Lisbon Treaty

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HomeBrewPlease

Gavin, if it's a yes vote this time, do you think there should be a third one as a decider?

---

Referenda to change the constitution (thats what this is, to change the constitution to add a line "we accept the lisbon treaty") are brought by representatives of the people as bills by the members of the Dáil and/or Seanad. If this referendum was passed, another referedum could reverse the decision by removing the line. If the majority support for No was there as you say it is, any party willing to bring such a Bill (to remove the ammendment) before the Dáil and thus the irish people would receive majority support. That's a fairly tasty carrot to wave in front of Fine Gael, Labour or Sinn Fein. If a Yes vote occurs, I wouldn't rule out one of those parties adopting that very stance.

Referenda are there to poll the opinions of the voters at any one time. If the majority want a yes, it will place the ammendment into the constitution until the majority want it removed.

It's a fairly simple process when you think about it. Obviously not suited to flipping a coin though or where-ever you got the the best of three idea. Certainly not from precedence as the Nice and Divorce referenda show.

I don't have a problem with referendum reruns, as long as there's a reasonable amount of time between them. I reckon 5 years is a reasonable period of time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dahamsta

I don't have a problem with referendum reruns, as long as there's a reasonable amount of time between them. I reckon 5 years is a reasonable period of time.

---

Surely "when the circumstances have changed/are clarified" is pretty apt? I mean, what harm is another re-run? If you were asked to vote on it once a week your opinion of its implications would hardly change?

You think these things run for free, and we and our "representatives" haven't got better things to do with our and their time?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dahamsta

You think these things run for free, and we and our "representatives" haven't got better things to do with our and their time?

---

Well yeah, once a week assumes they've got some new perspective on the issue once a week. Our elected "representatives" ( :confused: ) don't work that fast.

Be honest with you GZ, I don't even know what you're talking about any more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GavinZac

Referenda are there to poll the opinions of the voters at any one time. If the majority want a yes, it will place the ammendment into the constitution until the majority want it removed.

---

With the EU referendums however, the majority don't get to remove a Yes vote. It's made in stone. With Lisbon, the question asked in the Autumn is the exact same as the one last year. The fact we're having another referendum on the exact same document is Rule 1 of Mugabe-style politics. "You didn't do what we told you to do, now you'll do it again" :mad:

As for the sham guarantees that came as a result of the government's "research", I would like to know on what basis were the findings taken from. If it was solely the Irish Times, then clearly the government hasn't learned the lessons from the last referendum.

Listen to the (No voter) electorate, not the (Pro-Lisbon) papers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GavinZac

Surely "when the circumstances have changed/are clarified" is pretty apt? I mean, what harm is another re-run? If you were asked to vote on it once a week your opinion of its implications would hardly change?

---

Nothing has changed. Exact same Treaty that was already rejected. Exact same referendum once again.

And since you seem to support re-running referenda, if it's a yes vote this time, do you think there should be a third one as a decider?

Oh and there was 9 years between the two divorce referenda.

Has anyone here changed his/her mind since the last Referendum? I can't see many people who vote Yes the last time deciding the vote No because we are running a second Referendum.

Even though I will vote Yes again I think Cowans legal guarantees highlight the government incompetence in negotiating the first Treaty.

I can understand why some people are wary of the EU political union but are there any specific issues?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mypost

As for the sham guarantees that came as a result of the government's "research", I would like to know on what basis were the findings taken from. If it was solely the Irish Times, then clearly the government hasn't learned the lessons from the last referendum.

Listen to the (No voter) electorate, not the (Pro-Lisbon) papers.

---

http://www.dfa.ie/home/index.aspx?id=81464

Full report there.

I voted No in the last referendum, and will do so again. A lot of my friends did so also, but on a recent night out, a number of them said they will vote Yes, not because of the guarantees or that their opinion has changed, but to paraphrase "they have been bullied". Vote No again, and the Government will keep running this off until they get the result we want.

Democracy at its best!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Ref

I voted No in the last referendum, and will do so again. A lot of my friends did so also, but on a recent night out, a number of them said they will vote Yes, not because of the guarantees or that their opinion has changed, but to paraphrase "they have been bullied". Vote No again, and the Government will keep running this off until they get the result we want.

Democracy at its best!

---

Two quotes come to mind.

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - Einstein.

"No one in this world, so far as I know, has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people." - H. L. Mencken

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GavinZac

Referenda to change the constitution (thats what this is, to change the constitution to add a line "we accept the lisbon treaty") are brought by representatives of the people as bills by the members of the Dáil and/or Seanad. If this referendum was passed, another referedum could reverse the decision by removing the line. If the majority support for No was there as you say it is, any party willing to bring such a Bill (to remove the ammendment) before the Dáil and thus the irish people would receive majority support. That's a fairly tasty carrot to wave in front of Fine Gael, Labour or Sinn Fein. If a Yes vote occurs, I wouldn't rule out one of those parties adopting that very stance.

