Campaign against the EU Constitution project

THE WORLD IS LARGER THAN THE EU - VOTE NO

Political main points in the campaign of the Red-Green Alliance against the EU Constitution project

Adopted by the National Executive on September 20, 2003

The alternative to the EU is democracy

The EU Constitution means more Union and less democracy. Majority voting will be extended into almost all areas, transferring more power to the central institutions of the EU. Adopting the EU Constitution implies taking a further step undermining the democratic influence of the citizens on decision-making.

Representative democracy is defined in the draft Constitution as a fundamental principle, and the citizens are enabled to participate in the democratic life of the Union. All topics are to be "decided upon as openly as possible". However, there are no provisions ensuring participatory democracy or openness.

The Commission, a non-elected institution, still retains the monopoly of making proposals for EU legislation. The chairman of the Commission is bestowed with almost absolute power. The co-decision procedure between the Council and the Parliament remains the same. After EU enlargement the European Parliament can consist of up to 736 members. However, this relatively small number of parliamentary members will never be able to represent the more than 450 million inhabitants of EU member states.

The Constitution introduces the possibility of forming "European political parties" endowed with privileges over national or regional political parties, which may lose political influence. This will further erode even representative democracy.

The Constitution bestows upon the EU Court treaty primacy over national laws in the areas covered by the Constitution.

The small EU member states will lose influence compared to the bigger member states. This will undermine their national democracy. The so called intensified co-operation mentioned in the Constitution means that a number of member states – no less than a third of the EU-countries – can intensify their co-operation in view of "furthering the realisation of the objectives of the Union", i.e. increasing the integration of the EU, despite the wishes of other EU countries.

National parliaments may complain if they consider that the Commission breaches the "principle of subsidiarity". This right of objection is practically inapplicable. And the Commission is in no way obliged to comply with it.

The area of justice and internal affairs of the EU is going to be transferred from the intergovernmental level to the supranational level. This has already been prepared by framework decisions. However, in justice affairs Denmark has an opt-out, which has already been undermined by the Danish Government in several cases. For instance Denmark is taking part in the Schengen co-operation, which has been created to build a "Fortress Europe" in order to keep out refugees and immigrants.

This may imply an extension of police co-operation (the Europol) and a possible introduction of EU legislation such as the anti-terrorist laws and the common European arrest warrant. The measures already taken in this respect have contributed to undermining the legal protection of the individual.

The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights is written into the Constitution. This is giving primacy to EU law over the European Court of Human Rights and national laws. (i.e. national constitutions), thereby undermining the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg and transferring competence to a different court, the EU Court, which is not politically independent, but designed to promote European integration and market economy.

Furthermore, the EU charter contains a provision guaranteeing "intellectual copyright", designed to protect the interests of the multinational corporations.

The Red-Green Alliance wishes to extend democracy and the possibility of more popular participation and influence, as well as full openness, on decision making. We say no to the European Constitution, because it means more Union and less democracy. We say no to more majority voting. We say no to giving primacy to EU legislation over national laws. We say no to the building of a European area of justice and police authority. We say no to transferring to the EU Court the competence of enforcing human rights within EU.

No to rearmament and to a European superpower

Adopting this Constitution will create the institutional, constitutional and political framework of a European federal state with a president and a common foreign and security policy among other things. The formation of a common defence and a common military force under the authority of the EU is part of the constitution. Constitutionally the member states commit themselves to " undertake progressively to improve their military capabilities", i.e. to rearm. By this step the role of the UN as a security policy agent is clearly undermined. If the UN provides a seal of approval, it’s OK. If not, one is free to act on one´s own initiative regardless of the UN.

The EU will be a legal person, making the EU the state doing negotiations and replacing the member states, as is already the case in the WTO. There is no doubt that this will be used to create a European superpower enforcing its interests and competing for markets and influence all over the world.

The Red-Green Alliance is opposed to forming a European superpower and rejects a common EU Foreign and Security Policy as well as a common defence. We don’t want the EU to become an imperialist power acting as a policeman around the world. We prefer free co-operation among states on an intergovernmental basis, including the option of closer co-operation where and when they might chose to do so. We wish to promote democratic international co-operation emphasising full employment, solidarity, human rights, equal opportunities and a healthy environment.

