Lisbon Treaty

[mypost]

Stepohen Collins is getting all excited about the latest poll (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0131/1232923379854.html) in his own newspaper today. :rolleyes:

I may remind him that the 3:1 advantage the Yes side had from a poll in the same paper, turned into a 7% turnaround in 3 weeks last spring. :D To me, these polls that the Yes newspaper carry out, is very much a case of preaching to the converted.

I would be very interested in seeing a breakdown of middle-class/working-class voters were polled. We might get a different % forecast then.

[irishultra]

a yes vote is essential and i don't see why the EU should wait for us if we vote no again.

We are Irish but also European, and the Lisbon treaty is in the best interest for Europe as a whole.

[mypost]

a yes vote is essential and i don't see why the EU should wait for us if we vote no again.

We are Irish but also European, and the Lisbon treaty is in the best interest for Europe as a whole.

We're Irish first, then European. The Lisbon Treaty is from the book of nightmares, and until next year's UK election, we are the only country that can stop it taking effect.

A no vote is essential, as it was in June, to uphold earlier No votes and democracy in general.

[dahamsta]

Lison is in the best of politicians, period. Politicians that already have too much power, and too little respect for democracy.

I emailed my 3 MEPs last week about the copyright bill, only one had the courtesy to reply.

adam

[irishultra]

Lison is in the best of politicians, period. Politicians that already have too much power, and too little respect for democracy.

I emailed my 3 MEPs last week about the copyright bill, only one had the courtesy to reply.

adam


How is it the best interest of politicians?

The reasons for denouncing the treaty are stupid.

Does the treaty increase the amount of decisions taken in Brussels?
I would have hoped so but unfortunately not.

Will the Treaty of Lisbon create a European "Super-State"?
I'm not in favour of a ''super-state'' exactly, but a greater European identity would be much better. I would support a overall president of europe(in the long term) but with a good bit of control with each countrys goverment. It would also lead to much better opportunities.
I take 'pride' in both Irish and European Identity. I have both flags outside my house.

The EU is extremely diplomatic and thats why they are advising us to votes again, especially when a lot of people voted no because they simply could not understand the treaty. So again why should Ireland hold back the EU progressing because we can't understand it.

Like imagine in this day and age peoples reasons for rejecting it included because it will lead to abortions being made legal?:rolleyes:

Its 2009 FFS.

[mypost]

How is it the best interest of politicians?

The reasons for denouncing the treaty are stupid.

Does the treaty increase the amount of decisions taken in Brussels?
I would have hoped so but unfortunately not.

Will the Treaty of Lisbon create a European "Super-State"?
I'm not in favour of a ''super-state'' exactly, but a greater European identity would be much better. I would support a overall president of europe(in the long term) but with a good bit of control with each countrys goverment. It would also lead to much better opportunities.
I take 'pride' in both Irish and European Identity. I have both flags outside my house.

The EU is extremely diplomatic and thats why they are advising us to votes again, especially when a lot of people voted no because they simply could not understand the treaty. So again why should Ireland hold back the EU progressing because we can't understand it.

Its 2009 FFS.

No citizen is expected to read the treaty cover to cover. What they are expected to know is the core details of it.

It's a politicians dream charter. Hence all the talk of Ireland remaining at the "centre of power", and the heart of "decision-making" of the EU. When Ireland will only lose power at EU level.

Ireland effectively becomes a province under the EU Constitution. The Irish constitution is no longer valid, the Dail is reduced to a coffee morning talking shop rather than the legislation chamber it currently is. We would no longer be represented by our President. Our new President would be nominated by Brussels rather than be elected by the Irish people. We would lose the right to hold the EU Presidency, for equal time as other states. We lose our voting weights, our commissioner, and our corporate tax policy. We lose our right to 60 current vetoes that are in the interest of this state's well being. In the current economic climate, we are obliged to spend what little funds are available to increase our military spending, and come to the assistance of another member state should they be attacked. No jobs or investment will be created in this country as a result of a Yes vote. No jobs were created as a result of passing the Nice Treaty. We lost thousands of jobs after passing it, in the 2003 slowdown.

Blood is thicker than water, and in an Irish referendum, you are morally obliged as an Irish citizen to think of the well being of this country, before the well being of other states. After doing so, you should have little alternative but to tick the bottom box on the ballot paper, and preserve democracy in Ireland, and in the European Union.

[Bald Student]

Lison is in the best of politicians, period. Politicians that already have too much power, and too little respect for democracy.

