Lisbon Treaty

[GavinZac]

I've one question for the Yes camp. whats wrong with the status quo? I'm assuming if the treaty is rejected then nothing will change? also all this scaremongering "oh we'll be thrown out of the EU if we vote no" is bull
To re-iterate, because there seem to be several posts like the above:

Between 1995 and 2007, the EU's population has increased by 25%, and will continue to rise as affluence reaches the east and more states are added. The current system, designed with 45% of the current population in mind, is simply unworkable at these population levels and future population levels. Currently, there needs to be a clear majority of 80 MILLION people for ratification of most types of decisions. 20 times our own population! How insignificant are we? The idea that something could be unsuccessful in ratification because "only" 329,000,000 million people make a decision is ludicrous, and will, unchecked, be the death of the EU.
Its not about our image or reputation, or specifically about the poor souls in Hungary. its about ourselves and everybody losing those benefits we have outlined, either by our forced exclusion from what is a member's club that we have no automatic right to be in or entitlement to benefit from, or as is far more likely, the benefits that would be lost by the ever decreasingly efficient EU which already suffers from accusations of sluggish bureaucracy. We have a choice: rectify the position that we were in whereby these sort of controls were set in stone/ink for a certain size of the EU, or risk losing the single most important politico-economic development in the history of our continent and shared culture, be it to expulsion or stagnation.

And with reference to: http://www.economist.com/world/europe/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10024471

[Macy]

I seen a sticker on a signpost yesterday saying, 'Lisbon Treaty: If you don't know, vote no!' - Who are the fools who are endorsing this completely ignorant way of voting? Surely 'If you don't know', then reading the treaty to find out what it is all about is a far more rational response than voting no as a knee jerk reaction? The 'Vote no' campaign seems to be based 100% on scaremongering. I'm surprised more people cannot see through this to be honest.
If you don't know then it's perfectly reasonable to vote no and maintain the status quo. It's up to the Yes side to convince people to change. If people read it and don't understand the treaty then it's the Yes side that has to convince the people the benefits of changing what they already hold.

I personally remain to be convinced, as the Yes side arguement particularly on the Government side pretty much remains "look what the EU has done for Ireland", and the "no side are lying". They can't come up with coherent arguments to refute the no sides suggestions, and I wouldn't trust Dick Roche as far as I could drop kick him (head down). Streamlining means decisions being made for Ireland that she has no control over - the veto means there's give and take on issues to make them acceptable. It's about giving power to the larger countries at the expense of the smaller ones, hiden behind an efficiency arguement imo.


Maybe then we consumers can enjoy some competition in our food market and enjoy the lower prices that the free market would ensure.
Off Topic I know but..... You believe the likes of tesco will pass on the lower prices, rather than increase profits? There is no record of that - prices to farmers have been going down in real terms for years, yet prices in the shops have been going up.

[GavinZac]

I personally remain to be convinced, as the Yes side arguement particularly on the Government side pretty much remains "look what the EU has done for Ireland", and the "no side are lying".

You've been bleating that for a couple of months now, I think you're just avoiding the real arguments. Like, you know, the post right before yours.

[dahamsta]

There's no doubt that the current system is flawed and should be repaired, but that's being used as a way of forcing us to give up far more than is needed in order to feed their own greed for more and more power. For that reason, I'll be voting no. Eventually they'll come back with a reasonable plan, and I'll vote yes. And not before.

adam

[GavinZac]

There's no doubt that the current system is flawed and should be repaired, but that's being used as a way of forcing us to give up far more than is needed in order to feed their own greed for more and more power. For that reason, I'll be voting no. Eventually they'll come back with a reasonable plan, and I'll vote yes. And not before.

adam

Who's "they"?

[Block G Raptor]

I'd imagine DaHamsta is reffering to GB, Spain, Germany and France. ie. the Countries who will benefit most in terms of power from the treaty

[Macy]

You've been bleating that for a couple of months now, I think you're just avoiding the real arguments. Like, you know, the post right before yours.
But I said that I don't believe the efficiency arguement in my post? And lets be fair, you keep bringing up our exclusion from the EU as a result of a No vote as much as I bring up the Yes side's basic arguement about being "good Europeans".

[holidaysong]

I'd imagine DaHamsta is reffering to GB, Spain, Germany and France. ie. the Countries who will benefit most in terms of power from the treaty

I don't know about the rest but Germany will see a drop in their voting power actually.

