Lisbon Treaty

[pete]

While I acknowledge posters on polls can only got for sound bite phrases there are some seriously misleading ones around. Some are also anonymous which I thought was illegal?

I doubt Libertas are influencing many people but has any one been able to figure out why they are against the Treaty? :confused:

I wouldn't trust all Indymedia material but good article here (http://www.indymedia.ie/article/87311)

[holidaysong]

'Coir' are the group behind the 'People Died for our Freedom, Don't throw it away' ones, although thier name does not appear on the poster.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/irishexaminer/pages/story.aspx-qqqg=ireland-qqqm=ireland-qqqa=ireland-qqqid=62801-qqqx=1.asp

[jebus]

'Coir' are the group behind the 'People Died for our Freedom, Don't throw it away' ones, although thier name does not appear on the poster.

Not trying to wind anyone up here, but haven't we thrown away the Ireland the rebels fought for quite a few years ago anyway? I doubt the current model of the Republic is what they fought for, my opinion on the matter anyway

[Calcio Jack]

I regard myself as being a reasonably intelligent individual, but so far having read widely on this issue, I'm still not so much confused but becoming more cynical by the day...reason being is that I don't accept that the main reason for introducing the Treaty is to streamline the running of the EU.IMO it seems to run fairly reasonably and the changes mooted won't IMO improve it's day to day running by much.

Thus at this point I'm asking myself what is going on here ? locally the 'yes' side seem to be making veiled threats as to how we'll be vilified if we say 'no' but not giving us any positvie reasons to vote yes.

On the 'no' side a spooky group called Liberatas has as bedfellows two sinister Groups Sinn Fein and the Catholic Church with the farmers (IMO a group that only looks to it's own agenda) also supporting a 'no'.

So I feel like I'm caught between a rock and a hard place..so i've looked to our Euro Politicians for guidance...what do I get but laughing hyena Charlie McCreevy and Machcivelli Cox pushing for a 'yes' ... so on mature reflection I'm voting for dustin.

[mypost]

I am also happy that we keep control over tax policy.

I am not convinced by the tax policy argument. There is no doubt in my mind, that the EU want our tax system brought into line with the uniform rate across Europe.

Also, this brings us back to 1987, and FF's pledge to cut taxes before the general election. FF won it, and increased taxes from the outgoing FG-Lab coalition by £100 million, closing hospitals, and cutting public services in the process which cripplied the country. Now, 20 years later, they insist our tax rate will be unaffected from ratifying this treaty. Question is, with their record, are you willing to believe them??

[KevB76]

Also, this brings us back to 1987, and FF's pledge to cut taxes before the general election. FF won it, and increased taxes from the outgoing FG-Lab coalition by £100 million, closing hospitals, and cutting public services in the process which cripplied the country. Now, 20 years later, they insist our tax rate will be unaffected from ratifying this treaty. Question is, with their record, are you willing to believe them??

1987 ? Try 2007 ....didnt they also promise tax cuts in the run up to last years election only to back-track immediately after being elected (not that anyone was taken in by it anyway, it was so blatantly made up). Just shows what a load of mugs they think we are, just tell us what we want to hear, doesnt matter if there's any truth behind it as long as they get what they want. Whats different this time ? Why believe they have our best interests at heart this time ?

[KevB76]

....the farmers (IMO a group that only looks to it's own agenda) also supporting a 'no'.

Ehhhh, yeah. I mean who's interests did you expect them to look after ?
For farmers (as a group) read trade union, its the same idea.

[Poor Student]

I am not convinced by the tax policy argument. There is no doubt in my mind, that the EU want our tax system brought into line with the uniform rate across Europe.

Also, this brings us back to 1987, and FF's pledge to cut taxes before the general election. FF won it, and increased taxes from the outgoing FG-Lab coalition by £100 million, closing hospitals, and cutting public services in the process which cripplied the country. Now, 20 years later, they insist our tax rate will be unaffected from ratifying this treaty. Question is, with their record, are you willing to believe them??

