A Dutch "no" will improve the debate in accession countries

Quotes from Vladimir's speech:

Question 1: Who of you, here today, has been asked by your government to give your consent whether your government may begin negotiations with the EU about the accession of your country?

Obviously, I am the only person in this room who has been able to vote on that question – namely as a Swiss citizen. In Switzerland the answer to that question by the people is binding and the right to decide it is guaranteed by the constitution. Btw. I said "no", as the majority did. As a Swiss, I am convinced that the EU in its present state is not worth joining, and so that negotiating with it would be a waste.

Question 2: Who of you has been asked by your government whether you wish your country to join the EU?

I have been asked this second question as a Czech citizen. But only after the government was sure that the result will be a "yes"-vote. Not binding and not guaranteed by any (decent, real) constitution or any (decent, real) law. That is my Czech experience. Btw. I said "yes", as the majority did. As a Czech, I am convinced that any structure, even the EU one, is far better than the present post/communist clans still ruling and ruining my first country as they please.

In most, representative, democracies each citizen lends his or her sovereignty by the elections to the next level of office. But the sovereignty never leaves him or her.

If the Dutch say no to this Constitution, the arguments will be heard outside of Holland and help to enable a debate in other countries.