Why are you voting yes

sink

OK-Cancel-Apply wrote: »

The Lisbon Treaty will make Europe stronger, and that's why the United States is funding the 'no' campaign.

I'm a firm Yes supporter, however I would like to see any evidence you have on which you base that outlandish claim. It would be a gross violation of our sovereignty should the US government be funding organisations with a political agenda in this country, and it would seriously damage the US's relationship with not only Ireland but all of Europe.

nesf

sink wrote: »

I'm a firm Yes supporter, however I would like to see any evidence you have on which you base that outlandish claim. It would be a gross violation of our sovereignty should the US government be funding organisations with a political agenda in this country, and it would seriously damage the US's relationship with not only Ireland but all of Europe.

I think the allegations comes from the main funders/owners of Libertas being US Defence contractors or somesuch and people making the jump to saying that they were asked on the side to do it. There might be more to it than that, basically I'd view it with plenty of scepticism.

AngryHippie

The EU suits the US down to the ground, even more so if Lisbon goes through, They will have cheap labour markets to exploit, and room for plenty of financial speculation which they seem to thrive on, There is no way that the US administration would risk being involved with a media campaign to sway voting intentions in a sophisticated country like Ireland;)
On the other hand, there is a distinct possibility that a large US owned Multinational company may throw a few Million around to facilitate a smokescreen and a bit of disinformation, especially if it was spent as retardedly as Libertas, focusing all of their arguments on easily refuted nonsense, instead of pulling at a bit of thread that they know leads somewhere, like who will have control over FDI, what will become of the CAP, what will happen to Mandelsons WTO deal, Will Cowen give a cast Iron gaurantee to use the Veto on the CAP issue, How will Ireland cope with being the most expensive labor market in Europe, Can Irelands Educational system adapt to the new demands of Europe in language and technology etc.
The worst part about having a no vote in mind is the fact that sinn Fein are advising me to vote no, They are the worst of them, they have never made a correct referendum call and never for the right reasons or adressing the correct issues either, I see Mary Lou and want to vote yes....its not easy

Hotblack Desiato

AngryHippie wrote: »

who will have control over FDI, what will become of the CAP, what will happen to Mandelsons WTO deal, Will Cowen give a cast Iron gaurantee to use the Veto on the CAP issue, How will Ireland cope with being the most expensive labor market in Europe, Can Irelands Educational system adapt to the new demands of Europe in language and technology etc.

None of those issues have anything to do with the Lisbon Treaty. Yes or No, we will still have to deal with them. FDI is a national competence not an EU one. The CAP afaik remains a veto area (i.e. unanimous agreement.) The WTO will require unanimous agreement. Our labour costs would be a lot higher then they are were it not for immigration from the new EU states. Our education system is our government's responsibility (although the EU can help in areas like international recognition of qualifications.)

Scofflaw

nesf wrote: »

I think the allegations comes from the main funders/owners of Libertas being US Defence contractors or somesuch and people making the jump to saying that they were asked on the side to do it. There might be more to it than that, basically I'd view it with plenty of scepticism.

It being conspiracy stuff, there's an Indymedia article. To be fair, though, it's an unusually well-written one.

cordially,
Scofflaw

cathalgarvey

Whether or not the US is funding Libertas' "no" campaign sort of pales in the face of the far more likely scenario (if you're looking for a conspiracy): Ireland is the last chance for politically disgruntled people in the rest of the EU to stop Lisbon going through. If the no campaigns are getting more money for their posters and ads than seems reasonable, these little bands of euroskepticism abroad are the most likely source of funding.

I agree with the above with regard to our government and the parties composing it. We effectively have two large parties and a few satellite ones, and the two large parties thrive on opposing one another. It's not often that Fianna Fáil does something and Fine Gael doesn't have something critical to say of it. So yes, it should stand out when Fine Gael deliberately states that the Lisbon Treaty is "more important than partisan politics".

To sum up Lisbon's effect on Ireland's (and any other country's) say in the running of the EU...
Current: "The EU suggests this. Can we all please ratify it?"
Lisbon: "If nobody has a problem, we'll ratify this, ok?"

Lisbon allows the EU to do things without the express, deliberately and vocally given consent of each member nation. This doesn't mean they have less power at all; it introduces more powerful vetos for each country to allow easy stopping of anything objectionable. Everyone wins; the EU moves more smoothly, and everyone retains or gains the chance to say no.

To close that note, and with regard to our supposed loss of vetos in many specific areas; it wouldn't matter were this true, because co-decision is being introduced in virtually everything. This means the parliament is being consulted on almost everything now, moreso than before. The new voting structure allows easy vetoing if 4 or more countries decide to, and every country's national parliaments can push a special veto also if they decide they don't like something after it's been passed.

In other words, whatever about losing specific vetos, we're gaining 2 broad-spectrum vetos instead.

Just on the whole "US funding the yes campaign"..

The US would definitely like to see a strong europe in the next 20-50 years. When china is a lone superpower, the EU/US together will dwarf it.