[holidaysong]

Off Topic I know but..... You believe the likes of tesco will pass on the lower prices, rather than increase profits? There is no record of that - prices to farmers have been going down in real terms for years, yet prices in the shops have been going up.

Inefficient farmers should be forced out of the market if they cannot survive. CAP protectionism measures to keep them in the market creates artificially high food prices in the EU. Perhaps food prices are going up for other reasons, such as inflation in general or increased transport costs linked to the increasing price of oil but they are still higher than they should be.
As for the likes of Tesco, it is up to competition between food supermarkets to minimise profits and allow the free market price to be passed onto the consumer. That is a different issue, though with cartels and and other price-fixing arrangements being illegal under EU competition laws so I don't see why that would not happen.

[pete]

I can't see how anyone thinks that having the likes of P Flynn in Brussels actually gives us more access to decision making. If Commissioner roles were so important would we trust it to the likes of him?

I agree that Dick Roche & the government "action" so far has been hopeless. It is up to everyone to educate themselves & make their own decisions. I may not agree with a lot of their policies but I trust established political parties over an unknown grouping like Libertas who won't tell us who is funding their campaign.

[Macy]

Inefficient farmers should be forced out of the market if they cannot survive. CAP protectionism measures to keep them in the market creates artificially high food prices in the EU. Perhaps food prices are going up for other reasons, such as inflation in general or increased transport costs linked to the increasing price of oil but they are still higher than they should be.
At a time when food security is such an issue, it would be folly to destroy the sector at this time, just on an economic view point. Should be about educating to eat locally produced goods, in season (and locally brought ideally too).


As for the likes of Tesco, it is up to competition between food supermarkets to minimise profits and allow the free market price to be passed onto the consumer. That is a different issue, though with cartels and and other price-fixing arrangements being illegal under EU competition laws so I don't see why that would not happen.
Eh, the fact it hasn't happened so far should be a good indicator as to why it won't happen in the future. The EU and others are too busy messing about with Microsoft to deal with the real competition issues.


I agree that Dick Roche & the government "action" so far has been hopeless
It beggars belief that they'd put Dick Roche to front the campaign, when they benched him for the General Election campaign because he's so brutal...

[pete]

It beggars belief that they'd put Dick Roche to front the campaign, when they benched him for the General Election campaign because he's so brutal...

Bertie wants to be everyones friend.

Sure Willie O'Dea is Minister for Disasters. Then again that does have a nice ring to it. :D

[lilywhite stu]

Its in the eurocrats interests to give themselves more power. You are never going to see a situation where the trend from Brussels will be to devolve more power to member states. when they talk about 'progress' in the european project they mean further federalisation and more centralisation of decision making. The fact that this is their motivation is enough reason for me to vote no.

Brussels holding so much power only becomes so undesireable when we consider the huge democratic deficit that exists in so many areas of the EU:

1. We are the only country that will get to vote on this treaty and Barroso, Merkel etc seem determined to browbeat us into accepting it.

2.the treaty proposes that we have one foreign minister and a president (that could end up being bertie!) is this really necessary?

3.The rotating presidency of the EU, the one area where all countres get an equal say and influence, is due to be abolished by the treaty.

4.The commission is not elected yet seeks more power by making their legislation easier to pass when it gets to the council of ministers.

5.The law that eminates from the EU is so pervaisive that we are forced to do things like charge national schools for the little water they use! No Irish government no matter how incompetent would ever try to do such a stupid thing as this in the name of a competition policy.

Very soon we are going to have less power over our own destiny than states in the US. The EU's competition policy already places more restrictions on us than Washington places over Kentucky or Indiana or any other US state. However we are an actual country, Kentucky is not nor never has been so why should we accept less soverignty than a place like that? we won our independence and therefore deserve our soverignty.

I think it is good that Ireland joined the EU back in the 70s but at that time we joined a common market. Political union is a different matter altogether. The goverenments of Europe clearly don't think their populaitons want it because the won't give them the chance to vote on the treaty. i really don't think there is anything wrong with saying that we would like a common market and a high level of cooperation on issues that we have in common but that we do not want to (nor should we have to) surrender all to Brussels.

We do not owe them anything. Vote No

[Block G Raptor]

Its in the eurocrats interests to give themselves more power. You are never going to see a situation where the trend from Brussels will be to devolve more power to member states. when they talk about 'progress' in the european project they mean further federalisation and more centralisation of decision making. The fact that this is their motivation is enough reason for me to vote no.