I emailed my 3 MEPs last week about the copyright bill, only one had the courtesy to reply.

adam

I don't want to get into too much of an off topic discussion but whether a politician has time to enter into a private correspondence isn't really the measure of a democracy.

[dahamsta]

It is a measure of democracy though. They're my representatives in government.

irishultra, if you'd like people to respond to your posts, not insulting their intelligence is usually a good start. When you show some respect, I'll return with same.

I don't agree with mypost on a lot of things, but on one point above he's right: Lisbon is a politician's wet dream. They wrote it for themselves, not for us.

adam

[irishultra]

It is a measure of democracy though. They're my representatives in government.

irishultra, if you'd like people to respond to your posts, not insulting their intelligence is usually a good start. When you show some respect, I'll return with same.

I don't agree with mypost on a lot of things, but on one point above he's right: Lisbon is a politician's wet dream. They wrote it for themselves, not for us.

adam

sorry i didnt mean to come across like that honestly. i'm just putting my thoughts out there i'm only 17 so the opinions aren't concrete or very indepth but yeah sorry for coming across like that.

[Bald Student]

It is a measure of democracy though. They're my representatives in government.Fair enough but I think it's much more closely a measure of how many letters they get and how much spare time they have in their day.

I don't thing the treaty should deal with anything like this. Under whatever laws and treaties, we have the right to petition our elected reps and the right to boot them out of office if we're not happy with their response. After that, I think their performance should be judged by the electorate alone. If the people of Munster have chosen to elect MPs who don't respond to letters, that's their democratic right.

[Angus]

I find it fascinating that by and large (but not exclusively) the Lisbon debate falls as follows:

A Yes vote is generally advocated on intangible grounds ie Europe is good for us - better in than out - we have benefited from europe

A No vote is advocated generally on the basis of the actual treaty itself ie individual passages in the treaty - the commissioner, the voting rights, the organisational issues

Pretty tragic public debate and let me say this out loud in words

We do not have an intellgient electorate - we have people in the electorate who are hihgly intelligent but by and large the electorate is a Star reader

The pols know this which is why they treat us with such contempt

[mypost]

I find it fascinating that by and large (but not exclusively) the Lisbon debate falls as follows:

A Yes vote is generally advocated on intangible grounds ie Europe is good for us - better in than out - we have benefited from europe

A No vote is advocated generally on the basis of the actual treaty itself ie individual passages in the treaty - the commissioner, the voting rights, the organisational issues

Europe was good for us, as a funding and trading bloc. As a political union, it's not been anywhere near the same benefit to us.

We were warned over breaking the growth and stability pact, we were chastised for providing the bank guarantee, we are regularly taken to court over trivial issues. Now we're sneered at, for exercising our democratic right, which the EU claims to love. So long as that democratic right goes their way.

Once again, because of our constitution, it falls to us to be the guardians of democracy in the EU. Others should share the responsibility with us. But their politicians have decided to silence the people they represent instead. That may be what they want, but that's not what I and hundreds of millions of EU citizens want either. A no vote is a no-brainer.

[micls]

A No vote is advocated generally on the basis of the actual treaty itself ie individual passages in the treaty

Sorry but this is rubbish. How many times have you heard people give 'abortion' 'conscription' etc as reasons for voting no? Cos Ive heard it more than I can count.

BOTH sides have those who are voting for reasons that have no relevance to the treaty itself.

[dahamsta]

Sorry but this is rubbish. How many times have you heard people give 'abortion' 'conscription' etc as reasons for voting no? Cos Ive heard it more than I can count.

BOTH sides have those who are voting for reasons that have no relevance to the treaty itself.Absolutely.

[Angus]

Sorry but this is rubbish. How many times have you heard people give 'abortion' 'conscription' etc as reasons for voting no? Cos Ive heard it more than I can count.

BOTH sides have those who are voting for reasons that have no relevance to the treaty itself.

Precisely - advocated on the basis of a passage in the treaty - not necessarily an accurate representation but on the basis of the actual treaty.

Equally there is plenty of irrelevant drivel on the yes side

My point is - to agree with Adam - that this is a pols wet dream - a treaty which makes their lives easier and makes them less transparent and a docile public

[micls]

Precisely - advocated on the basis of a passage in the treaty - not necessarily an accurate representation but on the basis of the actual treaty.


But sure whats the difference between that and saying its good for us?

And Ive heard plenty of rubbish that had no basis in the treaty whatsoever, not the one I read anyway.

[Angus]

Sorry - I said it badly.

Where I was going - and it was a point made clumsily - is that the quality of public debate is lousy, on both sides.

