[%TAGS (074db819ec% %074db819ec) %]

(074db819ec% subtitle %074db819ec)


(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)chronological(074db819ec% END %074db819ec) (074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Thread(074db819ec% END %074db819ec) 
(074db819ec% IF user.email && action == 'arc' %074db819ec)
(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Reply to sender(074db819ec%END%074db819ec) (074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)to list(074db819ec%END%074db819ec)

(074db819ec% IF user.email == 'ehj@cleosan.com' || is_owner %074db819ec) (074db819ec% END %074db819ec)
(074db819ec% END %074db819ec)

PILCH Hartmut wrote:
At

        http://a2e.de/ffii/epla/cpedu/parl/

I have developped some reasoning to support a request in a draft Call To
Action.

You suggest:

   - The European Parliament would serve as the upper chamber of the
     EPLA parliament. It would not be the European Parliament as such,
     just the European Parliament acting in the function of the
     legislative organ of the EPLA treaty.

and

   - In this way, the member states would retain all the sovereignty
     that they retain in the current European Union.

and

   - Rather than consolidate these treatise into one and thereby create
     an new state-like moloch with a life of its own, the member states
     should, by means of accumulation of further treaties on special
     areas such as patent law, try to improve the current structure.


Could you elaborate on why "accumulation of further treaties on special areas" would be less moloch-like than a new constitution? And also, who would be promoting such treaties? National MPs? Prime ministers? MEPs?

And what other areas do you have in mind?

//Erik



(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Archive powered by(074db819ec%END%074db819ec) MhonArc 2.6.16.

(074db819ec%TAGS [% %]%074db819ec)