Lisbon Treaty

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

14/12/2008, 7:13 PM
mypost

Quote:

Originally Posted by pete

It is currently undemocratic that a person in Ireland has 14 times the voting power of a German person. Only correct we reduce that a bit.

Not all Germans live in Germany. Several million live in much smaller countries, several thousand more live here. Should they be punished for that? That's what you're advocating.

Quote:

New QVM rules protect the power of small countries by ensuring need significant majority of both population & country numbers. large countries cannot push through issues.

They will if consisted of the biggest 5, who will constitute the required percentage on any issues.

Quote:

Workers rights? Without the EU we wouldn't need to worry about that as wouldn't have any jobs.

Manyof the multinational firms based here came from the USA, creating thousands of new jobs. With or without Lisbon, they'll still be coming here due to our location and tax rate advantages over other EU states.

Quote:

The EU is made up of sovereign nations governed by their own laws.

Not under Lisbon. The requirements are common foreign, defence, security policies. The populations of the member states have a right to be asked if they agree with that scenario or not, not in just one country.

Quote:

I suppose the government would argue that they have addressed the concerns of people after Lisbon I.

They addressed one concern. One that rated low on the reasons why the treaty was rejected.

Quote:

Do you really think the EU want the Irish army so badly they have to trick us into it even using false legal guarantees? As said above if they need us so badly it would be a War we could not opt out as would be so big.

The guarantees are not legal, the Irish army will still be required to aid other member states should they be attacked, and will have to improve military spending, both at a time when we can least afford it. So they have not addressed any neutrality concerns.
14/12/2008, 8:53 PM
pete

Quote:

Originally Posted by mypost

They will if consisted of the biggest 5, who will constitute the required percentage on any issues.

Incorrect. Do you work for Libertas?

QMV in Lisbon Treaty

Quote:

* 55% of the Member States must agree: (for example, while there are 27 Member States, 15 Member States must agree);
* those Member States supporting the decision must represent 65% of the EU population.

To get 55% of the member states you would need at least France, Germany, Italy, United Kingdom, Spain, Poland, Romania, The Netherlands, Belgium, Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary, Portugal & Austria.

The change is actually better for small countries as there is currently no requirement for majority of member states just votes.
15/12/2008, 5:57 AM
mypost

Quote:

Originally Posted by pete

The change is actually better for small countries as there is currently no requirement for majority of member states just votes.

What countries have the most votes?? :D:rolleyes:

We have very little power in the European Union, and a restricted number of political entitlements as a member state. It's important that we preserve them in order to remain an influential member of the Union.
27/12/2008, 9:14 PM
mypost

Watched the TD and Senator statements from earlier in the year recently, and while there was a lot of huff and puff about Ireland been in "unchartered waters" and "isolated", there was little if any specific explanation about what exactly that meant.

Despite repeated declarations of "respecting the result" of the referendum from the Yes side, the general attitude was, "sure weren't we a bunch of thicks for voting No". :rolleyes: Senator Paschal Donoghue claimed that he felt "marginalised" and "feeling lonely" when the result was announced, and complained that his "social wealth" would be threatened as a result. He would later chair the sham EU Committee in the Autumn. With respect, Paschal Donoghue is not someone who is signing on, or living on €200 a week, or about to lose his home. That is what "feeling lonely", and "marginalised" is. There were just 6 speakers on the No side, 2 SF TD's and 4 Senators, including Shane Ross. Indeed it was Ross who made the best speech of all, indicating what the government would do with our corporation tax veto.

The Dail Statements were split into two parts, while the Seanad's commenced 5 hours into the day's proceedings. The speeches are all currently available here in the Dail/Seanad Webcast Playback section, dated 18 June last.
28/12/2008, 1:22 AM
ArdeeBhoy

Who cares?

We gonna sign eventually;in no position to argue against ultimately........
02/01/2009, 8:42 AM
mypost

More bullying, this time from the business class: :mad:

Quote:

"It sets up an unhealthy situation for Irish-based American companies to be operating its European operations from a place that has made clear its ambivalence to the European Union, American firms want certainty, to be secure that the operating conditions will not change after they relocate."

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/...842350072.html

Fair enough, pay the higher tax rates in other countries then. Or to avoid it, go to India, a well-known politically stable EU country. :rolleyes:

You can't have it every way. Good luck.
02/01/2009, 2:00 PM
Student Mullet

Quote:

Originally Posted by mypost

You can't have it every way.

I think that's the key point.
06/01/2009, 5:12 AM
mypost

Good interview with Klaus in the "Prague Daily Monitor" here

A lot of media complaining that Klaus is now EU President, when he's not. Saying he is, is like saying Mary McAleese was/is President of the EU, when we get to hold it, when actually it's the Taoiseach instead.