Referenda are there to poll the opinions of the voters at any one time. If the majority want a yes, it will place the ammendment into the constitution until the majority want it removed.

It's a fairly simple process when you think about it. Obviously not suited to flipping a coin though or where-ever you got the the best of three idea. Certainly not from precedence as the Nice and Divorce referenda show.

---

A long answer but you stil didnt actually answer what I asked you. If their was a yes vote this time, would you support the government holding another referenudm on the issue? Yes or no would suffice?

I dont support a best of three or best of five or whatever, but the government dont seem to like the idea of people voting the way they didnt want them to vote and seem intent on keeping holding referenda until they vote the "right way".

Do you seriously think that if there had been a yes vote last year, that the government would be holding a second referendum? Can you tell me any referendum that the government held and that they won, where they went back and re ran the exact same referendum within 12 - 18 months of doing so?

They never even held the promised referendum into joining Partnership for Peace that they promised. They cannot be trusted and promises from them and european bureaucrats dressed up as "legal guarantees" cannot be trusted either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HomeBrewPlease

A long answer but you stil didnt actually answer what I asked you. If their was a yes vote this time, would you support the government holding another referenudm on the issue? Yes or no would suffice?.

---

I'll answer that. I think should keep trying. As long as the Dail/government wants to keep trying that is their right. If the people don't like that will be ejected at the next General Election.

Call it bullying or whatever but in these times Ireland cannot lose ist influence in the EU. We might need a bailout from someone in the next couple fo years if cannot raise billions on the money markets. We have no right to an EU bailout but if we give them what they want will have earned some loyalty points. An EU bailout is so much more preferable that an IMF bailout.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Ref

"they have been bullied".

---

http://swordattheready.files.wordpre...1/paulnutz.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pete

We might need a bailout from someone in the next couple for years if cannot raise billions on the money markets. We have no right to an EU bailout but if we give them what they want will have earned some loyalty points. An EU bailout is so much more preferable that an IMF bailout.

---

Whether it passes or not, this country is economically screwed for the next 5 years at least. A very rough budget is still coming in in the winter. Passing Lisbon won't make that any easier. The Lisbon Treaty is not a financial goldmine, it is "to streamline decision-making in the EU" :rolleyes:

As regards EU bailouts, any financial aid that we're entitled to, we'll get. We are an EU member, and as such we can't be refused it, (e.g. Pork crisis) much as Brussels would like to refuse it.

This is the last referendum on the treaty, pre-UK election. When they reject it, they won't be isolated in Brussels and neither will we. No is our first and final answer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pete

I'll answer that. I think should keep trying. As long as the Dail/government wants to keep trying that is their right. If the people don't like that will be ejected at the next General Election.

Call it bullying or whatever but in these times Ireland cannot lose ist influence in the EU. We might need a bailout from someone in the next couple fo years if cannot raise billions on the money markets. We have no right to an EU bailout but if we give them what they want will have earned some loyalty points. An EU bailout is so much more preferable that an IMF bailout.

---

So why bother holding referenda in the first place?

Why do they not just tell us up front before wasting our time going out to vote, instead of pretending that there is some sort of democratic process at work or that the democratic wishes of people would be respected, that regardless of how we vote, they will ignore us and keep holding one until we do as they say?

In Brussels, democracy only works when the political class get the answer they want. It used to work in the Eastern bloc, until the people rose up against it. The "job for life" that they had didn't matter to them. They wanted to decide their own future, and many died in order to get it.

It's striking to me, that in the same week as Iranians were risking their lives so that their choice should be respected, the Irish government in Brussels were actively trying to rig the outcome of the next referendum, by declaring that we will have the "financial tools" to get out of the recession, should it be passed. Funny that, as none of the countries that passed it have them.

Not a single Euro, nor a single job will come here as a result of passing Lisbon. On the day of the vote, people must realise that and vote accordingly.

Did you just compare the Lisbon referendum to the Iranian elctions?

Seriously?!?

Since this thread is clearly into covering old ground territory I'd like to re-iterate that we are living with the consequences of a completely flawed Supreme Court decision on the definition of a constitutional amendment in respect of EU treaties.

The evidence for this:
1) we voted No for spurious reasons
2) we're likely to vote Yes for equally spurious reasons.

There is something fundamentally wrong in putting legislation that the average person cannot (either through lack of effort or intelligence) understand.

The "concessions" the Government have gotten may us look, frankly, like thickos.

This isn't just about the Lisbon Treaty, it's a symptom of decades of bad Government and worse judiciary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

There is something fundamentally wrong in putting legislation that the average person cannot (either through lack of effort or intelligence) understand.

---

I agree. I think it's ridiculous that the details covered by Lisbon are even in a treaty, much less a referendum. I think there should be a simple, clear treaty strictly defining the powers of the EU, and this should be the only document we ever vote on. The gritty details can be left to bureaucrats.