Republican Sinn Féin calls for a NO vote

Vinegar Hill

Seems Sinn Fein has weighed in as well!

---

Statement by Ruairí Ó Brádaigh, President of Republican Sinn Féin to press conference, May 14, Dublin.

Republican Sinn Féin calls for a NO vote to defend sovereignty, neutrality and democracy and defeat the Lisbon Treaty in the coming referendum on June 12.

Those supporting Lisbon have freely admitted that it is 95% - 96% the proposed EU Constitution which was rejected by the people of France and Holland in referenda in 2005. Lisbon is the EU Constitution by the back door in that it would constitute or establish a new European Union in the form of a supranational Federal State.

Qualified Majority Rule

Lisbon is also a power-grab by the EU's Big States, Germany, France, Britain and Italy. By making EU law-making mainly dependent on population size, it would increase the relative weight of the Big States in making EU laws in future and reduce that of smaller States like the 26 Counties.

Sovereignty

Under Lisbon more than 50 policy areas will no longer be covered by a member state's veto. Another clause gives the EU Council of Ministers the right to extend its powers in all areas with the exception of defence.

Neutrality

The "mutual defence" clause contained in Lisbon would commit all member states to assist by "all means in their power" any EU state which is "the victim of armed aggression on its territory". This is a significant step towards the full militarisation of the EU. It will be recalled that a Fianna Fáil general election manifesto in recent times guaranteed no participation in the NATO-led Partnership for Peace without a referendum. Yet 18 months later the Fianna Fáil-led administration brazenly brought the State into that Partnership for Peace without a vote of the electorate. Neutrality is being steadily eroded.

Democracy

The non-elected EU Commission holds the power to initiate legislation. Under Lisbon the 26-County State will lose its commissioner for five out of every 15 years, ie for one-third of the time.
Lisbon would give the EU Court of Justice the final decision on what our human and civil rights are in a wide range of areas. Already its "Laval ruling" set the "free movement of goods and services" as superior to the right of workers to strike. The Lisbon Treaty will further this agenda, placing competition above the rights of the working people.

The issue at stake here is the Lisbon Treaty, the movement of power towards the centre in Brussels and the tightening of the EU grip, NOT the question of EU membership. If Lisbon is defeated, life will go on as before - as happened when France and Holland rejected the proposed constitution - and the whole matter will have to be reconsidered. In fact this State could give a lead to the other peoples of Europe to demand their own referenda in turn, thus increasing democratic accountability.

Voting NO to the Lisbon Treaty/EU Constitution is opposing the creation of an undemocratic superstate, increased militarisation, the erosion of neutrality, the privatisation of public services and unfettered capitalism. We want a more democratic, not a less democratic Europe, a Europe of peoples.

zuroph

well that settles it, a yes vote from me.

Vinegar Hill

Because it is Sinn Fein does not make the points any less valid. It is easy to read the reasons why to vote NO.

JC 2K3

AFAIK, Republican Sinn Féin are not the same as Sinn Féin. Despite the fact Sinn Féin are also promoting a no vote, this post seems slightly misleading.

zuroph

I've read the points. from ALL the no campaigns. so far, not one has hit home with me, they've all smacked of propoganda. the first campaign posters i saw were along the lines of "If you dont like Bertie, vote no" which is ridiculous, why would my personal beliefs on bertie effect in any way how i vote on european policy..

sink

Vinegar Hill wrote: »

Those supporting Lisbon have freely admitted that it is 95% - 96% the proposed EU Constitution which was rejected by the people of France and Holland in referenda in 2005. Lisbon is the EU Constitution by the back door in that it would constitute or establish a new European Union in the form of a supranational Federal State.

Don't the words supranational and federal contradict each other?

Vinegar Hill wrote: »

Qualified Majority Rule

Lisbon is also a power-grab by the EU's Big States, Germany, France, Britain and Italy. By making EU law-making mainly dependent on population size, it would increase the relative weight of the Big States in making EU laws in future and reduce that of smaller States like the 26 Counties.

As usual they convieniently left out the other requirement under the new QMV system, that 55% of states are required to pass it. In this requirement we have just as much power as Germany a country 20 times our size.

Vinegar Hill wrote: »

Sovereignty

Under Lisbon more than 50 policy areas will no longer be covered by a member state's veto. Another clause gives the EU Council of Ministers the right to extend its powers in all areas with the exception of defence.

All areas were we would have difficulty having any impact on our own such as climate change. Any expansion of powers would require a unanimous vote and in Irelands case a referendum.

Vinegar Hill wrote: »

Neutrality

The "mutual defence" clause contained in Lisbon would commit all member states to assist by "all means in their power" any EU state which is "the victim of armed aggression on its territory". This is a significant step towards the full militarisation of the EU. It will be recalled that a Fianna Fáil general election manifesto in recent times guaranteed no participation in the NATO-led Partnership for Peace without a referendum. Yet 18 months later the Fianna Fáil-led administration brazenly brought the State into that Partnership for Peace without a vote of the electorate. Neutrality is being steadily eroded.

We never were truely neutral like Switzerland or Sweeden to begin with. And our non-aligned status dates back before the second world war. It made sence to be neutral during the cold war but I can't see the reason to stay neutral anymore. Anyway this treaty safegaurds our neutrality as we can not be obliged to provide any military assitance without first satisfying the triple lock, which is purely for your benefit as I would rather we not be non-aligned anymore.

