[Pierre-Marie Baty]

Argument n°3:
------------
A Constitution shall be REVISABLE.


ALL the Constitutions have a reasonable procedure of revision. One can reasonably not lock oneself up ALONG WITH the future generations in an institutional lockout that is the product of the epoch in which we are living. One thus forethinks of parliament majorities, petitions, veto rights, anything as long as we are certain that the Constitution will succeed in evolving in the future to always guarantee the Common Good, which means roughly the interest of the majority of the nation.

This Constitution DOES have a revisional procedure, goddamn yes : to change anything one must
1°) gather the UNANIMITY of the member States' governments,
2°) gather the UNANIMITY of the nations they represent.

Which comes down to saying that at TWENTY FIVE States with different or even completely contradictory interests and affinities, we will NEVER BE ABLE TO CHANGE THE SLIGHTEST COMMA IN IT. If in a hen house you have twenty-four hens and a fox, to find some unanimity in there you gotta wake up early ! Now, take out some hens and put in one or two foxes. Here's the Europe.

The Giscard Convention has given birth to a concrete block. Never seen before, anywhere.

I don't know if you realize that we are readying to sign the order of our own STRAIT JACKET, and YOUR CHILDREN'S !!!

Now, those who would still want to vote yes because they are repeated over and over again that this Constitution is not perfect - okay, but that it represents a "progress" compared to the previous treaties, I hope these people are realizing that they are commiting hara-kiri. Nowt can supercede a Constitution. No text. No treaty. This is THE ultimate text in a democracy. It HAS to be as perfect as possible from the start.

Some months ago, the "yes" vote was taken as granted. Now, we're being explained that France must not become the "black sheep of Europe", that the Union cannot be stopped regarding the other member states, ALL the media (but the communists ones), TV, radio, newspaper, call for a "yes" vote and certain personalities even proclaim to be persuaded that the French will rally a "yes" of reason.

I also hope everybody realizes that this is a manipulation.

Who owns the media ? What type of individuals are these ? Are they rich ? Poor ? Do they care more about solidarity or their own interests ?

We are told "if the approval fails, we'll all get back to the previous treaty" (which is particularly horrible). Wrong. This treaty has a horizon of validity that stops in 2009, that is to say that before four years, the Union will need to ratify another one (hopefully this time, a TRUE Constitution with the election of a TRUE Constituent assembly !). On the other hand, this "Constitutional treaty", if it passes, not only will supercede all the national treaties, but its validity will have NO limitation in time ! To break it, one will need to break EUROPE HERSELF !

Historical.