If the changes of us being attacked are relatively low could the same not be said of our EU neighbours?Originally Posted by mypost
That said we have never been purely neutral anyway. We have always been less neutral on the allies or US/Western sides.
I presume you know my "mock" quote above was tongue in cheek even if no similie...
Last edited by pete; 17/06/2009 at 10:51 AM.
That doesn't make sense, if you have doubts about legislation, you should vote against it. Otherwise it risks getting in by default. Either that or take the time to educate yourself better about it.
You should always vote, no matter how frustrating it is (and yes, it's very frustrating). Even a spoil is better than no vote at all.
adam
http://eirigisligeach.blogspot.com/2...-lisbon-2.html
Sligo éirígí activist Gerry Casey has condemned the decision by Brian Cowen’s administration to hold a re-run of the Lisbon Treaty referendum, which was democratically rejected last year.
Casey said the decision exposes the fundamentally undemocratic nature of the European Union and the contempt with which the political establishments in both Dublin and Brussels view the Irish people.
He said: “By ignoring the democratic decision of the Irish people last June to reject the Lisbon Treaty and by their decision to re-run the exact same referendum in October, the EU and the Brian Cowen’s administration have shown yet again the utter contempt with which they view the Irish people and the notion of democracy. From the time this Treaty was voted down, nothing whatsoever has been changed in it. Not a single paragraph, not a single word. The referendum the Irish people are being forced to vote for later this year will be exactly the same as that which they rejected last year.”
He added: “The so-called declarations and guarantees being given on certain issues are a red herring. They are meaningless and will have no legal force whatsoever as they will not be part of the Treaty itself. As such, they will not override the actual content of the Treaty. To put it simply, they will be meaningless political promises from untrustworthy politicians at both European and national level."
“Once again, this administration are attempting to bulldoze through, using a combination of coercion and deceit, a treaty that will further increase the fundamentally undemocratic nature of the EU. A vote for the Lisbon Treaty will further erode this state’s sovereignty, speeding up moves towards the creation of an EU super-state. The Treaty will see a further abandonment of the state’s neutrality as the militarisation of the EU will substantially increase, with moves towards an EU army intensifying and the establishment in the Treaty of the so-called mutual defence pact."
“The Treaty also continues to promote the right-wing ideology of greed over need, of privatisation and is fundamentally anti-worker, with negative consequences for the rights of workers, rights which need to be strengthened, not diminished. These are the very policies and values that have created the economic recession that we are currently in, that has led to massive unemployment, wage reductions, income levies and cuts in essential public services, such as health and education. For Irish workers to vote for Lisbon would be akin to turkeys voting for Christmas.”
Casey concluded: “Cowen and his colleagues have completely ignored the concerns of the Irish people over the Treaty. They have failed to secure any changes to it because they never once sought any changes to it. But Cowen and his cronies in Leinster House and in Brussels need to understand quite clearly that when we said No, we meant No. What part of No do these people not understand?”
Never heard of Sligo éirígí activist Gerry Casey so after bit of googling I see he is part of Socialist Republician fringe far left group. Main "policies" just seem to anti-British & as I have never heard of before I guess represent a very small minority of people given there is no evidence of even local council seats.
Vote No to Europe as the EU caused the Irish recession seems to be the summary. It is fairly clear that blog is anti-EU & not just anti-Lisbon.
I'm pretty sure he's wrong on the guarantees having no legal force too.
You can't spell failure without FAI
I've only heard one person comment on the legality, and their argument was one of precendent, specifally referring to the Danes. It's essentially a gentleman's agreement as far as I can tell, which is about as trustworthy as a handshake or "verbal contract". I'm pretty sure the person that was commenting wasn't a lawyer either.
I don't trust the eurocrats and their treaty. I wonder why that might be.
adam
Actually you are incorrect John. Unless they are included in the treaty itself, which they are not, then the guarantees have as much legal force as a politicians pre-election promise
I was thinking of this article:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/...breaking54.htm
Of course, there are fudges there - "at a future point" and "commitment" aren't "immediately" and "legal guarantee" - but it does seem like they would carry that weight if Cowen gets what he's asking for there.Spelling out the "requirement", Mr Cowen wrote that "what I ... require is a clear and unequivocal commitment that at a future point after the Lisbon Treaty enters into force, the legal guarantees contained in the decision will be attached to the EU treaties by way of a protocol."