Fianna Fail promised to reduce taxes, and they themselves increased the taxes. Your point is a non sequitur. A political party told a lie twenty one years ago so they might be telling a lie about this. If you used that logic in basing your voting behaviour you may as well just give up. You're clutching at straws trying to bind those two incidents together.:rolleyes:

[mypost]

I'm not binding the incidents together. :rolleyes: I'm citing one moment in time, when the country was on it's knees, they made a weighty promise, which only made things worse. Now they're telling us to ratify a referendum, that offers no benefit to Ireland. They're using arguments that carry no weight in order to sell it to us. With their history of lies, corruption, and empty promises, will you believe them this time? :confused:

[Calcio Jack]

[QUOTE=KevB76;943623]Ehhhh, yeah. I mean who's interests did you expect them to look after ?
For farmers (as a group) read trade union, its the same idea.[/QUOT

What I mean is that IMO they are the most self centred group of individuals in Irish society...

[pete]

I am not convinced by the tax policy argument. There is no doubt in my mind, that the EU want our tax system brought into line with the uniform rate across Europe.


Do you think the UK would have approved this Treaty if there was a threat to taxes? There is zero threat to direct taxes in this Treaty. It could be argued that indirect taxes are anti-competitive but our VAT rates are higher than most so not likely to increase - it is far fetched anyway as among others the UK would never stand for it.

[mypost]

Do you think the UK would have approved this Treaty if there was a threat to taxes? There is zero threat to direct taxes in this Treaty. It could be argued that indirect taxes are anti-competitive but our VAT rates are higher than most so not likely to increase - it is far fetched anyway as among others the UK would never stand for it.

The UK stands to benefit more than most from the constitution, and don't require it to be put to a referendum. That get out, prevented it from being rejected there.

[oldyouth]

I haven't read it fully yet, but I will. As of now, because the Shinners are canvassing for a No Vote, I'm likely to be voting Yes.

[dahamsta]

Indeed, but Fianna Fail, Fine Gael and Labour are campaigning for a Yes...

[superfrank]

Whichever way you vote, you'll be siding with one of the two divides.

I'm leaning towards Yes at the moment, although this may change if I go to the Lucinda Creighton meeting next Tuesday in Donnybrook.

My reasoning for voting Yes is probably ill-informed but my understanding, so far, is that a Yes vote will overall lead to a more democratic EU, i.e. no disproportionate imbalance in each members' voting strength and I'm a firm believer in democracy.

[dfx-]

I'm not binding the incidents together. :rolleyes: I'm citing one moment in time, when the country was on it's knees, they made a weighty promise, which only made things worse. Now they're telling us to ratify a referendum, that offers no benefit to Ireland. They're using arguments that carry no weight in order to sell it to us. With their history of lies, corruption, and empty promises, will you believe them this time? :confused:

Soooo, in other words, you are saying that they lied one moment in time 21 years ago and saying that this is another one.

There is no other reason to state anything about something 21 years ago otherwise.

At the moment, I'm open to either side. Neither side has convinced me one way or the other. I want to know what's good for Europe, not just Ireland in a parochial sense. The Government's history has nothing to do with it, getting revenge on the Government either. If I go in undecided, I'll vote no instead of ratifying something I'm not sure of, so the onus is on the yes vote. And that's a big failure at the minute - I'm not buying any yes arguments yet and they haven't been very strong arguments so far..

[rebelarmyexile]

After reading the treaty, it became apparent to me that the main points the No side are pushing are invalid, (in soverinty, tax, defence) and lot of silly points made by them too. Im personally not very Pro-Europe (in the Tory sense, not SF style anti-EU) but cant really see what the problem in voting YES is, seems to make sense to me.

[Calcio Jack]

[QUOTE=KevB76;943623]Ehhhh, yeah. I mean who's interests did you expect them to look after ?
For farmers (as a group) read trade union, its the same idea.[/QUOT

What I mean is that IMO they are the most self centred group of individuals in Irish society...

The above post was edited or more correctly cut by Pete, who asked that "personal rants be kept off this forum"...it wasn't a personal rant and everything I said was factual, so you want to play censor fine.... but IMO what you did was pathetic and unjustified....if you disagree then let us know which part was a rant ??

[Poor Student]

I'm not binding the incidents together. :rolleyes: I'm citing one moment in time, when the country was on it's knees, they made a weighty promise, which only made things worse. Now they're telling us to ratify a referendum, that offers no benefit to Ireland. They're using arguments that carry no weight in order to sell it to us. With their history of lies, corruption, and empty promises, will you believe them this time? :confused:

You're taking one instance of a political party not keeping a promise two decades ago unrelated to one now. You may dress them up as similar but they're not at all. One is a pre-election promise the other is a referendum on a European treaty. If you took an instance of political parties not keeping their promises decades ago then you could use that form of reasoning to argue against most things.

[mypost]

You're taking one instance of a political party not keeping a promise two decades ago unrelated to one now. You may dress them up as similar but they're not at all. One is a pre-election promise the other is a referendum on a European treaty.


in other words, you are saying that they lied one moment in time 21 years ago and saying that this is another one.

There is no other reason to state anything about something 21 years ago otherwise

http://foot.ie/showpost.php?p=943782&postcount=209 :rolleyes:


My reasoning for voting Yes is probably ill-informed but....a Yes vote will overall lead to a more democratic EU

The issue to us, should be what are the benefits to Ireland from it, if any, rather than how democratic the EU is. The level of democracy in the EU has had little impact on day-to-day life here.

But while we're on the subject, the fact that only one country gets the opportunity to hold a referendum, is a very clear demonstration of how democratic it is.

[pete]

[QUOTE=Calcio Jack;943802]

The above post was edited or more correctly cut by Pete, who asked that "personal rants be kept off this forum"...it wasn't a personal rant and everything I said was factual, so you want to play censor fine.... but IMO what you did was pathetic and unjustified....if you disagree then let us know which part was a rant ??

Post of far off topic & only likely to lead to further replies off topic. Feel free to start a topic on farmers backed up by some facts.

[Calcio Jack]

[QUOTE=Calcio Jack;944545]

Post of far off topic & only likely to lead to further replies off topic. Feel free to start a topic on farmers backed up by some facts.

Ok I can accept that the post was 'off topic' however it was not a rant which is the reason you gave for editing it... that's the end of the matter as far as I'm concerned...cheers

[superfrank]

SaveIreland (http://saveireland.blogspot.com/)

This crowd look a bit dodgy. One of their posters reads: "What do we want? A white Ireland in a white Europe."

The attitude adopted by SF is really pathetic. Adams came out and said, on the news last night, that a No vote will mean that there'll be no changes to the current EU structure and that the EU will have to go back and re-write it.

What really annoys me about some of the No campaigners is that they are focusing on the effects it will have on Ireland. The Treaty will bring reform across Europe, not only Ireland. If Ireland wants to decide what effects it, the country should opt out of the EU.

But Ireland is a member of the EU and, therefore, we have to think as a group, not as individuals.

That's one of the reasons why I'm voting Yes. The changes will effect all of Europe, not just Ireland.

[mypost]

What really annoys me about the No campaign is that they are all focusing on the effects it will have on Ireland. The Treaty will bring reform across Europe, not only Ireland. If Ireland wants to decide what effects it, the country should opt out of the EU.

But Ireland is a member of the EU and, therefore, we have to think as a group, not as individuals.

That's one of the reasons why I'm voting Yes. The changes will effect all of Europe, not just Ireland.

The people who voted on it in '05 were also thinking about themselves, and not what was great for Cyprus or Poland or Austria.

Whether you like it or not, people see themselves as x nationality first, European second, and so what happens in their own national parliament means more to them than what happens in Brussels.

[superfrank]

That's grand for them but I'm not a Europhobe and to me the Treaty will bring greater democracy to the EU as a whole and that's why I'm voting Yes.

[DaveyCakes]

we have to think as a group, not as individuals.

That's one of the reasons why I'm voting Yes. The changes will effect all of Europe, not just Ireland.

Are you taking the ****? We have to think as a group, not as individuals??? I'll stick with thinking as an individual if that's okay with you.

[DaveyCakes]

That's grand for them but I'm not a Europhobe and to me the Treaty will bring greater democracy to the EU as a whole and that's why I'm voting Yes.

Voting primarily for one's national interest does not necessarily make one a Europhobe

[superfrank]

Voting primarily for one's national interest does not necessarily make one a Europhobe
The way some people are campaigning for the No side, they really are acting like Europhobes.

[dahamsta]

superfrank, if you read the very thread you're posting in fully, you'd find at least two federalists that are against this treaty, with explanations. One of them is me. Are you calling me a europhobe?

Perhaps you should go back to the start of the therad and read it fully before tagging people.

adam

[superfrank]

I've been dipping in and out of the thread and it appears to be largely a bitchfest between GavinZac and mypost.