I personally want to vote no, to give FF a black eye. I didn't vote for them, I don't know anyone who did. They've thrown billions down the toilet. On the same side of the coin I do not wanna vote SF. Not now, not ever. I'm currently planning on abstaining.


But tbh, when you think about 25-50 years time, would you like a stronger or weaker EU?

Lockstep

OK-Cancel-Apply wrote: »

The Lisbon Treaty will make Europe stronger, and that's why the United States is funding the 'no' campaign.

Uh, what?

Any chance you could elaborate on this?

sink

kickoutthejams wrote: »

Uh, what?

Any chance you could elaborate on this?

There is a conspiracy theory going around that libertas is being funded by the CIA. Indymedia has a well written article on it but all their evidence is circumstancial. I would need better evidence before I would even consider it a possibility.

Lockstep

sink wrote: »

There is a conspiracy theory going around that libertas is being funded by the CIA.

I'd need extremely hard evidence before I would consider such a thing plausible.

World is wacky enough without unproven theories of such a nature.

Hotblack Desiato

There was an article in last Saturday's Irish Times which raised some interesting questions on that topic. I better not say any more than that!

Morpheus

redspider wrote: »

I havent decided which way I will vote yet.
- if scaremongers among the No camp are using FUD as well and claiming that our tax controls will be lost, that miltary aspects will be against our neutrality, etc, is that a reason to vote Yes?
Redspider

Id just like to point out we are not a neutral state. This isnt directed at redspider who is undecided, but at the public who may read this in general.

Ireland is not currently and has never been neutral.

Read the constitution.

Its not in it.

I challenge anyone to correct me if I am wrong and I have researched this whole issue before posting.

I am sick and tired of reading the No campaign leaflets about Irelands neutrality, Ive asked one or two of them about the Neutrality and when it was enshrined in our constitution as I didnt remember voting on it, they havent a clue about it, two of them told me that we became a neutral state in WW2!!!! Christ I lost the plot when I heard that one.

We have a foreign policy of non-alignment on a case by case basis.

that is all.

To be neutral means to look at swedens approach.

It would militarily cost us more of our GDP to be truly neutral constitutionaly than to vote yes in the Lisbon treaty.

I agree with FG's view. anyone attacks a member of the EU, attacks the EU as a whole and as such we are all obliged to help defend each other. We would expect the other states to do that for us, just because we are on the western verges of the EU and "relatively" safe is not a reason to thumb our noses at those member states in the east some of whom are uncomfortably close to dangerous countries, we helped get them into the EU now should we turn our backs?

A Common Defence policy is NOT the beginning of an uber state. it is a good way of garnering equal security and international rights for all member states of all sizes and in my opinion, with regard to foreign relations and also economically speaking, other non EU countries will begin to treat the smaller states with greater respect than before when they realise that they risk damaging relations with the EU as a whole.

Overall I would just like the issue of Irelands non-neutrality to be clearly defined and foremost in your mind when you vote either for or against the lisbon treaty.

I am a member of the DF and as such I seriously dont expect the status quo to change all that much in the next ten years, if you suddenly expect to see fighter jets patrolling our skies or tanks rumbling up o connell street in the next easter parade then you are being had.

Also on a smaller note, the EDA European Defence Agence was set up in 2004and is not a new addition via the Lisbon treaty and is not set up by EU defence companies. In my opinion it is providing a medium through which EU countries militaries can tender for equipment in a more economical and cost saving way by reaching a wider supplier base.

Also heres another point, admittedly nobody likes having to have armies. But in todays world they are an inherent product of our relative freedoms in europe. As such we should support them as they provide you with the often unseen security to go about your daily life and have the freedom to vote in the first place, so I ask, why continue to buy from american israeli or russian arms suppliers and provide them with Euros to keep some of their own workforces in jobs when the EU can happily supply cheaper european sourced equipment and spares for each members armys and keep europeans in jobs instead?

Whatever you do, try to be more informed and vote intelligently, if you are unsure, then dont vote no, just abstain from the vote altogether, you will simply be removing a yes or no vote from someone who has gone to the bother to be informed themselves and decided to vote based on that either way.

gordon_gekko

i am voting yes for a few reasons , 1s of all because this country is small , its not powerfull and it is not a country who will gain from isolating itself from bigger blocks with which its association has been nothing but good , we are not SWITZERLAND

2ndly , most european countries by global standards are small , ireland is especially small , do the irish people think that ireland will be more or less powerfull when it comes to neogtiating with the big guns , china , russia , the usa , those power blocks would see ireland as nothing but a little bug
europe needs to be united in this brave new world

lastly i am voting yes because i dont respect one single group on the no side , the usual suspects are there , sinn fein are against it because sinn fein get more attention and are more relevant by taking a possition that is contary to the mainstream , were they to come out in support , they would be about as relevant as labour are in this election and i dont hear much talk about labour theese days
another thing , i thought joe higgins was rejected by the electorate last yr , how come hes on the radio and tv a few times every day