Constitutional Deception

We’ve referred occasionally to the draft European Constitution. In this post we look a little more closely at its formation and its conversion into the Lisbon Treaty after the draft was rejected in referendums in France and The Netherlands in 2005.

The full text of the draft Constitution can be downloaded [1]. Here is the Preamble, which has all the lush and readily deniable features we have come to expect from EU propaganda:

We the People of the European Union, united in our diversity, common history, and shared values and future, in order to form an ever-closer Union, ensure the fundamental rights of all, promote solidarity, development and the general welfare, and secure a free, peaceful and sustainable future for generations to come, establish and adopt this Constitution for the European Union.

From the terms of the draft Constitution:

All legislative powers shall be vested in a Congress of the European Union, which shall consist of two Houses: a Parliament and a Senate…

In accordance with this Constitution, each House shall decide on its rules of procedure and be the judge of the election, results, behaviour and qualifications of its own Members. A majority of each shall constitute a quorum for all votes, elections and other decisions.

The following quotations from the draft illustrate clearly the intention for the EU to become a fully-fledged European government:

…a temporary authorisation of military action may be delegated to the Government of the European Union…

The Cabinet of Ministers shall consist of the Prime Minister, as Head of Government, and of the Federal Ministers.

Each branch of Government shall ensure the full disclosure of all professional and volunteer activities…

Even some supporters of a European Constitution have expressed reservations:

“…one of the reasons the 2005 “Treaty for a European Constitution” was destined to fail. With its forty-four titles and sections and its four hundred and forty-eight articles, not only did it give everyone something to disagree with, but it tried too hard to set in stone the needless complexity of the current treaties, which, as we go along, have become more bloated and obscure. As the EU today, it was unreadable.” [2]

The authors do want a constitution for Europe, just not the one that was proposed.

Giuliano Amato, was an author of the rejected EU Constitution in 2007. He was Vice-President of the Constitutional Convention of the European Union. Dr. Amato served as Prime Minister of Italy twice, from 1992 to 1993 and from 2000 to 2001. He is currently the Vice President of the Italian Constitutional Court. Referring to the Lisbon Treaty, he said:

The proposals in the original constitutional treaty are practically unchanged. They have simply been dispersed through old treaties in the form of amendments. Why this subtle change? Above all, to head off any threat of referenda by avoiding any form of constitutional vocabulary.”

Nothing [will be] directly produced by the prime ministers because they feel safer with the unreadable thing. They can present it better in order to avoid dangerous referendums”.

Open Europe director Neil O’Brien. “The idea of just changing the name of the Constitution and pretending that it is just another complex treaty shows a total contempt for voters.”

Supporters of “ever closer union” have chosen to interpret the no votes as protests against economic liberalisation, votes against enlargement, and even as votes for greater powers for the EU – in short, everything except a vote against deeper integration.” [3]

Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, also an author of the rejected EU Constitution. He died in 2020, regarded as the epitome of a French-European elite.

Public opinion will be led to adopt, without knowing it, the proposals that we dare not present to them directly … All the earlier proposals will be in the new text, but will be hidden and disguised in some way.” Giscard d’Estaing, June 2007.

The idea for a European government originated with Jean Monnet and others, during and after the first World War.

Europe’s nations should be guided towards the superstate without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps, each disguised as having an economic purpose, but which will eventually and irreversibly lead to federation.” (attributed to Jean Monnet but see [4])

We know that nine out of 10 people will not have read the Constitution and will vote on the basis of what politicians and journalists say. More than that, if the answer is No, the vote will probably have to be done again, because it absolutely has to be Yes. ” — Jean-Luc Dehaene, Former Belgian Prime Minister and Vice-President of the EU Convention, Irish Times, 2nd June 2004 [5]

“This Constitution is, in spite of all justified calls for further regulations, a milestone. Yes, it is more than that. The EU Constitution is the birth certificate of the United States of Europe. The Constitution is not the end point of integration, but the framework for – as it says in the preamble – an ever closer union.” — Hans Martin Bury, the German Minister for Europe, debate in the Bundestag, Die Welt, 25 February 2005 [5]






Some further reading:

From our blog: Treaties Examined in detail


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.