Printable View
Making it easier for them gives them more power; and you conveniently ignored the last part of the sentence. Typical Yes side tactics: pretend to misunderstand, ignore what you don't want to hear.
It's not done for our benefit, it's done for theirs. It enables them to cut us out of the chain even further, in exactly the same way they cut most of Europe out of voting on the contitution they have re-presented to us, despite being told - twice - to cram it where the sun don't shine.
adam
How is giving MEPs more influence isolating people from power?
Again, I can't see the treaty as much more than a cleanup exercise of institutions and mechanisms not designed for a Union of 27.
Lisbon isn't limited to MEPs. It is a cleanup exercise to some extent - the addition of an unelected president being a horrendous exception that only cleans up in their warped view - but it's one that disassociates people further from policy. The people and insitutions in the EU have quite enough power as-is, they don't need any more. If they want to tidy up, stopping their ridiculous empire building should be the first step.
The Nice Treaty was the cleaning-up exercise, that facilitated the expansion of the EU to 27 states and beyond, and the mechanisms to run the EU properly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr A
The Lisbon Treaty is not a treaty, per se, it's a constitution and a deliberate vindictive power grab, driven by the largest countries. It strengthens the powers of the parliament, the commission, and provides for an EU President. That wasn't in the Nice Treaty, and is something I find unpalatable.
After Lisbon is adopted, referendums will be a thing of the past, and given the lust for more power in Brussels, it won't be that long before elections go the same way.
Lisbon is an assault on the democratic rights of the people of 26 states. It would only have democratic legitimacy in Ireland. There is something deeply worrying about that for the future.
I'll comment on other points later.
This discussion got very circular quite a while ago, but I'd pick up on Mr. A's point re the Parliament and try to get into what specifically the problem is.
Given the Parliament approve legislation and are directly elected, in what is a fairly non-contentious manner, I presume this is not the source of the problem.
Are we into the vagaries of how the Commission, Council and Parliament interact in the various types of legislative procedures?
If people are so vehement about their opposition I'd expect they would be able to articulate what the specific problems are.
Otherwise the thread may as well be locked as it just falls back into the same tired old bluster from both sides.
It amazes me that, driving around Limerick, all I can see on "Vote Yes" posters are lines like "It's simple. We'ree stronger in Europe", or "It's simple. Europe works for us".
Whatever about whether the treaty is what poeple say it is (that argument is going fine without my two cents), it is ridiculous that the Govt and Opposition, after screwing up last time by just assuming that the voting public would just do as they were told, would be as unable or unwilling to do things differently this time.
Very hard to make a complex argument on a poster in fairness. Both sides can only put 'soundbites' on there.
Tp expand on that, Labour in particular have done several press releases on why they believe the treaty is a good thing with regard to various issues such as workers' rights and women's rights.
The problem with Lisbon for people who don't have the time or know-how to understand the treaty, is who do you believe? You can't believe politicians or parties because they have too much to gain personally and as organisations. You can't believe companies because - ridiculously - their only responsibility is to their shareholders. And you can't believe the likes of Coir and Ganley, because they're lying sacks of crap.
You can't even believe the organisation designed specifically to provide people with unbiased information for god's sake, because it's biased. Talk about Oirish.
adam
I think thats a fair comment Adam.Quote:
Originally Posted by dahamsta
I deal with EU legislation every day and have a fairly detailed knowledge of the consultative legislative processes (probably the most common EU legislative process). There are quite a few checks and balances to the power of the Commission, probably more than ever, both at the pre-legislation stage and in post-legislative comitology. In the area I specialise in it makes for good legislation, significantly better than what it replaced coming out of the Oireachtas. I'm not sure the Lisbon changes impact this process that much, arguably less so than Corbett or Lamfallusy.
I've said this many times, I'm not sure how you sell this to the man on the street?
Do you automatically draw the conclusion that if it can't be explained or understood in a paragraph that we should vote against it?
Personally its still my view that there's a strong argument that there wasn't grounds for a referendum, but clearly the (unelected) Supreme Court knows best.
I've love one of the No side to get into the detail of what exact changes they disagree with. If you read back through the pages of this thread, all that comes across is vague comments about "the will of the Irish not being respected" and "too much power going to Brussels". Thats fair enough if people want to make their decisions on high-level concepts, but then it becomes less about Lisbon and more about distrust/unhappiness with the wider European Union.
The AG gave the government his advice that a referendum was necessary. The government admitted that it was therefore best to have one, in order to prevent further legal challenges taken if it was not permitted.Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRedArmy
I've made a number of posts stating changes or speculative changes which I am not happy with. Indeed one of them is on this very page. I suggest you scan through them again.Quote:
I've love one of the No side to get into the detail of what exact changes they disagree with. If you read back through the pages of this thread, all that comes across is vague comments about "the will of the Irish not being respected" and "too much power going to Brussels".