I am kind of on the fence but lean to a No - my point was that the level of debate is infeasibly bad and is driven, on both sides, by pretermined agendas with little or no relevance to the actual subject at hand and its wider context

It is campaigning by sounbite and we let it happen

[pete]

Lets be honest, if the EU was still giving use billions to improve our infrastructure the last Treaty would have passed easily. As a nation we thought we had made it & didn't need that cash any more. I believe the recession will mean more people vote Yes.

Given the pathetic politicians we have in this country more powers for the EU would be a good thing.

[irishultra]

Lets be honest, if the EU was still giving use billions to improve our infrastructure the last Treaty would have passed easily. As a nation we thought we had made it & didn't need that cash any more. I believe the recession will mean more people vote Yes.

Given the pathetic politicians we have in this country more powers for the EU would be a good thing.

I agree. Hopefully some day we might be able to get a transport system and other things as good as our European compatriots.

Actually mypost i agree it is a joke that all EU citizens were not given the vote in relation to lisbon. why not have a europe wide vote, where the eu populations choice is based on a whole rather than just one country. Would this have been possible?

[pete]

Actually mypost i agree it is a joke that all EU citizens were not given the vote in relation to lisbon. why not have a europe wide vote, where the eu populations choice is based on a whole rather than just one country. Would this have been possible?

This would leave to possibility of the Treaty passed by majorities in large countries & our Vote would be insignificant.

[corkboy360]

This is a stupid waste of taxpayers money which should not be wasted right now considering the economic state.

Will ya have a bar a chocolate ?
Reply: NO

Era sure gwan gwan gwan gwan gwan
:rolleyes:

[mypost]

As a nation we thought we had made it & didn't need that cash any more. I believe the recession will mean more people vote Yes.

There were 200k+ people on the dole last June during the recession. Still the young and working class voted No.


Given the pathetic politicians we have in this country more powers for the EU would be a good thing.

The politicians in Europe are no better. Everyone thinks their politicians are crap. In Iceland there's been riots and a government resigning. In France and Greece, there have been riots. In Hungary 2 years ago, there were mass riots. In UK, the first protests started at the weekend, and that looks like it will get a lot nastier.


I agree. Hopefully some day we might be able to get a transport system and other things as good as our European compatriots.

There is nothing about public transport contained in the treaty. The British ruled us for 800 years, yet most of the state's rail lines that they built are single track only.


Will ya have a bar a chocolate ?
Reply: NO

Era sure gwan gwan gwan gwan gwan

:D

It's funny because it's true.

[pete]

The politicians in Europe are no better. Everyone thinks their politicians are crap. In Iceland there's been riots and a government resigning. In France and Greece, there have been riots. In Hungary 2 years ago, there were mass riots. In UK, the first protests started at the weekend, and that looks like it will get a lot nastier. .

Iceland not part of the EU. The French protest when they are bored. The UK protest is about "British Jobs for British Workers" :rolleyes:

Had to laugh at construction worker on Sky News explaining that he had worked home & abroad but wanted to keep UK jobs for UK workers. I wonder whose jobs to "took" when he worked abroad.

[mypost]

The UK protest is about "British Jobs for British Workers" :rolleyes:

I can see that escalating into another series of race riots in the UK again over time. Like in France, there is an uneasy truce in relations between the local and immigrant population. It doesn't take a lot for it to become civil unrest.

[mypost]

The IHT focus in on the Presidency issue.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/02/05/europe/letter.1-423347.php :rolleyes:

Again, the American federal model of "one man, one size fits all" policy is strongly advocated. That doesn't work over here, with citizens different backgrounds, and different identities. That's not what they want. Europe is a continent, not a country, and as such, there is no President along the American lines.

You only have to look at our Presidency in 2004, to see that small countries are perfectly capable of punching their weight and getting things done when it's their responsibility to run the ship for 6 months.

One other thing, Bohlen: The President of Europe is not Vaclav Klaus. :rolleyes:

[mypost]

The latest threat on the table here: (http://www.euractiv.com/en/opinion/irish-government-considers-holding-lisbon-revote-june/article-179443)

The people I've spoken to recently on the issue, have all indicated that they'll vote No again. There's not been a single backer of it. Whenever the Dail call the poll date, the Irish people will confront them again.

[holidaysong]

Well I'll be voting yes again and a lot of people I know will be doing the same.

