Printable View
I can't believe this issue is still being considered for two reasons.Quote:
Originally Posted by pete
1. ALL countries will lose their comissioner for five out of every 15 years.
2. Comissioners work for the EU, not their country.
It drove me mad to see Mary Lou McDonald constantly whining on this subject.
On the refusal to respect a democratic vote alone, vote No. That's before you look at anything else.Quote:
Originally Posted by jebus
They might be able to tell the French and Dutch to overturn their vote in parliament, but cannot do it here.
Yes amending a Treaty and allowing people to vote again is undemocratic alrightQuote:
Originally Posted by mypost
Seville Declaration? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by pete
We already have that. It was in Lisbon.Quote:
* Specific clause to ensure veto on all tax matters.
Equality isn't good enough for us?Quote:
* Keep our guaranteed EU Commissioner (seem very unlikely as previous suggestion was permanent one for big countries and small countries sharing the junior roles)
:confused: Whats the point?Quote:
* Removal of EU President (not sure if this correct).
Yes because this sounds terrible: Examples of new areas where QMV applies are: the procedure for entry into the euro; administrative cooperation; internal EU financial regulations; humanitarian aid operations; and police cooperation (where Ireland is not obliged to take part but has the right to participate in individual measures).Quote:
* Trim down the areas QMV is used (it was pointed out Patricia McKenna wanted to keep for Climate Change issues)
Labour Party MEP, and Vice President of the European Socialist group, Proinsias de Rossa: "The Lisbon Treaty provides the legal base allowing the adoption of a law to safeguard public services, a longstanding objective of social NGOs and trade unions all across Europe. Indeed, the European Federation of Public Services Union, representing eight million public sector workers across Europe, has said that the activation of these new provisions should be the primary goal of the European Parliament elected next year.Quote:
* Protection for public services from blocking state subsidies.
"The EU Court has previously found that public services provided by or paid for by the State, such as education and social welfare are entirely excluded from EU rules, but that public services with a commercial element such as transport and electricity, can be subject to EU competition and state aid rules in certain circumstances. Consequently there has been a long-running campaign to agree EU legislation that clarifies and copper-fastens the protections for public services from competition and state aid rules. Lisbon now achieves this."
That sounds like a bankable commitment, the kind that some would have you believe were absent.
I bet if you asked 100 voters if they understood this a majority would say they never knew guaranteed EU Comm already gone.Quote:
Originally Posted by superfrank
They might quote what we were told by our then commissioner during the Nice campaigns that it'd be 5 years out of 135 that we'd be without a commissioner...Quote:
Originally Posted by pete
Democratic?? You're having a laugh. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by jebus
They'd quite happily tell Cowen to ratify it through parliament if at all possible. Nothing to do with democracy.
Imo also, the leaders of the political parties who backed a Yes vote, should consider their positions as a result of it. The verdict was not just a refusal to become part of the Grand EU superstate, but a vote of No confidence in their leaderships. Certainly, if Cowen loses the EU elections next year, he should come under pressure to resign.
You realise they could do this if they felt like it?Quote:
Originally Posted by mypost
Quite a reactionary aren't we? Well I suppose you'd have to be being a supporter of a tin pot political party like Sinn FeinQuote:
Originally Posted by mypost
This would be hilarious if you weren't serious.Quote:
Originally Posted by mypost
I'm genuinely interested in how the No voters see it going from here.
Not what they want to see happen, but what they think will actually happen. Can they explain how Ireland will influence the other members to get a result that it can sell to the people.
FWIW, I think a 2nd referendum would likely result in a stronger No vote (again for the wrong reasons but we'll agree to differ on that).
If, consitutionally, they could've got away without a referendum this time (or any time) they would. It still means Lisbon is dead, as it'd still need a new treaty missing out those elements. It'd also be challeged legally, and I can't see how the main opposition parties could really support it going with this method.Quote:
Originally Posted by jebus
No, they wouldn't. I think they saw this as a mid-term fish-in-barrel shooting contest to give them a nice boost 12 months in. Unfortunately the government performed woefully here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macy
Tough call. There'll be more recriminations, more bullying, more shrill threats from the media. I wouldn't rule out a series of threats from France and Germany to kick us out, some artists impressions in tabloid papers of what Ireland would look like if there was a second famine and Big Brian on TV every day to repeat the mantra that there'll be chaos, chaos!Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRedArmy
Meanwhile there will be more protest across Europe as governments insist on ratifying the treaty without their people's consent, maybe major political strikes in France and Germany and the whole thing getting shelved because the ruling elite fear another 1968.
They'll identify the issues that soft no voters went with, and try and solve them as much as possible.Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRedArmy
For example most of the unions could be brought on side by committments on workers rights (personally I'd be looking for legislation rather than just committments). How that'd play with IBEC would be interesting, but hard for them to argue us being in line with the rest of Europe.
Express committments about public services and privatisation
Express committments on tax and militarisation.
Even if they believe these are in the treaty, or already stand from previous ones, they'll have to get those committments again.