Can't agree on that.Quote:
yes, I'm comfortable that Lisbon in practical terms doesn't given them materially more powers. And on that I suppose we'll agree to disagree.
It's well known that this treaty is all about more power for Brussels which in turn will give them more power down the line. If the yes side focussed on the contents of the treaty, instead of terrorising the people over the economic situation, we could have a free and fair debate. The economy is their sole selling point, and this treaty has nothing to do with the economy.
In fact, if we were to run a poll on the amount of people I've spoken to in the past 6 months stating which way they'll vote, it wouldn't be a contest, but a walkover for the No side.
really? Where is this well known? Relate it back to the roles, responsibilities and power of the Council, Commission and Parliament pre and post Lisbon then if it's well known.Quote:
Originally Posted by mypost
I'm not sure what relevance that has to what level of extra power Lisbon gives to the relevant decision making bodies.Quote:
Originally Posted by mypost
Had a bit of a "run-in" with yes campaigners at lunchtime today. Apparantly, despite the thousands of leaflets available, they're not getting very far.
Whole attitude was pompous, and one of them tried to argue with a straight face, that other countries have voted on the Lisbon Treaty. I think it shows how far they, let alone the government, are from reality.
im no political brain now at all, but useing the current economical climate as a reason to vote yes is tripe, we had 20 years of boom boom boom, and one year of bust, im happy with the laws staying the same, cause they seem to work fine, its inevitable that things go bust, its nessesary,
i dont agree with this at all, its says that its needed to make europe work in all states equaly, well people should understand what can happen, pick dell in limerick, they shipped all there production to poland, and at the moment that a bit costly, but of course not for a hugh multinational comapany like dell, this "treaty" will make this process so much easier, meaning more medium size businesses will be able to make the jump to poland and the likes, hell even an ambitious small business might think itd be worth there while,
i persoanlly think there tryin to say to me that all businesses that have left the island in the last year, will all resume working with the same employies as soon as lisbon is passed,
the thing i dont undertsand is, ive yet to meet someone who is gonna vote yes, yet the opinion polls say the majority are voting yes
You should be embarassed by comments like this ORA, it's the kind of thing I'd expect to see in debate club in a secondary school.Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRedArmy
Here's one, and it's the only one I'm going to get into. I have better things to do with my time.Quote:
I've love one of the No side to get into the detail of what exact changes they disagree with.
Justify having an unelected president of the EU, without resorting to the Yes side misdirection of the issues of the current system. I'll repeat that: without reference to the current system. It has no bearing on the lack of an election for same.
adam
If people aren't willing to get their hands dirty debating the nuts and bolts then its a pointless exercise IMO. Thats the last I'll say on it.Quote:
Originally Posted by dahamsta
You can't blame them for not getting their hands dirty, when everything they say, is dismissed as wrong and lies by the other side.Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRedArmy
The opinion polls are in "yes" press, and that part explains it. Then the polls are reported all over the world, with those 1,000 respondents views taken as what the country thinks.Quote:
Originally Posted by don ramo
For example, the Irish Times regularly ask opinion polls on their online paper about Lisbon. Despite most comments defending and explaining the No vote, the Yes side are always ahead in the percentages. :rolleyes:
Last weekend's Red C poll was for the Sunday Business Post. The key word is in Bold. This is the same paper that told the government the Sunday before the vote last year, that they had it wrapped up. Most business heads support it, like they support NAMA, despite the public outcry.
Maybe it's because No voters tend to be a LOT more vocal, and the yes case is far harder to articulate.
Maybe they don't have to try that hard.
http://www.irishtimes.com/blogs/lisb...edia-coverage/
Two letters from the Irish Independent. One, a history teacher from Belgium....:
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/le...y-1890192.html
...and the other from the American Chamber of Commerce:
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/le...s-1890196.html
We're not part of Schengen, and while that has probably more importance to citizens, it didn't affect our economy. Neither will this.
Random complaint - the ads for and against the treaty are utterly moronic. Cóir's "No" campaign has been discussed here, although they have since come out with the pink heart ads with slogans like "Politicans LOVE the gravy train - vote no", but the yes ones are unbelievable. "No to nuts; Yes to Lisbon", with a monkey. Like, WTF? "Yes in the City" with four shapely women posing. "It's simple - I'm safer in Europe" - so we vote no for Lisbon and the drugs battle will get out of control?
Given the Government took a lot of stick the lsat time for trying to force the issue down people's throats, it's amazing that they're doing the exact same thing this time around.