Malcolm Rivera
In 2005, France and the Netherlands rejected the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (TCE), commonly referred to as the European Constitution. This unratified international treaty was intended to create a consolidated constitution for the European Union (EU). The TCE would have replaced existing EU treaties with a single text, given legal force to the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and expanded qualified majority voting. The French rejected the treaty with 55% voting against it, while the Dutch rejected it with 61% voting against.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Countries that rejected the EU Constitution in 2005 | France, Netherlands |
| Date of Rejection | France: 29 May 2005, Netherlands: 1 June 2005 |
| Percentage of Voters Rejecting the Constitution | France: 54.87% to 55%, Netherlands: 61% to 61.6% |
| Voter Turnout | France: 69%, Netherlands: 62% to 63.3% |
| Reasons for Rejection | Fear of immigration, loss of national sovereignty, dissatisfaction with the government, negative perception of "Yes" campaign, etc. |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
France rejected the EU constitution in 2005
On 29 May 2005, France rejected the proposed constitution of the European Union (EU) in a referendum. The result was a victory for the "no" campaign, with 54.87% to 55% of voters rejecting the treaty on a turnout of 69%. France was the second country to go to the polls in a referendum on ratification, after Spain approved the treaty by a wide margin in February. However, France became the first country to reject the treaty.
The French electorate's decision to reject the EU constitution came as a shock to many commentators in France, especially since France is one of the founding members of the EU and has always been a country that has taken its European credentials seriously. In the weeks leading up to the referendum, the "No" campaign consistently held the lead, with opinion polls indicating that the "no" vote would be victorious. However, supporters of the constitution, including President Jacques Chirac, claimed that France's standing in Europe would be weakened and that there would be no Plan B.
The French referendum on the EU constitution was held during the presidency of Jacques Chirac, who decided to hold a referendum. This decision was influenced by the announcement that the United Kingdom intended to hold a vote. Chirac and his supporters also believed that the referendum would be an easy victory and an expression of confidence in him as President. Additionally, the referendum was expected to have a divisive effect on the opposition Socialist Party. Initially, the adoption of a constitution was downplayed as a simple "tidying-up" exercise that did not require a popular vote. However, as more EU member states announced their intention to hold a referendum, France came under pressure to do the same.
The French rejection of the EU constitution, along with a similar result in the Dutch referendum, damaged the legitimacy of the Constitution. However, subsequent EU Presidency holders vowed to continue with the ratification process. The French parliament later overrode the "No-vote" by approving a new version of the text, the Lisbon Treaty, which was voted on by the Parliament without a referendum.
Electrons and Charge: Understanding Coulomb's Law
You may want to see also
The Netherlands rejected the EU constitution in 2005
The Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (TCE), commonly referred to as the European Constitution, was an international treaty intended to create a consolidated constitution for the European Union (EU). It was signed on 29 October 2004 by representatives of the then 25 member states of the European Union. The treaty was subjected to referendums across the European Union, with Spain being the first country to hold a referendum on the Constitution. On 20 February 2005, Spanish voters backed the treaty with 76% voting in favour.
However, on 29 May 2005, the French people rejected the Constitution by a margin of 55% to 45% on a turnout of 69%. This was followed by the Dutch rejection of the EU Constitution on 1 June 2005, with 61.6% of voters saying "no" on a turnout of 63.3%. This was the first national referendum in the Netherlands in over two hundred years. The referendum was consultative and not binding on the government, meaning that despite the electorate rejecting the Constitution, it could theoretically still be ratified by the States-General. However, the Dutch government had said that it would abide by a decisive result, provided turnout exceeded 30%.
The Dutch rejection of the EU Constitution was influenced by various factors. There was widespread disillusionment with the country's political elite, as the centre-right coalition government led by Jan Peter Balkenende was pushing through unpopular cuts in public spending. The ""Yes" campaign was also perceived as aggressive and ruthless, with controversial television broadcasts provoking controversy by raising the spectre of war and chaos in Europe if the Constitution was rejected. Some "Yes" campaign advertisements featured emotive images of the Holocaust and Srebrenica Massacre, which were received very poorly by the public.
