Lisbon Treaty

[mypost]

I voted no primarily because I didn't see anything wrong with the status quo; to be honest, I couldn't see any other way of voting.

It's rare that Stu, Adam, mypost and bohemians fans are shoulder-to-shoulder on an issue. But like the political parties on the Yes side, it's convenient to put differences aside for the greater good of the country.

And the decision on Friday was for the greater good of the country. It was important to get this voted down, so we wouldn't have to be subject to an EU nation, who like other nations around the world, wants a permanent President and Foreign Minister. Mary McAleese and Micheal Martin would be effectively useless from next year, the Dail would be nothing more than a poor mans talking shop. The Irish Constitution would be no more.

As it stands, we have a strong Europe as it is, and while we need to compete with Russia (banjaxed outside Moscow), India (frequent terrorist outrages), and China (world's most repressive regimes), the issue of climate change is not as important as the individual loss of sovereignty and democracy that passing this treaty entails. The loss of sovereignty is something which should never be surrendered by any nation, let alone Ireland, with our history. Ditto democracy.

Free Europe is a strong Europe, and the Europe most citizens want. Only politicians want Federalism.

[OneRedArmy]

As it stands, we have a strong Europe as it is, and while we need to compete with Russia (banjaxed outside Moscow), India (frequent terrorist outrages), and China (world's most repressive regimes), the issue of climate change is not as important as the individual loss of sovereignty and democracy that passing this treaty entails. The loss of sovereignty is something which should never be surrendered by any nation, let alone Ireland, with our history. Ditto democracy.

Free Europe is a strong Europe, and the Europe most citizens want. Only politicians want Federalism.

Your comments on Russia, India and China are frankly, beneath ridicule.

Its because of people like you I want Europe to have more influence.

[pete]

I voted Yes as the admin and decision making changes seem sensible, necessary and as good a deal as I think we could reasonably expect. The EU has been good for us and threatened doom of previous Treatys never occurred so ultimately I trust the EU. I did my own research & I also did not feel any of the organisations on the No side made me inclined to question the EU.

[pineapple stu]

Ah you're one of those who thinks climate change will just sort itself out, right I'll back out now as I'd rather not lower my IQ to the level of a marshmallow

So I should do what you say because you said to do it? And you think I have the IQ of a marshmallow?

That's a No vote for me so. See how this works?

A further problem with your bullying, dismissive arrogance arises from the fact that it's a tact the EU have tried before. Take the Maastricht Treaty, for example. We were basically told that (and I paraphrase out of necessity) without the euro, Ireland would be nothing. We had to have this or we'd all end up back in the 60s. So we voted for it; we were young and naive at the time. Denmark, Sweden and the UK didn't vote for it and lo! the sky hasn't fallen in on their economies. So people are looking for more of a reason to vote something in than "Shut up and vote for it, idiot."

Oh, and I'd say Croatia will be fine.

[SMorgan]

I am fairly sure that if the Government ask the same question, with some tinkering, they'll get the same answer. Last Thursday’s outcome bears little resemblance to Nice One.

The fact is that you can be pro-EU and fully acknowledge the benefits of Ireland's involvement in the EEC, EC and now the EU and still vote against the Lisbon Treaty. This agreement was anti-democratic, in that it was drafted to avoid some countries having to put it to their people and involved the appointing of an unelected President and Minister of Foreign Affairs. I’d say that if this Treaty was put to a vote across Europe, Ireland would have strengthened its credentials as a pro-EU country. Do you believe for one minute that Denmark, Netherlands, France or the UK would have gotten anything like 46% for the “indecipherable drivel” that was the Lisbon Treaty. There is a space reserved in heaven for those on this message Board trying to explain it to the rest of us, even if one of them tried to claim that the Commissioners have a legitimate mandate and cannot be considered unelected.

[DaveyCakes]

Mary McAleese and Micheal Martin would be effectively useless from next year

Would anyone notice the difference?

[DaveyCakes]

We effectively denied Croatia the chance for economic growth by voting no, how about that for a reason to vote yes

How about a common climate change policy that would put pressure on the US and China for seconds

Ah, the Maude Flanders argument..."Won't somebody PLEASE think of the Croatians"

They seem to be doing okay....

http://eu.mfa.hr/?mh=34&mv=307&id=4232

[OneRedArmy]

So I should do what you say because you said to do it? And you think I have the IQ of a marshmallow?

That's a No vote for me so. See how this works?

A further problem with your bullying, dismissive arrogance arises from the fact that it's a tact the EU have tried before. Take the Maastricht Treaty, for example. We were basically told that (and I paraphrase out of necessity) without the euro, Ireland would be nothing. We had to have this or we'd all end up back in the 60s. So we voted for it; we were young and naive at the time. Denmark, Sweden and the UK didn't vote for it and lo! the sky hasn't fallen in on their economies. So people are looking for more of a reason to vote something in than "Shut up and vote for it, idiot."

Oh, and I'd say Croatia will be fine.

You've just done whats known as post-fact justification.