[mypost]

All coming out of the woodwork with alarmist comparisons:

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0215/eulisbon.html

He was speaking in Cork. To put things in perspective, Cork's population is greater than Iceland's. :rolleyes:

[pete]

All coming out of the woodwork with alarmist comparisons:

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0215/eulisbon.html

He was speaking in Cork. To put things in perspective, Cork's population is greater than Iceland's. :rolleyes:

I don't think EU membership on its own protects us but if we were not in the Euro we would be like Iceland - the punt would be worthless.

[OneRedArmy]

Talking to someone this weekend and mentioned the "coincidence" that the two biggest public opponents of the Treaty (Ganley and Ulick MacEvaddy) are also the two people in the country who benefit from huge US military contracts.

This really deserves more media investigation.

[pete]

Talking to someone this weekend and mentioned the "coincidence" that the two biggest public opponents of the Treaty (Ganley and Ulick MacEvaddy) are also the two people in the country who benefit from huge US military contracts.

This really deserves more media investigation.

Prime Time did some digging but no real dirt although Ganley was very defensive.

Irish Times poll (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0215/breaking45.htm) shows supporting increasing.



Support is growing for the Lisbon Treaty with a further swing to the Yes camp in recent months as the State’s economic situation deteriorated, according to the Irish Times/TNS mrbi poll.

The poll shows that 51 per cent would now vote Yes, an increase of eight points since the last Irish Times poll in November, with 33 per cent saying they would vote No, a drop of six points

[mypost]

Irish Times poll (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0215/breaking45.htm) shows supporting increasing.

There were similiar figures in the government's favour this time last year. Until a comprehensive breakdown on those figures are released, especially location wise, those figures should be viewed with suspicion.

[SMorgan]

The poll figures have to be viewed in light of the fact that the Yes campaign has started with many swipes at the no camp in recent weeks. We've been here before and I'd expect the same outcome again. I also have serious doubts about the accuracy of the poll given that it phased the questions in terms of 'in light of commitments given on.........' The questions gave an impression of concessions that clearly don't exist and would have made a yes response more likely.

We also have the Yes lies that going unchallenged for now. (the No side are anti EU)

These so-called commitments have to be tested in a campaign and i doubt if they will stand up. At the end of the day its will be the exact same treaty, word for word.

[mypost]

I also have serious doubts about the accuracy of the poll given that it phased the questions in terms of 'in light of commitments given on.........' The questions gave an impression of concessions that clearly don't exist and would have made a yes response more likely.

We also have the Yes lies that going unchallenged for now. (the No side are anti EU)

After all these poll results, it's not just here that they're printed, but in most online and print press around the world, from Ireland to India, and they're seen by billions of people. After last year's result, if they think we're a bunch of conned cowards, you couldn't blame them.

All the commitments are meaningless, and have no legal standing regarding this treaty. It's up to us to recognise that and vote accordingly.

[OneRedArmy]

The EU are investigating the feasibility of issuing a bond at EU level (ie German backed) to potentially bail out Ireland and the other PIGS as we are pretty much unable to raise anymore ourselves due to our fiscal situation.

If this plays out as being true, I would expect it to have a significant impact on the Lisbon dynamic. At last we might move on from forced abortions and conscripted kids. It's unfortunate though that it's taken the current dire circumstances to move the debate on.

[pete]

If this plays out as being true, I would expect it to have a significant impact on the Lisbon dynamic. At last we might move on from forced abortions and conscripted kids. It's unfortunate though that it's taken the current dire circumstances to move the debate on.

I know there were other factors but IMO a significant part of rejecting Lisbon was the idea we didn't need the EU money any more. I know we don't get kicked out the EU if we reject Lisbon but losing influence when basically begging for assistance will have an impact.

[Dodge]

After all these poll results, it's not just here that they're printed, but in most online and print press around the world, from Ireland to India, and they're seen by billions of people. After last year's result, if they think we're a bunch of conned cowards, you couldn't blame them

The majority of Irish people don't care, I doubt you'll find anyone in India who cares.

[mypost]

I know there were other factors but IMO a significant part of rejecting Lisbon was the idea we didn't need the EU money any more. I know we don't get kicked out the EU if we reject Lisbon but losing influence when basically begging for assistance will have an impact.

Losing influence means nothing to the average man/woman in the street.

Lisbon is all about power. Voting the other way will merely increase that power to a smaller number of individuals in Brussels to abuse it. The Anglo controversy here, has shown very clearly how badly power can be, and is abused.

[pete]

Losing influence means nothing to the average man/woman in the street.

Ireland never had any power in the EU in voting terms but still our politicians were able to negotiate deals on EU funds. We got significantly more per capita than other poorer countries at the time. EU funds built half our infrastructure which for example can drive Dublin-Cork in 2.5/3 hours as opposed to 5+ hours.

