Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Lisbon I is over, roll on Lisbon II...

Options
135678

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    DishonestPikey
    Registered Users Posts: 62 ✭✭DishonestPikey


    Or possibly the legality of approx 1 million voters deciding the fate of 500 million could be called into question. don't be so sure that this will simply be taken on the chin. Not very democratic when you look at it from the other side.


  • Options
    #63
    marco_polo
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 10,079 Mod ✭✭✭✭marco_polo


    And what could Lisbon 2 possibly contain that would make any difference.


  • Options
    #64
    axer
    Registered Users Posts: 5,517 ✭✭✭axer


    marco_polo wrote: »
    And what could Lisbon 2 possibly contain that would make any difference.
    A declaration of our neutrality :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #65
    lisbon_lions
    Registered Users Posts: 517 ✭✭✭lisbon_lions


    A round 2 would be a very VERY dangerous move for Brian Cowen.
    Scenario 1. A round 2 is declared, then Cowen will be seen to not listen to the people of his country, Scenario 2. accept the no and move on, that causes trouble in Brussels with Cowen the loner in the corner.

    All after a few weeks in the job. God, what a rough one.


  • Options
    #66
    Mr.Nice Guy
    Registered Users Posts: 45,594 ✭✭✭✭Mr.Nice Guy


    You wouldn't put it past them. EU treaties are like a bad rash. You think you've gotten rid of it but it pops up somewhere else to cause problems.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    Rb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,277 ✭✭✭✭Rb


    DishonestPikey wrote: »
    Or possibly the legality of approx 1 million voters deciding the fate of 500 million could be called into question. don't be so sure that this will simply be taken on the chin. Not very democratic when you look at it from the other side.
    If they wanted to be democratic they could have given every citizen in Europe a vote. Instead, they actually denied those who wanted a referendum a chance, they ignored those who already voted out a very similar document.

    It was by chance that we got a referendum due to our constitution, had we not had one you can be sure this would have been pushed on top of us, or given to our "representatives" in Government to vote amongst themselves, which of course they'd have voted yes because they'll do anything to lick the arses of the EU.


  • Options
    #68
    marco_polo
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 10,079 Mod ✭✭✭✭marco_polo


    axer wrote: »
    A declaration of our neutrality :rolleyes:

    Jesus wept :(


  • Options
    #69
    Rb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,277 ✭✭✭✭Rb


    lisbon_lions wrote: »
    A round 2 would be a very VERY dangerous move for Brian Cowen.
    Scenario 1. A round 2 is declared, then Cowen will be seen to not listen to the people of his country, Scenario 2. accept the no and move on, that causes trouble in Brussels with Cowen the loner in the corner.

    All after a few weeks in the job. God, what a rough one.
    Indeed. Unfortunate for Cowen really.


  • Options
    #70
    DishonestPikey
    Registered Users Posts: 62 ✭✭DishonestPikey


    Rb wrote: »
    If they wanted to be democratic they could have given every citizen in Europe a vote. Instead, they actually denied those who wanted a referendum a chance, they ignored those who already voted out a very similar document.

    "They" didn't do anything of the sort. It was down to the individual countries and their constitutions whether it went to referendum or not. this is as undemocratic as you can get. 1 million voters deciding the fate of 500 million , on something so big it effects the whole planet.


  • Options
    #71
    Mr.Nice Guy
    Registered Users Posts: 45,594 ✭✭✭✭Mr.Nice Guy


    DishonestPikey wrote: »
    "They" didn't do anything of the sort. It was down to the individual countries and their constitutions whether it went to referendum or not. this is as undemocratic as you can get. 1 million voters deciding the fate of 500 million , on something so big it effects the whole planet.

    They do what the EU tells them. You know that full well. Gordon Brown denied the British people a vote because he knew they'd reject it. Sarkozy knew the same in France.

    It didn't have to be a small country deciding the treaty's fate. If it was up to everyone it would have been defeated yonks ago.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    Sherifu
    Registered Users Posts: 17,727 ✭✭✭✭Sherifu


    Change a few lines. Vote again.


  • Options
    #73
    aidan24326
    Registered Users Posts: 5,925 ✭✭✭aidan24326


    It's not as simple as saying that 1 million decide the fate of 500 million. This is just lazy soundbite stuff. Opinion polls showed that at least France, Holland and the UK would all have rejected the treaty aswell had they a chance to vote on it, so it's obvious that the Euorcrats and the politicians in general haven't done a very good job of selling the thing. It doesn't help when a number of politicians themselves have admitted they either didn't read the treaty at all or if they did read it they don't understand it.