[...]

Brilliant Post!!. I've been saying for a long time that Brussels wants a "United States of Europe" but from what you say about Kentucky and Indiana it seems that even this won't satisfy the Eurocrats. our Democratic Right to have our say on how our country is run is being eroded by this treaty. Membership of the EU could soon be the "New Colonialism" with foreign politicians making the decisions that effect our daily lives more and more and the power of our own Elected Government having less and less power at home, let alone in Europe. If you want to remain in a Democratic Society VOTE NO!!

[GavinZac]

If you want to remain in a Democratic Society VOTE NO!!

You know we elect MEPs, right? This isn't Lordship.

Its interesting that in the same breath you advocate Irish votes counting for more than French ones, and yet simultaneously claim the defense of democracy.

[pete]

The EU seems to create a strange situation.

I don't like big government but I am voting Yes even though it gives the EU more power.. Socialists who would normally like big government are against more EU power.

:confused:

[Block G Raptor]

You know we elect MEPs, right? This isn't Lordship.
Yes I do know we elect MEP's but the fact is that these MEP's will have less of a say in how our country fares in the EU if Lisbon is passed.


Its interesting that in the same breath you advocate Irish votes counting for more than French ones, and yet simultaneously claim the defense of democracy.
Yes but I'd rather Irish MEP's Voted for by the Irish people had more of a say in Irish Affairs than French MEP's voted for by French People

[holidaysong]

3.The rotating presidency of the EU, the one area where all countres get an equal say and influence, is due to be abolished by the treaty.


To be replaced by an 18 month presidency shared by three nations, with each nation leading the presidency for 6 months each. This ensures that any one country doesn't get completely bogged down in EU affairs for 6 months to the detriment of their own national affairs.

Where does the equal say and influence get abolished? :confused:

[mypost]

If Commissioner roles were so important would we trust it to the likes of him?

It is up to everyone to educate themselves & make their own decisions. I trust established political parties over an unknown grouping like Libertas who won't tell us who is funding their campaign.

Most of the electorate don't know what they're voting on, yet we're told that we have to pass it, and we'll be a laughing stock around Europe if we don't. :confused:

The only laughing from around Europe from a No vote, will be at Bertie, Barroso and co, for a change.


To be replaced by an 18 month presidency shared by three nations, with each nation leading the presidency for 6 months each.

It will be replaced by a 30-month Presidency for one nation, that will be a carve-up for the big 5, starting with France in July.

[GavinZac]

Most of the electorate don't know what they're voting on, yet we're told that we have to pass it, and we'll be a laughing stock around Europe if we don't. :confused:

With rubbish like "Lucinda Creighton wants a European Army. She's Voting Yes to Lisbon. Are you?" embarrassment doesn't seem to be something Libertas are worried about.

[lilywhite stu]

I think we need to stand up for ourselves as a people. It is clear that the government are not going to do that for us. Ireland never votes against anything in Europe no matter whether it is in our interests or not .The government are not even happy with the deal Mandelson is negotiating at the WTO talks but they won't do anything about it, they are far more interested in being mr. Sarkosy's best friend. I keep thinking of neville chamberlain and his policy of appeasment when I think of Irish governments in Europe. I'm not comparing the EU to Nazi Germany here(although both are quite good at building roads) but just don't ever expect an Irish government to side against the general will of the EU in its peoples interests.

[GavinZac]

they are far more interested in being mr. Sarkosy's best friend.

Sarkozy is possibly the most sceptical of the european leaders about the Lisbon treaty. He was elected shortly after France's right wing (and strangely, certain left wing extremists e.g. Communist party) rejected the Constitution as a protest vote against Chirac, by appealing to those right wing-ers.

[pete]

The government are not even happy with the deal Mandelson is negotiating at the WTO talks but they won't do anything about it,.

Please explain why we are not happy with the WTO deal? :confused:

[lilywhite stu]

Ok fair point about Sarkosy. I picked the wrong leader as an example but there's others I could have gone for.

WTO deal is going to seriously mess up the argiculture industry in Europe. Affecting our farmers, the section of the population most in favour of the EU.