That probably would be enough to get it through I would've thought, with a proper campaign by the Government. It'd have to be a fair way down the line, as I think the comments and actions in Europe since the result will have hardened the No vote.
By ruling elite you mean the democratically elected representitives of the people of Europe?Quote:
Originally Posted by BohsPartisan
I think thats conceivable, but my worry would be that as time goes by and (likely) our economy heads further down the tubes, that the 'protest' No vote will only increase.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macy
Could be spun as part of the reason for economic slippage and, as being the saviour.Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRedArmy
If you subscribe to the view (I don't, but clearly many do) that in terms of costs vs benefits of EU membership, we are or are moving towards a negative marginal position (interest rates, fishing, immigration etc.) then the anti-EU feeling is only going to increase.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macy
Its clear the Irish electorate ignored the "Europe has been good to us so vote yes" argument (with some good reason) and if people are looking to see where the EU will benefit Ireland going forward its hard to make a clear case.
Efficiency is a hard sell, to paraphrase someone (Ivan Yates?) on Newstalk over the weekend.
Does any one know if there is anything to stop the other 26 countries from continuing without us? I know EU Commissioners, EU President & QMV changes would require us to sign up but many other issues may not...
Lets say Germany & France want to create their own army. Is it democratic that we stop them as opposed to just opting out?
Wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by jebus
Not in this country they couldn't. End of discussion.
Wrong again.Quote:
Well I suppose you'd have to be being a supporter of a tin pot political party like Sinn Fein
I'm not a supporter of SF or any political party for that matter. I am a supporter of a free Europe, not a federal Europe.
I think you've done a good job in summing up the stupidy of some. A bit of a tip for the future, if you don't understand something then don't comment.Quote:
Originally Posted by jebus
Aren't you the blind guy who couldn't see the No scare posters though?Quote:
Originally Posted by SMorgan
That's absolutely right.Quote:
Originally Posted by jebus
But do I know they were there because Cowen mentioned them every single time he was interviewed along with telling us about people that he knows that are voting No because they think they were told they'd have to store nuclear waste in their back gardens if they don't!!
I don't know, do you?Quote:
Originally Posted by SMorgan
Any chance we can stay on topic & avoid name calling so this thread can stay open?
Do you think those guys rule anything? They're just puppets. The ruling elite are the corporations, the banks, the media, and unelected bodies like the EU commission. In particular the corporations make the big decisions that effect our lives. They control production and distribution of goods and services.Quote:
Originally Posted by Billsthoughts
Can we leave aside pie-in-sky fantasies of anti-corporate communist/agri-anarchy revolution and talk like big boys?Quote:
Originally Posted by BohsPartisan
i've been following some of the establishment reactions to the referendum decision across europe, and its left me curious. how do those who voted yes feel about some of the following:
Spain's centre-left El Pais said Europe is 'blocked once again by a new crisis,' but the liberal El Mundo suggested the way forward was for the other 26 EU member states to ratify the Lisbon Treaty, forcing Ireland to revise its Constitution which requires it to consult voters, or to hold a new referendum.
and
The French language daily La Libre Belgique in Belgium said that submitting such a complex document to a popular vote was 'an inept exercise.' Le Soir agreed, calling it 'Russia roulette'.
whilst
Poland's centre-left daily Gazeta Wyborcza called it 'a very bad sign for the whole European Union' and 'a gift to the Polish enemies of the EU.'
debate about eh hows and whys of the no vote, but are any yes voters annoyed about some of these comments? ireland put the treaty to a public referendum, and of those who voted, the majority voted no. democracy in action, can't argue with that. but how do youse feel about non-irish sources telling you how to run your own politcal establishment?
I'm personally delighted that the No Vote came out on top, the very thought of increasing the say of Vichy France & the Fourth Reich in the running of our country chills me to the bone!
Would think that the No Vote's strong finish had something to do with the French Foreign Minister's stupid comments about Ireland owing the EU....Relatives of mine died in fields in France trying to liberate that country from his new best pals Nazi Army...his ancestors were probably rolling over somewhere showing their yellow bellies and harrying local Jews from their homes
I don't know. I certainly would be uncomfortable with circumventing the referendum now. Whether or not one was needed can be debated on and on, but once you've given it I don't think you can really take it away. What needs to be done is the hand holding I spoke about earlier. Sure, write 2 paragraphs in plain English that reinforce that none of the No campaigns concerns are valid, and paste it to the end of the treaty, but you'd still have complaints about giving it another go. We're sort of stuck.Quote:
Originally Posted by shantykelly
Likewise as above. Inept is a pretty good way to describe the Yes campaign.Quote:
The French language daily La Libre Belgique in Belgium said that submitting such a complex document to a popular vote was 'an inept exercise.' Le Soir agreed, calling it 'Russia roulette'.
Sounds about right.Quote:
Poland's centre-left daily Gazeta Wyborcza called it 'a very bad sign for the whole European Union' and 'a gift to the Polish enemies of the EU.'