    It's all much ado about nothing if you ask me, most of the proposals for the treaty were to do with boring administrational stuff in the way the EU does it's business, and not the big scary conspiracy that the no campaign were making it out to be.


  • Options
    #74
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    No requirement for a Lisbon 2. We can simply be asked to accept semi-detached status. That means the rest of Europe can ratify the Lisbon Treaty and move on. We can then ratify it as a "re-accession" Treaty.

    We've said we don't want to dance, so we don't have to dance. No-one will make us - but we don't have the right to stop other people dancing.


    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Options
    #75
    Mr.Nice Guy
    Registered Users Posts: 45,594 ✭✭✭✭Mr.Nice Guy


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    We've said we don't want to dance, so we don't have to dance. No-one will make us - but we don't have the right to stop other people dancing.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw

    The other people dancing weren't asked if they'd like to dance. The decision was made for them. I think they should be asked like we were. They must be tired and fed up by now.


  • Options
    #76
    Ulyanov
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4 ✭Ulyanov


    Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »
    The other people dancing weren't asked if they'd like to dance. The decision was made for them. I think they should be asked like we were. They must be tired and fed up by now.

    I think you have no business deciding the way other nations accepted Lisbon. One thing is for sure. In any other nation more people would turn out than did in our country.


  • Options
    #77
    PH01
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,120 ✭✭✭PH01


    Looking at the turnout it's heading for the high 40's. That's a much better showing than in Nice I.
    Lisbon II would need a turnout of 57% or more to turn this Lisbon I result around, wouldn't it?


  • Options
    #78
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »
    The other people dancing weren't asked if they'd like to dance. The decision was made for them. I think they should be asked like we were. They must be tired and fed up by now.

    Unfortunately, that simply fails to reflect the reality of politics. The other European countries are proceeding with ratification - today's No has not stopped the process.

    At the end of it we will be left with 26 in, 1 out. If there is a legal way that Ireland can be sidelined for the moment, that is what will happen.

    I don't like it, but it has been relatively obvious all along that it was an option - despite being denied by the No campaign (for obvious reasons) as 'scaremongering'.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Options
    #79
    Mr.Nice Guy
    Registered Users Posts: 45,594 ✭✭✭✭Mr.Nice Guy


    Ulyanov wrote: »
    I think you have no business deciding the way other nations accepted Lisbon. One thing is for sure. In any other nation more people would turn out than did in our country.

    I favour democracy and I don't like seeing national parliaments ignoring the rights of people.

    Let's see referendums!


  • Options
    #80
    DishonestPikey
    Registered Users Posts: 62 ✭✭DishonestPikey


    Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »
    They do what the EU tells them. You know that full well. Gordon Brown denied the British people a vote because he knew they'd reject it. Sarkozy knew the same in France.

    It is not democracy when people are voting for the wrong reasons, on yes and no sides. They left it to the elected politicians who do know what they are voting on.


  • Options
    #81
    bauderline
    Registered Users Posts: 898 ✭✭✭bauderline


    Maybe we have reached the limit of the level of european integration people are prepared to accept or are comfortable with. I would guess that people want decisions regarding the irish state to be made by the politicians they elected not ones in europe that they did not elect.

    I think the real problem is that people in many european countries perceive that control over social and economic policies are being eroded from the national government in favour of EU.

    If the people of europe favour a loosely based community over a united states of europe who is to say that they are wrong.

    I think too much store is being put on the effectiveness of the EU going forward. We live in a GLOBAL economy not a european one, many of issues we face today can only be truly resolved at a global level. At the risk of sounding as mad as a hatter maybe we need a global government / parlament ?

    Baud.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »
    I favour democracy and I don't like seeing national parliaments ignoring the rights of people.

    Let's see referendums!

    That's not your call. That's up to the citizens in each country. Our country, our rules - their countries, their rules.


    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Options
    #83
    Zube
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,502 ✭✭✭Zube


    I don't want people in other EU countries running things here in Ireland! Also, I insist that the German Government put this treaty to a referendum in their country. Plus, Brian Cowen is funny looking! VOTE NO NEXT TIME, TOO!