You can't spell failure without FAI
Cowen was perfectly satisfied with the treaty as it was. What possible motivation would he have to chase down that meaningless "commitment" once he gets his way and the treaty is passed?
A leading authority on League of Ireland football since 2003. You're probably wrong.
Votes. He's not exactly sitting on impressive polls at the moment.
You can't spell failure without FAI
For the record, that's what happened with the Danes, however it's important to point out that they weren't attached to the Maastricht Treaty, they were attached to another, later treaty. That's what the Irish Government is looking for here, in what has been described as a "belt and braces" approach. The problem being that the belt has no notches and is thus useless, and the braces are in the post from North Korea.
TBH, my time as a supporter of Europe is nearly at an end. While I believe in the concept in much the same way I believe in the concept of true socialism, I don't think it can work in practice. The communists ruined socialism with their greed for more and more power, and that's exactly what the eurocrats are doing to Europe. I don't think we should leave Europe, I don't think there's anything to be gained by it in the short to medium term, and I do think that the petty eurocrats would do everything in their power to truly shaft us.
I don't think Europe has the balls to throw us out either though, for many reasons including the accessions. So I think we should just plain do what we damned well please, including borrowing as much as a we damned well need to get ourselves out of this recession properly, and giving two figers to the EU when they wave their finger at us about it.
Either way, if Lisbon goes through, my support of the EU project is over.
adam
Last edited by dahamsta; 24/06/2009 at 6:01 PM.
The only way they would be legal would be for them to be part of a treaty. For that to happen we are dependent on the word of not just Cowen and the Irish government but also all the other governments in the EU who would also have to agree down the road to include those necessary protocols. To be honest they cannot be trusted to do so.
Do you remember Fianna Fáil's commitment to hold a referendum before allowing Ireland join NATO's Partnership for Peace (PfP)? That promise wasn't long going into the bin was it?
Bottom line is, if it's not in the treaty then it has no legal standing and as I already said, it is as relaiable as a politicians pre-election promise. In other words, it is not in any way reliable
I'm not convinced the guarantees are worth much anyway - much of it seems to be grandstanding to appease the kind of people who voted no to stop the EU army conscripting their sons. Perhaps I've missed something there, and there actually is some value to them.
At any rate, none of this is going to change my "We already voted no to this, you undemocratic *******" no vote.
You can't spell failure without FAI
Votes don't come into it. Once the referendum is out of the way, the issue can be put off and spun indefinitely, or at least until the Croatian accession treaty. That gives FF plenty of time to sweep it under the carpet. In any case, FF is now so firmly ensconced in the back pockets of the neoliberal lobby that it has abandoned its previous populism (witness the imminent slashing of social welfare.) The know that come election time, a lot of yokels will still be stupid enough to vote for them.
A leading authority on League of Ireland football since 2003. You're probably wrong.
They rejected the treaty. They voted NO.
There were two choices - Yes or No. They chose No.
Nowhere on the ballot paper did I see an option that said
No- I dont understand it or
No- but please ask me the exact same question again next year
Did you?
A No vote shouldnt automatically mean it can't be brought forward again...
And in light of this we should definitely get a second bash of the general election this year as we clearly got that one wrong too......
Even though it is the exact same question? So if we voted yes this time should we have another go - best out of three sort of thing?
Perhaps the government could have told us all that the result of the first referendum wouldnt count anyway before we voted and we could have just stayed at home and waited for the second one before wasting our energy getting up and going out to vote
They can't throw us out anyway
Last edited by dahamsta; 24/06/2009 at 6:37 PM. Reason: Merged posts.
HBP, if you read all of micls post, you'd see that it was somewhat tongue-in-cheek.
Is your statement in response to me wishful thinking or is there a legal reason?
Or the government could try to identify the issues the people had with the treaty, check if they were valid complaints, go get confirmation that they were not, and then present the treaty properly a second time with less misinformation possible?
Thank feck we don't live in a country where we can't have second goes at referenda. Imagine how embarrassing it'd be to live in a nation where we're still living on a 2:1 decision by our parents to ban divorce!
Your Chairperson,
Gavin
Membership Advisory Board
"Ex Bardus , Vicis"
Gavin, if it's a yes vote this time, do you think there should be a third one as a decider?
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks