At the same time the result is clear and has to be respected.
As regards what happens next, this of course will be assessed and discussed at the European Council meeting in the middle of June.
I haven‘t heard anyone believing that it is a realistic option that there will be renegotiation. This text took so many years to negotiate, I don‘t think anyone will have the courage or a realistic belief in reopening a negotiation with 25 Member States involved again. What would that bring? This was a very difficult process and at the same time the most open and transparent process we have ever had. So I think this will take time. In the foreseeable future we cannot see a renegotiation, but other solutions have to be found in the end.Of course she then goes and blows it when she discusses "No"
We will probably now see a debate that follows with also interpretation of exactly what kind of No this was. I have met a number of those who participated and said ‘No‘ in this referendum but who believe in European integration. They say that they don‘t think that this Constitution is the solution but they want European integration to continue and they believe in the European project. It is clear that people voted ‘No‘ for many reasons. Even in the comments section in this blog you see several shades of ‘No‘ – people who do not want the EU at all and people who think the idea of the EU is good but are not happy with how it is working. It is important to examine this thoroughly in order to find a solution.Take this paragraph out of context and assume that we are talking about sex and alleged rape. What she says is precisely what the scumbags who excuse assaults with mealy phrases about "she asked for it dressing that way" and "just one of the lads". If, as I suspect, such parsing of "no" would be unacceptable in a case of rape why is it acceptable in a case where the unelected are assaulting the liberties of their citizens? Indeed the way Margot's colleagues in the corridors of power in Brussels seem to be acting just the way bullying salesmen of products like insurance or timeshare flats do - pushing us to sign up for something that we know we're going to regret the next day when it is too late. And the 400+ page constitution is just like the small print of these iffy sales, with hidden clause III subsection 2.1A that states that we can only void the contract by sacrifcing our firstborn to the devil. The shock should surely be not that the people of Europe disagree in the way they dislike the proposed EU constitution but in the arrogance of their leaders, elected and unelected, who thought that they could force agreement to such a bloated and unreadable document without recourse to threats of mafia-style revenge on those who demur.