It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

No Campaign - EU Constitution

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 19 2005 @ 11:19 AM
link   
Well the NO Campaign has kicked off for the EU Constitution referendum in the UK.

No Campaign says the EU Constitution will give us:

More power to the EU
In the modern world we should be making more decisions locally, but the EU Constitution means even more power for remote EU officials.

More cost, more waste
The EU's policies are already costing too much, and there is too much waste in the EU. But the EU Constitution would make things even worse.

A bad deal for Britain
Tony Blair said he didn't want an EU Constitution. But he gave way. The Government got a bad deal for Britain.

Vote no for a better future
A no vote is a vote to keep control - and sort out the EU's real problems.

(information from here )

Link for the Site of Importance:

The Economy

Public Services

Crime, Justice and Police

Immigration and Asylum

Foreign Affairs and Defence

Charter of Fundamental Rights

Government Reasons

EU needs Reform

Look forward to your views on the issue (relating to the UK) and your views on the no campaign.




posted on May, 20 2005 @ 07:15 AM
link   
Well it might not surprise you Wizard but IMO it's the usual tired old faces trying to inject new energy into the same tired old message.

Trust me, when the 'yes' side get going all this 'they're trying to take us over' and 'it's a bit like France & Germany trying to dominate' nonsense will be answered and made to look very very silly, mainly because it is.

Till then the tactic (wisely) is to do what you always do with this kind of situation, let them preach to the already converted endlessly repeating the same stuff.
When you have a situation where the public are aware that they have only heard one side of the story the 'no camp's' endless 'launches' and 'relaunches' are really only talking amongst themselves.



posted on May, 20 2005 @ 07:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
When you have a situation where the public are aware that they have only heard one side of the story the 'no camp's' endless 'launches' and 'relaunches' are really only talking amongst themselves.


Maybe its time for the Yes camp to stop being so afraid and actually do some campaigning.



posted on May, 20 2005 @ 07:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by UK Wizard
Maybe its time for the Yes camp to stop being so afraid and actually do some campaigning.


- It's not "fear" Wizard, it's called keeping your powder dry.

Or would you have called Nelson or Drake who did similar (to extremely effective effect) etc etc afraid?



posted on May, 20 2005 @ 08:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
- It's not "fear" Wizard, it's called keeping your powder dry.


I think they should start using their powder or they'll find that they have to march up hill into cannon grape shots (continuing the gunpowder theme
)



posted on May, 20 2005 @ 09:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by UK Wizard
I think they should start using their powder


- What for?
There is nothing of substance happening just now.

Rather than endlessly argue a vague (and rather meaningless) principle (which is what the 'no camp' would love.....but only on their terms and relating to the bit they choose - ie 'sovereignty' as opposed to the people of the UK's living standards ) we're better off, IMO, waiting to debate actualité.
Cause and effect and concrete reality as opposed to vague rhetoric and 'ideas'.


or they'll find that they have to march up hill into cannon grape shots (continuing the gunpowder theme
)


- Naaaaa, to continue the theme I think we're far nore likely to find they've expended all their ammo on targets that were never actually there and ultimately when the real debate happens they'll be left with little relevant (or new) to say; ie spiked guns!


It's quite striking that when the other side is put people's views start to shift.
Did you see Robin Cook on Question Time, er, I think it was going back a little while now, it was actually pretty surprising but he was given a tirade of anti-EU myth and demolished each point one by one and actually had that member of the audience say smething along the lines of 'we've never heard the case put like you just did and you have changed my mind, I can see there is a lot more to it now'.
Anecdotal I know but then it is a recognisable an widespread theme that the British public recognise that they have not heard the full story.

The anti-EU mob have been at it, seriously, since Thatchers 1989 (anti) Euro election crap about 'waking up to a diet of Brussels'.......this despite Thatcher signing the 'Single Market Act' (the biggest single piece of European integration to date) or Major signing the Maastricht Agreement (the next biggest single piece of European integrationism).

I look forward to the pro side starting (for real). It should be interesting to say the least.
But we'll have to wait for the serious issue to arise seriously.

For instance; there's no point going and boring everyone to death about the Euro because there is absolutely no chance of the UK joining the Euro for at least, hmm, what shall we say? 5yrs, maybe 10?
Which is an entirely different a situation from ruling it out entirely.

If we get a so-called 'EU constitution' referendum next year then we may see this start; but even that is dependant on there being a question to put.
In other words what's the point of a debate and referendum over a constitution if it has already been voted down by another EU country?



posted on May, 20 2005 @ 10:02 AM
link   
NO Campaign, not to be confused with UKIP as they are quite different.

UKIP want out of Europe completely, NO Campaign want to be part of Europe, but in the past have campaigned solely against the Euro, and are now saying they want less integration than the constitution offers.

I wonder if they will make this distinction during the campaigning?

Edit - Just found an interesting article concerning UKIP and NO Campaign, re:referendum on constitution.



Although a majority of the No Campaign supporters have sympathy for the withdrawal policy of UKIP, the No Campaign has set its store by not frightening the horses of big business and has stuck to a policy of "in but out". Mark Croucher, Press Officer for UKIP, admitted to The Sprout that there are difficulties with this position. "It looks like Britain might not have a referendum on the Euro after all. It might be included in a future referendum to endorse Giscard's Constitution", he says. "This would of course leave the official No Campaign in disarray as they are committed to support the EU in principle." UKIP members have long chafed at the greater public recognition and funding that the No Campaign enjoys. Some of the UKIP's leaders feel that this is a chance to force their hand.


Taken from this article. I know its over 2 years old, but still interesting.

[edit on 20-5-2005 by squarepusher]




top topics



 
0

log in

join