> If you decide for a negative vote before the European Court rules, let me tell you that the Commission will nonetheless continue to pursue the current procedure before the Court, as we are entitled to do. A negative vote will not stop the proceedings before the Court of Justice.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120625/12333619468/eu-com...
> The European Commissioner responsible for the treaty, Karel de Gucht, has said that he will ignore any rejections and re-table it before the European Parliament until it passes. That’s not going to happen. Parliament takes its dignity very seriously and does not tolerate that kind of contempt, fortunately. This is something relatively new in the history of the European Union’s democracy – the first time I saw Parliament stand up for its dignity was during the Telecoms Package, where the Commission also tried to ram through three-strikes provisions. (Instead, Parliament made “three strikes” schemes illegal in the entire European Union.)
Not a bad thing, but TFA isn't authoritative.
In this sense, the Commissioner's remarks were like a red drape waved in front of a sleepy bull, and were probably the main cause for such an overwhelming rejection.
Never tell politicians that they don't matter; it's the best way to motivate them to prove you wrong.
[Borrowed from a HN comment I made about a week ago on this issue: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4161254]
His opinion, in other words, is irrelevant. Let him bark. If he doesn't end up in prison of impoverished at the least the EU and Belgian parliaments will get him to pipe down a bit.
Each time he refiled it and it was again soundly defeated it would just make him look increasingly like an ineffectual buffoon.