You didn't vote no because Jebus thinks you have the brain of a marshmallow.

As for the Euro, I don't think comparing us to Britain, Denmark or Sweden is in any way relevant. By any measure, Euro membership has been very good to us. If you're looking for a comparison, do some research into how the New Zealand and Icelandic economies (small island economies moving from an agrarian base) are doing recently outside an Currency Area or Trade Block.

Your comments are indicative of the "post-Celtic Tiger superiority complex with an added dose of economic paranoia" that seems to have grasped large swathes of the country every since people realised that property accumulation wasn't the magic beans production license they'd thought it was.

Without wanting to sound like David McWilliams, as a nation we're like a child thats been told the birthday party is over and they can't have any more cake. We're angry and we'll blame anyone who tries to tell us what to do.

The EU has and continues to be beneficial to us to this day. Anyone who disputes this should at least bring some figures/examples or the like to the table.

[pineapple stu]

You've just done whats known as post-fact justification.

You didn't vote no because Jebus thinks you have the brain of a marshmallow.

But people did vote no because politicians thought the people have the brains of a marshmallow. It's called likening one thing to another. Obviously jebus didn't sway my vote.

As for the Euro, I don't think comparing us to Britain, Denmark or Sweden is in any way relevant. By any measure, Euro membership has been very good to us.

Again with the sweeping dismissive statements with no back up whatsoever. I think it's a default setting for some of yez!

And I'm not trying to argue whether or not the euro is good, but I am arguing that the EU and the government went way over the top when they stated the consequences of not joining. Different thing.

[OneRedArmy]

Do you believe for one minute that Denmark, Netherlands, France or the UK would have gotten anything like 46% for the “indecipherable drivel” that was the Lisbon Treaty. There is a space reserved in heaven for those on this message Board trying to explain it to the rest of us, even if one of them tried to claim that the Commissioners have a legitimate mandate and cannot be considered unelected.

1. You are right that it hasn't been well explained by the people who had a responsibility to do so (the main political parties).
2. That acknowledged, legal documents by their nature are "indecipherable drivel", particularly EU ones due to the complexity.

[OneRedArmy]

But people did vote no because politicians thought the people have the brains of a marshmallow. It's called likening one thing to another. Obviously jebus didn't sway my vote.


Again with the sweeping dismissive statements with no back up whatsoever. I think it's a default setting for some of yez!

And I'm not trying to argue whether or not the euro is good, but I am arguing that the EU and the government went way over the top when they stated the consequences of not joining. Different thing.

See my reference to Iceland and New Zealand, which are probably the two closest economies to Ireland's outside the EU.

These are the best example of what not joining the Euro could've cost us.

The best you could do was a comparison to three countries 10-20 times our size that we economically have nothing in common with.

[pineapple stu]

Denmark and Sweden have 40m-80m people now?

And ironically, we've 10-20 times the population of Iceland.

[OneRedArmy]

Denmark and Sweden have 40m-80m people now?

And ironically, we've 10-20 times the population of Iceland.

Thanks for misreading my post and the geography lesson.

I'll still take Iceland and New Zealand as the best comparisons when assessing the benefits of joining the Euro vs what could've happened.

If your views re the single currency are indicative of the wider population then the Government has a much wider and harder job on its hands.

[Student Mullet]

A further problem with your bullying, dismissive arrogance arises from the fact that it's a tact the EU have tried before. Take the Maastricht Treaty, for example. We were basically told that (and I paraphrase out of necessity) without the euro, Ireland would be nothing. We had to have this or we'd all end up back in the 60s.

The euro is quite popular, I don't think it took any bullying to get us to join.

[dahamsta]

Citing "popularity" as a reason is very odd. Popular with people or currency traders? I'm not sure how popular it would have been with either before we joined the eurozone, what with it not actually be a currency and all...

[Sheridan]

I see McCreevy is taking some of the flak for this in the European Parliament and facing calls for his resignation. Brilliant stuff, couldn't happen to a nicer ****.

[jebus]

I see McCreevy is taking some of the flak for this in the European Parliament and facing calls for his resignation. Brilliant stuff, couldn't happen to a nicer ****.

Not surprised given the balls the government made of promoting this. Still though, 5 more years come the next nationals eh lads

[OneRedArmy]

I see McCreevy is taking some of the flak for this in the European Parliament and facing calls for his resignation. Brilliant stuff, couldn't happen to a nicer ****.

Thats McCreevy, the Commissioner who represents Ireland......oh wait now.....

[Student Mullet]

Citing "popularity" as a reason is very odd. Popular with people or currency traders? I'm not sure how popular it would have been with either before we joined the eurozone, what with it not actually be a currency and all...

I don't think citing popularity as a reason for something getting a lot of votes is odd, that's how the system works.

I don't know any currency traders. I've not seen any opinion polls on the topic so can only base the popularity of the currency on talking to the people I know and, of them, Pineapple Stu is the only one I'm aware of who doesn't like the euro.

[Sheridan]

Charlie McCreevy: Bad for Ireland, Bad for Europe.