I think it is interesting that the countries most in favour of federalsiation are France, Germany and Italy. France wants it because they don't want Germany to attack again(fair enough since they have lost 3 wars to Germany in 150 years). the Germans are appear quite ashamed of their nationality(war guilt whatever you want to call it)so have less hang ups about their soverignty and are scared of their own power. Italy is an absolute mess of a country and are more than happy to give anyone else a go at running their country since they haven't managed to do it themselves.

Since we have none of the above problems I think that most of the enthusiasm for the EU in Ireland comes out of anti-British sentiment. it makes little sense otherwise that they are so Eurosceptic and we generally aren't? I think it just feels good to side with other countries against the Brits but it is probably a fairly immature reason for wholeheartedly supporting Brussels in everything it does.

[lilywhite stu]

Sorry France only lost once but they got invaded 3 times which isn't nice!

[osarusan]

I think it is interesting that the countries most in favour of federalsiation are France, Germany and Italy. France wants it because they don't want Germany to attack again
you are surely not serious.

[mypost]

Sarkozy is possibly the most sceptical of the european leaders about the Lisbon treaty. He was elected shortly after France's right wing (and strangely, certain left wing extremists e.g. Communist party) rejected the Constitution as a protest vote against Chirac, by appealing to those right wing-ers.

He was elected 2 years later.

Despite that, in reality he's a Chirac clone, as they come from the same political side. He's not the answer to France's problems, never mind the EU's.

[pete]

WTO deal is going to seriously mess up the argiculture industry in Europe. Affecting our farmers, the section of the population most in favour of the EU.


While I have no problem supporting the agriculture industry to an extent (donlt mind subsidising rural economies) but their importance to the Irish economy is minimal. It was correctly pointed out by the EU President that it accounts for 4% of the Irish economy so need sacrificing the rest of us for a small section of the economy.

[lilywhite stu]

The food processing sector which obviously depends on our agricultural industry is worth much more than 4% however. It is clearly not fair that Irish farmers should invest so much in food standards and safety and then allow other countries to sell what they like into Europe. Thats pure double standards. There are important social reasons for supporting rural communities. A large proportion of farmers are at this stage too old to leave the land or retrain for a different job so they need continuing support or else we will be faced with terrible social deprivation in rural Ireland.




The original motivation behind the European project was the unification of France and Germany in order to avoid war and instead become the driving force of a modern europe. Thats textbook stuff. Maybe i was being dramatic but just because France and Germany want to be married together does not mean we all have to joined together on the same terms.

[mypost]

While I have no problem supporting the agriculture industry to an extent (donlt mind subsidising rural economies) but their importance to the Irish economy is minimal. It was correctly pointed out by the EU President that it accounts for 4% of the Irish economy so need sacrificing the rest of us for a small section of the economy.

Agriculture is one of our most vital industries, which took heavy punishment from the F+M outbreak, and is worth billions to our economy. It's more important to our economy than Britain's.

[GavinZac]

Agriculture is one of our most vital industries, which took heavy punishment from the F+M outbreak, and is worth billions to our economy. It's more important to our economy than Britain's.

No, its not. Its utterly unprofitable, ridiculously over-subsidised, and the few remaining in the industry are there either because they're holding out for a good offer for their land, or their land is worthless.

Only 5% of our economy is Primary Industry, and that includes fishing, farming, mining and other resource gathering. It might be a nice romantic idea to picture Ireland as an independently sustainable island on the edge of Europe, but well, its not.

Saying it is more important to us than to Britain is a bit facetious; its about as profitable, but their Secondary and Tertiary sectors are even more profitable than ours, so its smaller in comparison again, as low as 0.5% in England and reaching a "high" of 2.4% in Northern Ireland.

[Poor Student]

The original motivation behind the European project was the unification of France and Germany

Did I miss that part of history? I thought the idea was to create an interdependence, originally through the ECSC, that made war an unattractive prospect rather than unity. I think you're deliberately being flippant and emphasising words like 'unity' and 'federalism' to distort the picture.


With rubbish like "Lucinda Creighton wants a European Army. She's Voting Yes to Lisbon. Are you?" embarrassment doesn't seem to be something Libertas are worried about.