My reason for calling people Europhobes is that some, I do believe I said some when I made that statement, are focusing on how it will effect Ireland's sovereignty. These people are reluctant to give into Europe. They give this impression by the way they are going about their campaigns. To me that's Europhobia. It's the kind of argument to be expected in England.

EDIT: Apologies Adam. My post could be construed as generalising all no-voters as anti-Europe.

[mypost]

My reason for calling people Europhobes is that some, I do believe I said some when I made that statement, are focusing on how it will effect Ireland's sovereignty. These people are reluctant to give into Europe. They give this impression by the way they are going about their campaigns. To me that's Europhobia. It's the kind of argument to be expected in England.

The little countries, such as Ireland, are the most pro-European, yet this constitution aims to sideline them to being subservient to the power and demands of the big 5 countries.

I consider myself pro-European and normally take the yes side in these referendums, but this one is not good for Ireland and Europe in general, and it has to be looked on differently.

[pete]

The attitude adopted by SF is really pathetic. Adams came out and said, on the news last night, that a No vote will mean that there'll be no changes to the current EU structure and that the EU will have to go back and re-write it.


I am voting Yes but don't think i could disagree with that. If any one country does not approve this Treaty it is dead & they start again. I don't know if it is enough of a reason to vote Yes but politicians across the EU won't exactly be happy as they process has already taken years of consultation.

If you had to find a direct personal advantage to every vote you make then probably would not vote half the time. Indirectly a most effectively administered EU benefits everyone.

I think nearly all the political & lobby groups campaigning for a No vote are serial opponents of the EU so difficult to take seriously. SF would definitely fall into that category. The Greens usually oppose EU Treaties but being in government makes that more difficult - have they actively campaigned for this Treaty?

[dahamsta]

I don't have a problem with what Adams said. This treaty has already been rejected twice, they need to get the message and rewrite it with constituents and the member countries in mind, not just themselves.

adam

[DaveyCakes]

politicians across the EU won't exactly be happy as they process has already taken years of consultation.


My heart bleeds for them...

[DaveyCakes]

I've been dipping in and out of the thread and it appears to be largely a bitchfest between GavinZac and mypost.

My reason for calling people Europhobes is that some, I do believe I said some when I made that statement, are focusing on how it will effect Ireland's sovereignty. These people are reluctant to give into Europe. They give this impression by the way they are going about their campaigns. To me that's Europhobia. It's the kind of argument to be expected in England.


You've summarized perfectly why I'm voting no. By using the phrase "give in to Europe" you're describing exactly the kind of coercion being used to push a Yes vote through...

"If you don't vote yes, then Europe will be cross with us"

If not giving in to that make me a Europhobe, then so be it. It doesn't by the way, you seem have a hopelessly naive, black and white worldview in which everyone is either a happy, tolerant Europhile or a backward, xenophobic Europhobe with no shades of grey inbetween.

[dahamsta]

Martin Manseragh (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Mansergh) was trying that line earlier today, I think on Newstalk. Presumably the Dutch and French are scheduled to be thrown out of the union now, since they rejected it in it's previous form (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_European_Constitution). Idiot.

[Lionel Ritchie]

I haven't decided which way to vote yet. There's much I dislike about both sides.

There's a substantial "drift" factor with the Yes side ...as in we MUST vote yes or people on the mainland will be cross with us. A Taoiseach who shrugs that he hasn't read something he demands we vote in favour of doesn't endear either.

Then there's many on the No side I just find odious. Right wing religious groups who see their nice little cat-lick country going down the swanny, Sinn Fein, Libertas -who claim to be pro-European project but use much of the same terminology as British Tory Euro-Sceptics "...Brussels dictat" ..."over in Europe".

When in fact we ARE Europe.

[Angus]

I haven't decided which way to vote yet. There's much I dislike about both sides.
There's a substantial "drift" factor with the Yes side ...as in we MUST vote yes or people on the mainland will be cross with us. A Taoiseach who shrugs that he hasn't read something he demands we vote in favour of doesn't endear either.

Then there's many on the No side I just find odious. Right wing religious groups who see their nice little cat-lick country going down the swanny, Sinn Fein, Libertas -who claim to be pro-European project but use much of the same terminology as British Tory Euro-Sceptics "...Brussels dictat" ..."over in Europe".

When in fact we ARE Europe.