[Den Perry]

Ireland never had any power in the EU in voting terms but still our politicians were able to negotiate deals on EU funds. We got significantly more per capita than other poorer countries at the time. EU funds built half our infrastructure which for example can drive Dublin-Cork in 2.5/3 hours as opposed to 5+ hours.

and whoever is responsible for making it easier for the Cork shower to get to the rest of the country should be ashamed

[mypost]

Ireland never had any power in the EU in voting terms but still our politicians were able to negotiate deals on EU funds. We got significantly more per capita than other poorer countries at the time. EU funds built half our infrastructure which for example can drive Dublin-Cork in 2.5/3 hours as opposed to 5+ hours.

Funding has nothing to do with the Lisbon Treaty. It has everything to do with power, and in our case, less of it.

[irishultra]

Funding has nothing to do with the Lisbon Treaty. It has everything to do with power, and in our case, less of it.

i posted on here a while back, but i have to say i know plenty of people who would pretty much see themselves as european who would reject the treaty.

[mypost]

First it was the French, now the Germans are in on the act:


He reportedly made pointed references to those who “complain about other nations fishing in their waters. . . and forget who pays their milk subsidies”.

“A second No would have horrific consequences for Ireland and I am not the first to say it. I don’t think there is anything particularly new in that.”

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2009/0320/1224243126493.html

The Lisbon Treaty has nothing to do with milk subsidies or payments of any description, to say it does is lieing. :mad:

[Macy]

The Lisbon Treaty has nothing to do with milk subsidies or payments of any description, to say it does is lieing. :mad:
It has nothing to do with conscription, abortion or tax harmonisation either but that won't stop some anti Lisbon nut jobs using that as an arguement either.

[mypost]

Good news during the week, as unlike here, the Czech government was voted out of office, due to their economic crisis. It also holds up the ratification of the Treaty there a bit longer, and delays Cowen and Martin's show "guarantees" in order to force us to vote again. :)

While EU leaders will whinge that the collapse is an example of their issues with the rotating presidency, the fact remains that most governments can fold at any time, and it's merely a coincidence that the Czech one should fall while holding the Presidency. Also, the Prime Minister of the Czech Republic remains holder of the Presidency, and this event should not be used as a stick to beat other countries with, who are due to have their turn at it in time.

http://europenews.dk/en/node/21676

[OneRedArmy]

Good news during the week, as unlike here, the Czech government was voted out of office, due to their economic crisis. It also holds up the ratification of the Treaty there a bit longer, and delays Cowen and Martin's show "guarantees" in order to force us to vote again. :)

While EU leaders will whinge that the collapse is an example of their issues with the rotating presidency, the fact remains that most governments can fold at any time, and it's merely a coincidence that the Czech one should fall while holding the Presidency. Also, the Prime Minister of the Czech Republic remains holder of the Presidency, and this event should not be used as a stick to beat other countries with, who are due to have their turn at it in time.

http://europenews.dk/en/node/21676Governing through a "having your turn approach" is about as childish as it comes. Whether its a coincidence or not is irrelevant, the fact of the matter is that the EU will be directionally rudderless at a time when there are lots of issues that need addressing, such as financial regulation, the operations of the ECB going forward etc.

[pete]

While EU leaders will whinge that the collapse is an example of their issues with the rotating presidency, the fact remains that most governments can fold at any time, and it's merely a coincidence that the Czech one should fall while holding the Presidency. Also, the Prime Minister of the Czech Republic remains holder of the Presidency, and this event should not be used as a stick to beat other countries with, who are due to have their turn at it in time.

It highlights a big flaw in the rotation Presidency. The Presidency drives discussion & agreement on issue for their 6 months but now it is like a pause until Czech decide what they want.

[mypost]

The EU continues to function, while that process is ongoing. The issues that must be addressed, will be addressed.

Next week's Czech-USA summit goes ahead as planned.

[dahamsta]

I've always thought that 6 months was a very short term for a presidency. There's no way a country-based presidency should be as long as a person-based one, but sure nothing gets resolved in the political arena in 6 months.

[Dodge]

I've always thought that 6 months was a very short term for a presidency. There's no way a country-based presidency should be as long as a person-based one, but sure nothing gets resolved in the political arena in 6 months.

Presidency incurs a huge extra cost for the country holding it. Both in terms of actual money spent and man hours. Some of the smaller countries simply couldn't afford to hold it for more than 6 months