Well done for pointing that out, Gavin. I cringe every time I see that infantile piece of argument on billboards.:o

[Poor Student]

Yes but I'd rather Irish MEP's Voted for by the Irish people had more of a say in Irish Affairs than French MEP's voted for by French People

Your TDs handle Irish affairs and your MEPs handle European Union affairs. Since when have French MEPs voted on Irish affairs?:confused:


Brilliant Post!!. I've been saying for a long time that Brussels wants a "United States of Europe" but from what you say about Kentucky and Indiana it seems that even this won't satisfy the Eurocrats. our Democratic Right to have our say on how our country is run is being eroded by this treaty. Membership of the EU could soon be the "New Colonialism" with foreign politicians making the decisions that effect our daily lives more and more and the power of our own Elected Government having less and less power at home, let alone in Europe. If you want to remain in a Democratic Society VOTE NO!!

That's such narrow scope of thought. It's like giving out that a man from Offaly will be making all the major decisions that effect Dublin. The European Union is a body which we are a constituent part of and share in its decision making process. In democratic fashion as a small part of the Union we can only have so much of a say. Irishmen and women have an equal chance as any other EU citizens of participating to the fullest extent taking up its offices and positions. Currently Charlie McCreevy holds a respectable commission and Pat Cox was president of the European Parliament.

[KevB76]

..... the farmers who just sit around and wait for the cheque from Brussels.....

Jesus wept :rolleyes:


Any chance of poll on this please ?
(The Treaty, not whether farmers sit on thieir asses all day counting their free euros).

[mypost]

That's such narrow scope of thought. It's like giving out that a man from Offaly will be making all the major decisions that effect Dublin. The European Union is a body which we are a constituent part of and share in its decision making process. In democratic fashion as a small part of the Union we can only have so much of a say.

Before, Europe has only been used to decide things, after the Irish avenues were exhausted. With the Yes vote, it will be Europe first, Ireland second.

[GavinZac]

Before, Europe has only been used to decide things, after the Irish avenues were exhausted. With the Yes vote, it will be Europe first, Ireland second.

I'm afraid I don't really see your point, its a bit vague. Things? Avenues? It?

[Poor Student]

I'm afraid I don't really see your point, its a bit vague. Things? Avenues? It?

Mypost is voting 'No' in the upcoming referendum. Are you?;)

[GavinZac]

Ideas! :D

http://img440.imageshack.us/img440/9351/lib7bul4.jpg
http://img384.imageshack.us/img384/7550/chinavo3.png
http://img440.imageshack.us/img440/2968/cornerflaglk3.png

[Poor Student]

Ideas! :D

http://img440.imageshack.us/img440/9351/lib7bul4.jpg
http://img384.imageshack.us/img384/7550/chinavo3.png
http://img440.imageshack.us/img440/2968/cornerflaglk3.png

Well done!:D

[pete]

Ideas! :D

http://img440.imageshack.us/img440/9351/lib7bul4.jpg
http://img384.imageshack.us/img384/7550/chinavo3.png
http://img440.imageshack.us/img440/2968/cornerflaglk3.png

Very good. Those billboards don't give Libertas any credibility.



Any chance of poll on this please ?
(The Treaty, not whether farmers sit on thieir asses all day counting their free euros).

I thought the EU now paid farmers NOT to work? :confused:

I don't object to some subsidy to farming but suggesting it is vital to the Irish economy is ludicrous. If it was so important why does it need to be subsidised? Vital to rural life is fair enough. The WTO trade talks will not scrap CAP and given they have already stated doesn't that mean this Treaty has no affect? The big problem with CAP is it is fine for the EU to pay for but no chance we would pay for ourselves directly.

[Student Mullet]

Is there anything in this treaty I should be concerned with, assuming that I don't care what percentage of the vote we have in the various european institutions?

[Macy]

I don't object to some subsidy to farming but suggesting it is vital to the Irish economy is ludicrous. If it was so important why does it need to be subsidised? Vital to rural life is fair enough.
Food security is the next big issue coming down the line - cost of transportation due to fuel costs and world demand/ world environmental changes or incidents. Look at bread going up 33% due in part due to a scarcity of wheat. Rice is likely to follow suit after Burma. We need to start producing and eating our own food again.

[KevB76]

I thought the EU now paid farmers NOT to work? :confused:


REPS (Rural Environment Protection Scheme), is a Scheme designed to reward Farmers for carrying our their farming activities in an environmentally friendly manner and to bring about environmental improvement on existing farms.
It is a financial incentive for farmers to operate their farms in a more environmetally friendly manner, not to do nothing as was implied.

Can we have a poll please pete ?

[Block G Raptor]

It is a financial incentive for farmers to operate their farms in a more environmetally friendly manner, not to do nothing as was implied.