Imo, it is also highly insulting to the Czechs, that Sarkosy invited himself to Egypt to try and sort out the latest Israel-Palestine crisis. What part of "you're no longer EU President" does he not understand?
06/01/2009, 9:36 AM
OneRedArmy

Quote:

Originally Posted by mypost

Imo, it is also highly insulting to the Czechs, that Sarkosy invited himself to Egypt to try and sort out the latest Israel-Palestine crisis. What part of "you're no longer EU President" does he not understand?

The French have historically had close relationship to the region, but don't let the truth get in the way of a rant....
06/01/2009, 12:28 PM
mypost

I'm aware of that, but it's the Czechs job to represent the EU on these matters now, not his.
06/01/2009, 12:39 PM
OneRedArmy

Quote:

Originally Posted by mypost

I'm aware of that, but it's the Czechs job to represent the EU on these matters now, not his.

I thought we didn't have an EU president?

Also, did he say specifically that he was representing the EU?
06/01/2009, 1:35 PM
pete

Quote:

Originally Posted by mypost

I'm aware of that, but it's the Czechs job to represent the EU on these matters now, not his.

Has Sarkovzy claimed he is representing the EU?
06/01/2009, 2:07 PM
osarusan

Quote:

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

Also, did he say specifically that he was representing the EU?

Quote:

Originally Posted by pete

Has Sarkovzy claimed he is representing the EU?

To be fair, either he is there as a representative of the EU, or he shouldn't be there at all without haveing ensured that what he's saying/offering is what the EU are saying/offering.
He may have run it all by the EU already, I have no idea. But if he hasn't, I don't think that the president of an EU member state should be unilaterally doing what Sarkozy is doing.
06/01/2009, 2:13 PM
mypost

Quote:

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

did he say specifically that he was representing the EU?

Quote:

Originally Posted by pete

Has Sarkovzy claimed he is representing the EU?

:rolleyes:

He didn't, and I never said he did.
06/01/2009, 2:16 PM
pete

Quote:

Originally Posted by osarusan

To be fair, either he is there as a representative of the EU, or he shouldn't be there at all without haveing ensured that what he's saying/offering is what the EU are saying/offering.
He may have run it all by the EU already, I have no idea. But if he hasn't, I don't think that the president of an EU member state should be unilaterally doing what Sarkozy is doing.

There is no common EU foreign policy. Independent countries do as they please. France does not hold the Presidency anymore.
06/01/2009, 2:25 PM
Macy

Quote:

Originally Posted by osarusan

He may have run it all by the EU already, I have no idea. But if he hasn't, I don't think that the president of an EU member state should be unilaterally doing what Sarkozy is doing.

As pete says, there's no common EU foreign policy, so it's not like he's causing a policy conflict one way or another.
06/01/2009, 2:46 PM
OneRedArmy

Quote:

Originally Posted by mypost

Imo, it is also highly insulting to the Czechs, that Sarkosy invited himself to Egypt to try and sort out the latest Israel-Palestine crisis. What part of "you're no longer EU President" does he not understand?

Quote:

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

The French have historically had close relationship to the region, but don't let the truth get in the way of a rant....

Quote:

Originally Posted by mypost

I'm aware of that, but it's the Czechs job to represent the EU on these matters now, not his.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

I thought we didn't have an EU president?
Also, did he say specifically that he was representing the EU?

Quote:

Originally Posted by mypost

:rolleyes:

He didn't, and I never said he did.

Well thats what you inferred with your bolded comment above.

So are you just making it up?
06/01/2009, 2:53 PM
osarusan

Quote:

Originally Posted by pete

There is no common EU foreign policy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Macy

As pete says, there's no common EU foreign policy, so it's not like he's causing a policy conflict one way or another.

I know this, but the EU does release statements on conflicts like the current conflict, and I just mean that member states should be careful that what an individual member state says doesn't undermine such statements or positions.

EDIT : I'm basing this on the assumption that an EU statement is supposed to be representative of an EU opinion or position, and therefore represents or includes the positions of the member states. If this is not the case, then forget everything I've said!
06/01/2009, 3:28 PM
mypost

Quote:

Originally Posted by osarusan

the EU does release statements on conflicts like the current conflict, and I just mean that member states should be careful that what an individual member state says doesn't undermine such statements or positions.

Which is my point.
21/01/2009, 1:17 PM
mypost

Cowen on the warpath in the Mansion House yesterday, according to the Irish Independent.

Quote:

"Our membership of the union gives life to the aspirations of the First Dail. It is surprising, therefore, to hear some so consistently question our role within the union,"

It's called opposition, that politicians never like.

Having only recently broken free from the grip of one Union, the first Dail had, almost certainly to the contrary, no aspirations of becoming part of another. This Dail however, are intent on doing whatever it takes to satisfy the European Union, rather than co-operate with the mandate it's own electorate gives them.

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page