  • Options
    #84
    Mr.Nice Guy
    Registered Users Posts: 45,594 ✭✭✭✭Mr.Nice Guy


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    Unfortunately, that simply fails to reflect the reality of politics. The other European countries are proceeding with ratification - today's No has not stopped the process.

    At the end of it we will be left with 26 in, 1 out. If there is a legal way that Ireland can be sidelined for the moment, that is what will happen.

    I don't like it, but it has been relatively obvious all along that it was an option - despite being denied by the No campaign (for obvious reasons) as 'scaremongering'.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw

    I understand the point you're making but, like you, I don't like it and we were led to believe that everyone accepted or the game was up and I'd like that to be the case.
    DishonestPikey wrote:
    It is not democracy when people are voting for the wrong reasons, on yes and no sides. They left it to the elected politicians who do know what they are voting on.

    Who determines the right reasons? Look at the vote on British civil liberties the other day. There was speculation that the DUP voted based on concessions Gordon Brown would give them. How can you say politicans vote in the right manner and the electorate do not? I value the electorate's opinions. That's true democracy. The people of Europe need a say.
    Scofflaw wrote:
    That's not your call. That's up to the citizens in each country. Our country, our rules - their countries, their rules.

    The citizens weren't given a say however such as the French and Dutch and British despite deserving one. That is a disgrace.


  • Options
    #85
    axer
    Registered Users Posts: 5,517 ✭✭✭axer


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    That's not your call. That's up to the citizens in each country. Our country, our rules - their countries, their rules.
    It does effect us since those governments that did not allow their citizens to speak are those involved in deciding policies that will effect Ireland. If they don't listen to their own citizens then why would you expect they would listen to us?


  • Options
    #86
    toxick
    Closed Accounts Posts: 473 ✭✭toxick


    DishonestPikey wrote: »
    It is not democracy when people are voting for the wrong reasons, on yes and no sides. They left it to the elected politicians who do know what they are voting on.

    like cowen who publicy announced he hasn't read the treaty?


  • Options
    #87
    SkepticOne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,718 ✭✭✭SkepticOne


    DishonestPikey wrote: »
    It is not democracy when people are voting for the wrong reasons, on yes and no sides. They left it to the elected politicians who do know what they are voting on.
    No, in a democracy there is no right or wrong reasons, there is only the will of the people.


  • Options
    #88
    djpbarry
    Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »
    The citizens weren't given a say however such as the French and Dutch and British despite deserving one. That is a disgrace.
    People have come out with this argument over and over and over again without (as yet) providing any evidence whatsoever that the majority of people in Britain, France or the Netherlands (or any other EU state for that matter) actually want to vote on the Lisbon Treaty. Can you please either provide some evidence to back up this claim, or else ditch it and just accept that most EU citizens are happy enough for their parliaments to ratify the treaty for them.


  • Options
    #89
    Rb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,277 ✭✭✭✭Rb


    DishonestPikey wrote: »
    They left it to the elected politicians who do know what they are voting on.

    Our elected politicians have already shown that many of them are confused by the thing, don't understand it or haven't read it. So should we leave it up to them?No.

    THEY didn't leave it to the elected politicians, the elected politicians left it up to themselves and denied the rest a say. Hundreds of millions of people in Europe have been denied a say in this at the hands of a few at the top levels in their country. That's not democracy.

    I don't care if people want to use the "Well, they did vote for them" as an argument, people voted for Fianna Fail and rejected the treaty. In matters of such national importance as this treaty, EVERYONE should be given a say. It was denied to hundreds of millions by their own government. It's not right, I don't care what those who voted Yes say, it's not democratic, it's a farce.


  • Options
    #90
    djpbarry
    Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    toxick wrote: »
    like cowen who publicy announced he hasn't read the treaty?
    Another line that is continually trotted out; please provide some evidence that Brian Cowen does not understand the content of the Lisbon Treaty.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    DishonestPikey
    Registered Users Posts: 62 ✭✭DishonestPikey


    toxick wrote: »
    like cowen who publicy announced he hasn't read the treaty?

    Come off it. It was debated in parliament and would it have been down to a parlimentary vote it would have been absolutely scrutinised. I've also made the point that Britain had the chance to opt out of parts of the treaty. They did not accept the treaty as a whole, something that cannot be done in a referrendum.


Advertisement