Quite secure about it to be honest. They can't force us to anything, but they're entitled to their opinions.Quote:
. but how do youse feel about non-irish sources telling you how to run your own politcal establishment?
eh?? Vichy france was a puppet state for the rump of france that wasnt occupied by the Germans. Hardly an imperial powerhouse trying gain control of ireland by stealth. and i would hardly call todays germany the fourth reich. their current army strength lies at about 6 divisions. the IDF has a strength of approximately 1 division. cant seem them jack boots marching this way any time soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wangball
given the choice, i would have voted no. but dear god, please dont let anyone think that the above would have been my reasoning behind it.
Who do you think calls the shots then? You think the big corporations, some of whose wealth is bigger than that of a lot of nations aren't calling the shots? You know, those guys who fund all the major political parties across the continent, who own the media, who make fortunes manufacturing weaponry that they sell to national governments, who thrive on keeping fossil fuels the main source of energy, who are able to call out the police to break strikes and stop protests? Then you are very naive. Big boys deal in the truth not the fantasy that we somehow have control over our own governments.Quote:
Originally Posted by GavinZac
What were the main motivations for the war in Iraq? Did Bush's buddies in big business not call the shots on that one? Or do you live the fantasy that somehow the EU is different, a benign entity that cares for its people a kind of political Virgin Mary standing up against the big bad USA? You continue to argue your point starting from the laughable premise that the state is somehow a neutral body that treats all equally and that if we don't like how things are going we simply have to cast a vote. A place where our leaders have no ulterior motives or hidden agendas and are simply good honest folk who are there to serve the people.
When did I say any of that? This thread is about the Lisbon Treaty and the aftermath of the vote. Now, unless you feel like taking a gang of guerrillas up to the Wicklow mountains (I'd probably join you, whats the worst that could happen? I reckon we'd outrun our 3 tanks and the green-painted cessenas are hardly very good at ground-straffing) to try to overthrow our corporate overlords, can we go back on topic?Quote:
Originally Posted by BohsPartisan
A) The EU is different to the US. Demonstrably. In many, many ways.Quote:
Originally Posted by BohsPartisan
B) If you look historically, I think you'll find the unions have had considerably more clout in EU member states than global corporations.
C) Please spare us the Das Kapital rhetoric. A lot has changed since then. Whatever about the failures of capitalism (and by God there are some), Marx and Engels are well past their sell by date.
Do you spend your free time watching reruns of Dads Army Das Boot and Saving Private Ryan?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wangball
I suppose you still hold a grudge against Dev or Collins too?
Dad????Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRedArmy
What has the Iraq War got to do with the Lisbon Treaty? Didn't France & Germany oppose the US?Quote:
Originally Posted by BohsPartisan
:eek: :confused:
Ireland has been pro EU for years & while the rejection of the Lisbon Treaty was not anti-EU for many people it does seem the number of euro sceptics is growing now the cash is drying up. The 'race to the bottom' rhetoric is boring as historically the EU has moved jobs to the least developed countries. Jobs moved to Ireland when our standard of living was low & the same is happening in Eastern Europe. You will see the same worldwide - Just look at where Korea was 30-40 years ago & now a rival to Japan in technology.
@ORA what has changed since then specifically with regards to anything Marx wrote in Capital (in the unlikely event you read any of it). If Marx's ideas were so out of date, why was he voted thinker of the Millenium by British academics? Why do so many economists say that Marx perfectly describes Capitalism in his economic works?
And if you think the Unions have more "clout" in the EU than corporations well, its hard to argue with a hypothesis so dumb. It simply is not the case.
@Pete - obviously not reading the substance of the post as usual, that was a reply to GavinZac's post here http://foot.ie/showpost.php?p=963758&postcount=787 oh and same to you gav. It was to do with something you specifically said questioning the power of corporations. I was trying to tease out why you think that view is Pie in the Sky.
I didn't question the power of corporations. However, it is "pie-in-the-sky" to discuss the burgeoning overthrow of the oligarchy. The topic is the Lisbon Treaty, which has little or nothing to do with Marxist class struggle and more to do with whether or not we can veto EU changes in tax structures. Now, we've wasted a couple of pages on your voting is pointless, burn the fast food joint rant, can we get back to the substance, as you put it?Quote:
Originally Posted by BohsPartisan
Obviously you have your ideas in a twist. If I though voting was pointless why was I arguing for a no vote? :confused:Or are you deliberately lying to misrepresent my position (a little trick you picked up from your fellow Yes campaigners) Also bringing Black Block tactics into the discussion is as disingenuous as the Yes sides constant use of Coir to discredit the no side.Quote:
Originally Posted by GavinZac
My "rant" was an answer to a question on what the alternative to Lisbon is. My point being, there is no alternative because the problem is not just this particularly treaty, the problem is the EU, its unelected cabinet and the power of the European Round Table of Industrialists. The only alternative to Lisbon and the EU is to replace that with a democratic European federation and real democracy is impossible as long as these people hold power.