Can we have a poll please pete ?

So were paying them not to Pollute the rivers with their silage now?
ffs it's tantamount to paying them not to drink and drive or not to hold up a bank. I've known about this REPS scheme for a couple of years as I was involved in a Major IT upgrade for Teagasc that involved installing the software they use to implement the REPS scheme and have always been flaberghasted that we tax payers are footing the bill for this, ffs what other industry gets paid not to break the feckin' Law.

[osarusan]

So were paying them not to Pollute the rivers with their silage now?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man_argument

[Block G Raptor]

Osarusan I hate it when you use facts to make my arguments look silly :)

[John83]

Osarusan I hate it when you use facts to make my arguments look silly :)
He didn't actually use any facts there. Perhaps this is a joke whooshing over my head.

[Da Real Rover]

The No camp bleats on about the new voting structure being more democratic etc, but yet fails to see the lack of democracy in the EU repackaging a treaty that was given to the French and Dutch voters who resoundly rejected it. Also the fact that this new treaty will remove any Referendums that Ireland would normally undertake to change its constitution, further errodeing our democratic systems.
If this treaty is primarily about enriching our democratic systems, then give it to the European people to decide upon democratically.

As for the sovereignty question. I was merely stating that there should be no price tag on sacraficing our borders, if we do decide to throw the National boundries to the wind well in my opinion it must only be to the benefit of Ireland, and the Yes camp have yet to give a solid reason on the benefits which Ireland will receive. I am all for the disintegration of National boundaries, but only if it will benefit our people.

This treaty will benefit the powerfull in Europe, it will be far easier for them to pass treatys which will be to the direct benefit of the big nations. Irelands voting power, will translate into Ireland becoming a periphery player. Any laws or initiatives which will benefit Ireland but maybe infringe on the European big players would be impossible to pass, we as a nation would have to hope all laws passed for the benefit of the powerfull would also benefit Ireland, and if they dont well we would be powerless to do anything.

[KevB76]

So were paying them not to Pollute the rivers with their silage now?
ffs it's tantamount to paying them not to drink and drive or not to hold up a bank. I've known about this REPS scheme for a couple of years as I was involved in a Major IT upgrade for Teagasc that involved installing the software they use to implement the REPS scheme and have always been flaberghasted that we tax payers are footing the bill for this, ffs what other industry gets paid not to break the feckin' Law.

Look at it this way - its akin to a national wage agreement for farmers.
Take for example a sheep farmer - in the late eighties a good price for your sheep was IR£50 a head - now in 2008 a good price is €80. Thats about the same as it was 20 years ago - and they werent making a killing back then either. Also, wool is worthless now compared to back then. Meanwhile, running costs - feed, fertiliser, vets bills etc etc etc have increased as you would expect over 20 years of inflation.

The reason prices (incomes) have remained stagnant is due in part to the common market and european policies, which was why compensation was agreed in the first place. The EU pays about 55% of the REPS payments, our government pays the rest.

In return for this "free money" the farmers have to jump through various hoops, largely based on improving environmental aspects of their work which covers a lot of other topics apart form effluent from silage (which is a rarity since the advent of wrapped bales of silage, which replaced the silage pits which leaked effl....i digress).

So it is not money for nothing, it does actually add to the amount of work a farmer needs to do, and there are financial penalties if criteria are not met.
Furthermore, it is not compulsory, the farmers who typically enter REPS are those that are really struggling, those with very small holdings often in difficult terrain, and older famers (50's 60's 70's) who have done this all their lives and know nothing else. You will not find many dairy farmers in REPS for example, as dairy farmers can still make a living without the hand-outs.

The next set of revised rules for REPS will abolish the use of fertilisers and pesticides - imagine being told you can no longer use your latest Intel pentium processor, you must go back to a 386 on windows 3.1 because its kinder to the environment. No pesitides = crops will be at risk of various diseases from a by-gone era. No fertilisers = cant grow enough grass to make enough hay/silage to keep stock fed over the winter - so reduce stock levels (and reduce futher your measly 1980's income) or buy in hay/silage which will be even more expensive beacuse there is less availbale and more people in need of it.

Sorry for dragging this off-topic (I'm not a farmer by the way).

Poll pete ? :)

[KevB76]

Back on topic,

theres some Q&A on the following website:

http://europa.eu/lisbon_treaty/faq/index_en.htm#1