Additionally, there were fears among the Dutch people about the potential impact of the Constitution on their country's influence in the EU and concerns about being dominated by the powerhouses of the European Union, such as the United Kingdom, France, and Germany. The debate over the accession of Turkey to the European Union and the enlargement of the EU to include Eastern European countries also played a role, with fears of an increase in immigration and outsourcing of jobs to new member states.
The Dutch rejection of the EU Constitution, coming just three days after the French rejection, dealt a severe blow to the project of greater European integration. It exposed questions and concerns about the development of the European project and contributed to a sense of crisis for the EU.
Texas Constitution: Can Atheists Hold Office?
You may want to see also
The French referendum result surprised commentators
The French referendum result on the EU constitution in 2005 surprised commentators. France was one of the EU's founding members and had always been a country that took its European credentials seriously. From the outset, the country's political elites had been at the forefront of closer European cooperation. It seemed almost unthinkable that France would be the first of the EU's 25 nation states to say 'no' to the constitution. However, on 29 May 2005, the French people rejected the constitution by a margin of 54.87% to 45.13% on a turnout of 69%. This rejection, coupled with a similar result in the Dutch referendum, seriously damaged the legitimacy of the Constitution.
France's rejection of the Constitution left the treaty with an uncertain future, with other EU member states pledging to continue with their own arrangements for ratification. The result was surprising to political commentators, with those in favour of the "yes" vote having received 71% of mentions on television between 1 January and 31 March. The "yes" campaign had warned that a rejection would raise the chances of war and that France would become "the Switzerland of Europe".
The possible consequences of a "No" vote were highly debated in France before the referendum. Proponents of the Constitution, including Jacques Chirac, claimed that France's standing in Europe would be considerably weakened. Pro-EU campaigners for a "No" vote argued that the Constitution would be renegotiated. "No" vote campaigners, particularly the prominent socialist Laurent Fabius, labelled this option "Plan B". Campaigners for a "Yes" vote stated that there would be no such Plan B and that the 'European project' could be brought to a standstill for at least ten years.
The reasons for the French rejection of the EU constitution were varied. Many voters feared a loss of national sovereignty, immigration, and relocation of firms to European countries with cheaper workforces. Others objected to the perceived lack of democratic accountability and the threat they considered the Constitution posed to the European social model. Some leftist critiques focused on the directive dealing with the liberalization of services, known as the Bolkestein directive. This directive was meant to liberalize the supply of services inside the EU.
Founding Fathers' Vision: Preventing Tyranny in America
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The Dutch referendum was the first in over 200 years
France and the Netherlands rejected the European Union (EU) Constitution in 2005. On May 29, 2005, the French people rejected the constitution by a margin of 55% to 45% on a 69% turnout. On June 1, 2005, the Dutch people rejected the constitution by a margin of 61% to 39% on a 62% turnout.
The Dutch referendum was the first national referendum in over 200 years. The vote was consultative and non-binding, meaning that despite the electorate rejecting the Constitution, it could theoretically still be ratified by the States-General. The government did say, however, that it would abide by a decisive result, provided turnout exceeded 30%. Official results say that 61.6% of voters rejected the Constitution, on a turnout of 63.3%.
The referendum was held just three days after the French referendum on the Constitution resulted in its rejection. Because all EU member states needed to ratify the treaty for it to take effect, some regarded the Dutch referendum as irrelevant. However, Dutch campaigners for a "Yes" vote appealed to the electorate to avoid damaging the Netherlands' standing in Europe in the way that the French result was perceived to have weakened France's position. Before the plebiscite, many "No" campaigners expressed the view that French rejection of the treaty would encourage Dutch voters to follow suit. A second "No" vote in a referendum in another of the founding countries of the European Communities was widely regarded as having the power to "kill off" the treaty.
The referendum was the result of a bill drafted by Members of the Dutch parliament: Farah Karimi (GreenLeft), Niesco Dubbelboer (Dutch Labour Party), and Boris van der Ham (D66). The government was not in favor of this bill. During and after the debate about the bill, several political parties made clear how they would act with the different possible outcomes of the referendum. While the referendum was officially non-binding, most parties were willing to follow the outcome. The governing and major opposition parties, making up 80% of the country's members of parliament, all backed the Constitution, along with the major newspapers. The parties of the coalition—Christian Democratic Appeal, People's Party for Freedom and Democracy, and Democrats 66—all campaigned for a "Yes" vote, as did the opposition Labour Party and GreenLeft. The Socialist Party, Pim Fortuyn List, Group Wilders, Reformed Political Party, and ChristianUnion all campaigned for a "No" vote.