Vinegar Hill wrote: »

Democracy

The non-elected EU Commission holds the power to initiate legislation. Under Lisbon the 26-County State will lose its commissioner for five out of every 15 years, ie for one-third of the time.
Lisbon would give the EU Court of Justice the final decision on what our human and civil rights are in a wide range of areas. Already its "Laval ruling" set the "free movement of goods and services" as superior to the right of workers to strike. The Lisbon Treaty will further this agenda, placing competition above the rights of the working people.

The same as every other country, we are not loosing out to bigger states.
The court already has much say over human rights and competion law. The Lisbon treaty dosn't give the court any more power than it already has in these areas. The free movement of goods and services are essential to making the common market as strong as possible. In the short term there may be some cases were it goes against workers in certain countries, but in the long term once wage equilisation has been completed the common market will benefit workers all across the union.

Thats republican sinn fein. The one with an active paramilitary wing.

Kev_ps3

Fair play to them, im not a Sinn Fein voter but ill be voting No.

humanji

Kev_ps3 wrote: »

Fair play to them, im not a Sinn Fein voter but ill be voting No.

Fair play to them for trying to mislead voters? I'm sure there are plenty of real reasons they could choose to inform the public about instead of lying to people.

lostexpectation

alter the thread to put in republican sinn fein

cathalgarvey

Oh thank goodness. If Sinn Féin vote no, the educated public will hopefully vote yes!

turgon

Oh thank goodness. If Sinn Féin vote no, the educated public will hopefully vote yes!

cathalgarvey, in one fell swoop you have made two (what are in my opinion) ridiculous points

a) that simply because Sinn Fein vote NO to the treaty we should all vote YES. This is partly an insult to your own intelligence - you are basically saying that you cannot make up your own mind and have to rely on others.

b) that those in the NO camp are uneducated, and that their opinions are bizzare. You have a right to an opinion, but that doesn't entitle you to dismiss contradicting ones. Just because they disagree with you doesn't make them altogether wrong.

Both sides highlight points of merit and demerit in the treaty. It just so happens that the NO side twist things a little more than the YES said.

theprizelamb

was watching six-one this evening and heard a sound bite of Gerry Adams saying that one of the reasons for a "no" vote was that Ireland would no longer have a commisioner.

Am i missing a point, because i've heard this being put forward a few times, but Ireland does not have a commisioner representing Ireland, but there is a commisioner for Internal Markets and Services who happens to be irish. While every member state currently nominates a commsioner they do not have any leaing towards their home nation, but must remain totally impartial. further more they cannot take action without the mandate from the council of minsiters (?) which every member state will contnue to have a representitive.

If this is correct, and I stand to be corrected, going without a commisioner who happens to be irish is not a valid reason to vote no.

oscarBravo

You're correct about the commissioners' alliegance being to Europe, rather than to their home states, but a more important point is that we'll lose the automatic right to a commissioner even if we vote "no" to Lisbon - it will just happen five years earlier with a "no" vote.

sink

This thread is about Republican Sinn Fein not Provo Sinn Fein. But anyway Gerry Adams is a tool, most people don't listen to a word he says.

turgon

Without Gerry Adams there probably wouldnt be piece in Ireland, he being the one who dragged most of those ignorant nationalists into the political agenda.

And I bet you anything you wouldnt say it to his face.

dlofnep

What has Gerry Adams to do with RSF? At least get your parties right lads before you start having a crack at each other.

sink

You're absolutely right, but he has no sence how to run a country.

HalloweenJack

From the sounds of it, SF are pushing for a No vote so nothing will change. A "left" party pushing conservatism? Surely not!

dlofnep

His ability to run the country is not relevant to this thread.

turgon

dlofnep wrote: »

What has Gerry Adams to do with RSF? At least get your parties right lads before you start having a crack at each other.

I wasnt having a crack at anyone, I was just pointing out what I feel. Down here in the republic were all "oh now, siinn fein are so bad", and yet we have no problem with them running things up north. Its one of the greatest hypocricies of modern irish politics.

dlofnep

I was referring to the confusion or inability of people to understand the difference between Sinn Féin (Headed by Gerry Adams) and Republican Sinn Féin (Headed by Ruairí Ó Brádaigh). This thread in question is in relation to Republican Sinn Féin, not Sinn Féin (Or Provisional Sinn Féin) - so I'm curious as to what Gerry Adams has to do with it.

sink

I think we've gotten our wires crossed here. I was replying to this post.

theprizelamb wrote: »

was watching six-one this evening and heard a sound bite of Gerry Adams saying that one of the reasons for a "no" vote was that Ireland would no longer have a commisioner.

Am i missing a point, because i've heard this being put forward a few times, but Ireland does not have a commisioner representing Ireland, but there is a commisioner for Internal Markets and Services who happens to be irish. While every member state currently nominates a commsioner they do not have any leaing towards their home nation, but must remain totally impartial. further more they cannot take action without the mandate from the council of minsiters (?) which every member state will contnue to have a representitive.

If this is correct, and I stand to be corrected, going without a commisioner who happens to be irish is not a valid reason to vote no.

sink wrote: »

This thread is about Republican Sinn Fein not Provo Sinn Fein. But anyway Gerry Adams is a tool, most people don't listen to a word he says.

My reply was in response to his statement on six one which was completely off the mark as, the commission is going to be restructured in 2009 anyway, lisbon only delays it five years. So the fact that he is bringing it up as a reason to vote no shows he is a tool and does not know how to run a country.

This has nothing to do with the progress made in the north, which I respect him for. But if he wants to deal in southern politics I should be able to criticize
him for his stance on southern issues.

dlofnep

Sink - Perhaps you could take a look at my commission thread in here and answer my question? Thanks