Yes to welfare, No to the EU and money power

The EU is the driving force in promoting neo-liberalism in Europe: through the creation of the "single market", securing the free movement of persons, goods, services and capital (i.e. more competition to promote corporate capital interest), and the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) with its tight financial policies entailing social cuts and privatisation. These policies have widened the social gap within the EU as well as the applicant countries, and the gap between women and men, and have led to increasing social exclusion and poverty.

This economic policy is included in the new Constitution. For the first time an international constitution is going to apply in Denmark, according to which the capitalist market system with its "single market" becomes part of the national constitution. Free movement is a basic right in the EU Constitution. The EU will control of the financial and employment policies of the member states. The EU will be able to take the initiative of co-ordinating social and labour market policies. By harmonising consumers’ taxes and corporation taxes the first step has been taken towards creating a common tax system within the EU. Monetary policy will be determined by the European Central Bank (where there is no democratic influence whatsoever), which makes price stability the main priority of monetary policy (anti-inflationary/monetary policies). The EU will have sole competence of forming trade policies.

The Red-Green Alliance wishes to break with the basic principles of the single market and with the neo-liberal policies. Instead we wish to expand the universal welfare system, to build up a well functioning public sector, a fair policy of distribution, and a labour market policy for the benefit of wage earners and the unemployed. We wish to be able to restrict the influence and power of multinationals and transnational capital and to extend the democratic influence of the citizens on economic and social policies.

The Danish opt-outs

Our government will shamelessly use of the Danish opt-outs in order to annoy the No forces. If they get the "Yes" they are hoping for in the referendum on the EU Constitution, they will then be able to drain them of their content and finally abolish them. The Red-Green Alliance wishes to safeguard the opt-outs. We would even like to see them more rigorous. But we don’t see even a chance of that happening looking at the political balance of forces in the Danish Parliament. And – even more important – talking about the opt-outs must under no circumstances weaken the mobilisation for a No to the EU Constitution.

The best way to safeguard the opt-outs is by voting No to the EU Constitution.

After the NO

The "Yes" side will no doubt explain the referendum as a vote between two clear alternatives: They will "threaten" us that a "No" vote will force us to leave the EU,. This is a scare campaign with the sole purpose of frightening people to vote "Yes" to the EU Constitution. We will argue that after a "No", the treaty will have to be annulled, as it must be ratified by all the member states in order to come into force. In case of a No vote all political parties and popular movements will have to discuss how to tackle the situation. Of course the Red-Green Alliance has its own visions of European co-operation in this process.

Our program says: "The Red-Green Alliance favours a Danish withdrawal from the European Union and will work to create realistic alternatives to Danish membership of the EU. However, Danish withdrawal from the EU is merely an intermediate aim in the process of creating a different Europe, in which solidarity, democracy and ecology are the fundamental principles. This will as well imply a basically different form of international co-operation in a world without aggressive super-powers. Therefore the Red-Green Alliance would like to see a Danish withdrawal from the EU starting a snowball-effect leading to a break-up of the EU." These visions will of course be part of the discussions of how Denmark is to tackle the situation after a "No".

Until the referendum on the EU Constitution our most important task will be to mobilise for at "No". It is a special task to attract the numerous Social Democrats and Socialist Peoples Party supporters who feel betrayed by their parties and may be wavering which course to take.

If a majority of Danish voters vote "No", it will indicate first of all that they do not want further integration within the EU. They will be rejecting they a European federal state with a common army, a common judicial system, a common police and so forth. This will first of all be a problem for the Government and the "Yes" majority of political parties in the Danish Parliament. If the result of the referendum is a "No", we must insist that the treaty is annulled. Anything else would be a breach of all former treaties. Our opponents have tried to counter our point of view, by arguing that a narrow majority in one country should not be able to decide the political future of the rest of Europe. However, Denmark is far from being the only country where the ratification of the draft EU Constitution would meet with obstacles . EU criticism is growing in many places, on the left in particular.

After a "No" the Danish Government would find itself in a completely precarious parliamentary situation, having brought itself in a position conflicting with the popular majority in regard to such an important matter as the EU. Our logical demand from the Government would be for it to resign and call an election. A "No" would change the political agenda.

Life is too short for the European Union - vote "No"..