Tribune | 30/08/2006 

In the French "no" vote on 29 May, it was difficult to separate the domestic message from the European message. We must, however, endeavour to ensure that this serious setback does not lead to an atmosphere of hand-wringing, unease, disappointment and rancour among France's other European partners.

What was behind the "French no" to the European project? I would say that there are two possible interpretations: that the European project is, on the one hand, not popular enough and, on the other, not protective enough. The rest of Europe can relate to the first of these interpretations easily enough, because to a large degree they share it. There are a number of lessons to be learnt by the Council, Parliament and the Commission in terms of the Union's priority actions and the attitudes of the decision-makers. More tangible results, more attentiveness, greater empathy and less distance from the citizens are all required.

The second interpretation is more problematic, as it concerns the profile of the "good" economic and social model in the context of globalisation. The French would like to see a European model in their image, yet the other countries do not find this French model appealing. It will therefore take a long time to reach a compromise on this key issue, and this will only happen if we engage in far-reaching, coherent debate. Europe cannot be built in one country.

Notre Europe will play its part in putting together these responses. In the meantime, the other European democracies must also have their say. All of the Member States have the right to take part in the debate, and let us hope that the 4 out of 5 ratification threshold will be reached. Consequently, in accordance with Declaration 30 annexed to the Treaty, the Council has arranged a meeting for November 2006 to decide whether to scrap the draft Constitutional Treaty or to keep its ambitions alive.