Lionel - I don't know you and mean this with all respect and I know what you mean by the comment in bold.

One of the frustrating things about this debate is that it gets played as a "YES" campaign versus a "NO" campaign with no room for informed intelligent nuanced debate. I know that you did not mean what I am accusing the wider electorate of and am just using your comment as a pivot - I am not having a pop.

Both campaigns are full of terrible people practically none of whiom understand or even have read this treaty - it plays in the media as a contest as opposed to the above mentioned nuanced debate on the issues.

Despite almost blanket media coverage over the last few weeks I have struggled to find an intelligent presentation of the facts and issues - but I have seen buckets of op eds one way or the other - and now this tiresome Ganley US military thing - yawnsville.

if only somebody on foot.ie created a post on Democracy and the Intelligent Electorate......

[mypost]

Despite almost blanket media coverage over the last few weeks I have struggled to find an intelligent presentation of the facts and issues - but I have seen buckets of op eds one way or the other

With all yes/no referenda, that will be the case. It happened with abortion, divorce, Nice, immigration, etc, and here as well.

[Calcio Jack]

Well having seen the biased voting displayed towards Eastern bloc countries to themselves in the Eurovision last night...it's plain to see that nothing west of the Rhine stands a chance (albeit IMO on this occasion we deserved nothing) I'll be voting 'no' as it's one thing to get nil points in a poxy Eurovision contest...it will be a different matter were we to dilute our current strenght (veto etc) by signing up to the Lisbon treaty and allow the newbies to have a level playing field...' what we have we hold' is now my mantra.... and I make no apology for that

[Block G Raptor]

Well said Calcio. the eastern block will look after the eastern block. I know the eurovision is a pretty novel way of demonstrating this but look at how we really have been excluded by the eastern block in that in recent years. being as we are on the western edge of europe we will be the most Isolated by this treaty

[DaveyCakes]

I like it...

"Justice for Dustin...Vote No!"

[Block G Raptor]

I like it...

"Justice for Dustin...Vote No!"

Now where did I leave that Black Marker and poster boards

[GavinZac]

I don't have a problem with what Adams said. This treaty has already been rejected twice, they need to get the message and rewrite it with constituents and the member countries in mind, not just themselves.

adam

If we're going to say that the Constitution being rejected in Holland and France is "this treaty being rejected twice", what about the 18 other countries that have ratified the constitution?

Don't let France bully us! Vote Yes!

[/mypost]

[mypost]

If we're going to say that the Constitution being rejected in Holland and France is "this treaty being rejected twice", what about the 18 other countries that have ratified the constitution?

How many were subject to a referendum? They were all ratified by national parliaments where the result was guaranteed.

[GavinZac]

How many were subject to a referendum? They were all ratified by national parliaments where the result was guaranteed.

National parliaments are elected and mandated to represent their citizens' wishes. The Irish parliament are doing so by enforcing the constitutional requirement for a referendum on this treaty. The multitude of other EU countries did so by their own decisions.

Using your appointed powers to perform what most people in your jurisdiction want you to is what your earlier link referred to as the sinister sounding majoritarianism, or what the rest of us call democracy.

[dahamsta]

On this occasion I agree with mypost, for reasons I've already stated -- this treaty is in the best interest of politicians, not countries or people. Of course politicians are going to ratify it.

adam

[GavinZac]

On this occasion I agree with mypost, for reasons I've already stated -- this treaty is in the best interest of politicians, not countries or people. Of course politicians are going to ratify it.

adam

What's the best interests of politicians? Upping salaries? To take an arbitrary opposition party from across Europe that are supporting the Lisbon Treaty, what would Fine Gael politicians be getting out of this?

[dahamsta]

Power Gavan. The politician's lifeblood. I reckon I've posted the exact same thing now about a half dozen times in this thread, that's about enough for me.

adam

[GavinZac]

Power Gavan. The politician's lifeblood. I reckon I've posted the exact same thing now about a half dozen times in this thread, that's about enough for me.

adam

But aren't most anti-treaty people saying that this will reduce our voting power, and as such, our politician's voting power? Besides, in a democratic system, politicians can only retain power, and probably more importantly their salaries, by meeting their constituents wants and expectations.

Voting for the treaty, according to the No campaign, would be a double blow for politicians, reducing their power and condemning themselves to losing it entirely when the EU are aborting our babies and taxing our children's shoes?