Television broadcasts by the "Yes" campaign provoked controversy for raising the spectre of war and chaos in Europe if the Constitution was rejected. The most emotive of the adverts, which featured images of the Holocaust and Srebrenica Massacre, were never aired by the "Yes" campaign, but received national news coverage and were received very poorly. A poll by Maurice de Hond indicated that 30% of the Constitution's opponents used the referendum as an opportunity to demonstrate their dissatisfaction with the government, instead of confining their deliberations to the contents of the treaty. At the time of the referendum, the Netherlands' centre-right coalition government, led by Jan Peter Balkenende, was suffering a period of unpopularity as it tried to push through cuts in public spending, and there was widespread disillusion with the country's political elite. Some matters relating to the European Union that motivated the "No" vote were also not strictly connected to the provisions of the Constitution. The debate over the accession of Turkey to the European Union, as well as countries of Eastern Europe, led to fears of an increase in immigration or an outsourcing of jobs to new member states. Furthermore, the Netherlands had not held a referendum on the euro, and amidst concern that its adoption had led to an increase in the cost of living (combined with Dutch citizens' status as the largest net per capita contributors to the EU), around 30% of voters took the opportunity to "take revenge" on the political establishment for seeking to advance European integration in a manner that did not engage the public to the extent that it could have done. A larger group of voters, however, voted "No" for reasons that were connected to the Constitution itself. 48% thought the new Constitution was worse than the existing treaties, and 44% cited the declining influence of the Netherlands in the EU, with the treaty as an important motivation. Linked to this was a fear of being dominated by the powerhouses of the European Union (particularly the United Kingdom, France, and Germany).
Who Legally Challenged the Vietnam War?
You may want to see also
The French referendum divided the Socialist Party
In 2005, France and the Netherlands rejected the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, commonly referred to as the European Constitution. This treaty was intended to create a consolidated constitution for the European Union (EU).
The French referendum on the EU Constitution divided the Socialist Party (PS). On 1 December 2004, 59% of Socialist Party members approved the proposed European Constitution. However, several well-known members of the Party, including Laurent Fabius, Henri Emmanuelli, and Jean-Luc Mélenchon, asked the public to vote against it. Fabius was ejected from the executive office of the party. The split over the European Constitution, as well as party leaders' competing ambitions to win the presidential nomination in 2007, led the party into disarray.
The PS has historically been a centre-left to left-wing political party with social democratic and pro-European views. However, the referendum revealed a significant minority of members who defended the "No" vote. This division within the party can be understood in the context of the party's evolution since the 1980s. The PS turned into an organisation dominated by elites with strong cultural and economic capital, and its dependence on the state for funding and expertise increased, to the detriment of popular support.
The referendum also exposed an ideological fracture within the party over the issue of Europe, which had emerged following the unexpected defeat of Lionel Jospin in the first round of the 2002 presidential election. This fracture was further deepened by Hollande's proposal to revoke the citizenship of dual-national terrorists in late 2015 and the subsequent promulgation of a law reinforcing the flexibility of the labour market. By 2017, internal dissent was so strong that the incumbent president had to renounce his campaign for the presidency.
The PS has struggled to regain its footing in the years since, with membership decreasing significantly and electoral performance suffering. In the 2022 French presidential race, the socialist candidate Anne Hidalgo won only 1.75% of the vote—the lowest for the Socialist Party since the beginning of the Fifth Republic.
The Left's Betrayal of the Constitution
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
France and the Netherlands.
France's rejection of the EU constitution came as a shock to many commentators, as France was seen as a country that took its European credentials seriously. However, in the weeks leading up to the referendum, the "No" campaign consistently led in opinion polls. The "No" vote was also influenced by anti-Muslim sentiment, opposition to EU membership for Turkey, and fears over losing control of immigration policy.
The Netherlands' rejection of the EU constitution was influenced by dissatisfaction with the government, fears of losing influence in the EU, and a weak "Yes" campaign. Many Dutch citizens also felt bullied by bigger countries and let down by the single currency.
