rik Meleet]

quote:Originally posted by Matrix

But this is the very heart of the matter! There can only be a referendum if you trust that the whole population has enough information and knowledge to properly consider their vote. You say they are, most of the rest of us say they're not.

That is not the heart of the matter at all. That was at the heart of the matter 2 years ago when the keeping of the first referendum was discussed. What's at the heart now is that the first referendum gave a clear answer and that is now ignored.
The only way to not have a 2nd referendum is when parliament and government reject the current treaty as well. Since that is what the citizens told them to do so 2 years ago.

[Matrix]

My opinion not to hold another referendum is for the same reasons as two years ago. I find the argument that because there was a first referendum you cannot deny the people a 2nd one a very valid one, however. But doesn't change the fact that I am very glad there isn't gonna come another referendum. (I'm very glad that I'm not a politician responsible for this matter. )

What should happen if the 2nd referendum's vote is also "no"?
The first time there were a zillion different reasons why people voted "no". And all political parties made a different summary out of them. The fact that the treaty has been changed purely cosmetically is IMO the best thing, because it already was a consensus between all different countries within the EU. To demand a more Dutch vision in the treaty is quite selfish. I mean, it's that kind of attitude that makes the European parlamentarians travel between Brussels and Strassbourg all the time! It's that kind of attitude that make the EU pay subsidies to farmers based on reasons that were only valid forty years ago!

Dozens of civil servants and parlamentarians worked on this document, twitched and tweaked it, argued and debated about it, and then it was (or will again be) subject to the people who haven't heard a single argument from those debates and mostly didn't even read the damn thing! But they'll judge based on shallow things like whether the Euro was good for us or not. Christ, even economists haven't figured that out yet.