What message were you trying to send? [Not "why did you vote No?"]

bug

BMH wrote: »

How is it not democratic? We voted to exclude ourselves from the treaty, and that's exactly what will happen.

I personally don't think it's the last we'll hear of the Lisbon Treaty in Ireland.

But I'll wait and see what comes out of Cowans meeting if publicised at all next week.

I also disagree strongly with the points made on this forum which state that No voters were mostly subject to casting their vote on the basis of scaremongering. I actually believe that the Irish people are more intelligent than that.

trishasaffron

I'm a big fan of the EU but I abstained because I think the success of Europe depends on it not getting further integrated - I especially have a problem with the common defence approach despite all the caveats. I hope the pro Lisbonites will take the time to listen to the voters.

I think it was a simple matter of people being unsure, and going for the safe option.

And protest votes.

And yes voters not being able to vote because they could not afford the petrol to drive to their home constituency, vote, adn drive back to their place of work. *cough, cough*

I would have gone yes, but I can see the merit in the No. I did not like the idea of rotation anything. I'd like to see a Europe where we are all seen as business partners, not as a nation of Europeans. Federalists shoulD be ostracised like the imperialist fascists in the 40s before them.

Anyone who wishes to rule europe, or wishes someone to be able to rule europe is a meglomaniac, and must be stopped.

It's interesting to note that Lisbon would have enshrined a way for a country to leave the EU.

edit: Pro-EU, pro-integration on certain issues, pro-EU defence force, anti-minimising of elected bodies.

Voipjunkie

turgon wrote: »

Thought this would be a no brainer. Ever heard of the EU commission?
.

That is not an answer

What do you mean by a more democratic EU ?

Ever heard of the EU commission is not an answer

I suspect that most people have no idea what it means and your answer lends credence to that.

vibe666

BMH wrote: »

I thought that the complexity of the Treaty was a cause for concern for many of the people?

yes, because the "10 step guide to running a superstate" would have been a REALLY effective alternative. :rolleyes:

I think 500 pages on how to run Europe is a pretty good effort when you look at the likes of Microsoft training manuals and law books.

and let's not blow the NO vote out of proportion, it's far from a landslide victory.

all it would have taken to swing it the other way would be 54,982 of the NO voters to have had a change of heart on the day and voted YES and that would be 50% +1 in favour and that has to be classed as a pretty freaking close call by anyone's standards.

If only the YES camp had come out with a "if you don't understand it vote YES" campaign before the NO's thought of it, it would have gone the other way.

what percentage of 490,000,000 is 54,982 anyway?

turgon

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission

Doesnt sound democratic no matter how much you twist the representative democracy card.

Amberman

seamus wrote: »

These amendments could only be made if the people we vote in to make such decisions for us, i.e. our government, agreed with them.

I didn't realise that the Irish government had a veto over all future amendments. By what majority do the Irish government have to agree in order to veto amendments?

Would they still have had a veto during the five years in which Ireland had no commissioner?

turgon

The bitterness on this thread is unbelievable. The yes side have not got what they were obviously divinely entitled to and are among other things claiming that most/all people voted No out of ignorance and are blatantly ignoring the rational reasonings of the No-side and dismissing them with silly old reasons like the fear that the EU might encroach on nations sovereignty. :rolleyes:

They have also resorted to the claim that a tiny weeny minority is stopping 500 million from "their plans". Yes, please show me where these other 500 million have expressed their approval of the Lisbon Treaty. And don't even try pull the representative card, it got old the second time it was pulled.

Ireland voted No, had some real fears in the treaty like the militarization and the lack of accountability. Why cant that be accepted maturely?

Darragh29

molloyjh wrote: »

That is totally irrelevant to the Treaty itself, as has been stated countless times at this stage. I agree that the Yes campaign was utter, dire tripe. I didn't let it affect my decision at all though. I based mine on what we were voting for. The Treaty, and nothing else.

well I reasoned perfectly legitimately that I was right to take into account an increasingly desparate political leadership in relation to this matter, which was evident to me when Eamon Gilmore said "now is not the time for this country to throw a wobbly on Europe". If people feel completely disconnected from Europe and feel disenfranchised by Europe and feel suspicious at the fact that our political leaders feel that they cannot return a no decision on this, then now is the time for the country to say it. The comments made by Eamon Gilmore were nothing other than a disgrace, they brought our already low standard of poliical courage down into the toilet and cemented my decision to vote no. To keep on topic, the message I want to send is that please learn some basic humility and at least give us, the people of Ireland, the respect we deserve and finally please do not ever attempt to dictate to us again with regard to what is best for us, we can work this out for ourselves. Just give us the facts and leave the rest to us.

BMH

turgon wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission

Doesnt sound democratic no matter how much you twist the representative democracy card.

Would you admit that your proposals with regards the Commission are poorly thought out then? I can't think of any set-up other than the status quo that's good for Ireland.

BMH

Amberman wrote: »

I didn't realise that the Irish government had a veto over all future amendments. By what majority do the Irish government have to agree in order to veto amendments?

The government speaks with one voice.

Would they still have had a veto during the five years in which Ireland had no commissioner?

Yes. Commissioners have absolutely nothing to do with vetos.

turgon

BMH wrote: »

Would you admit that your proposals with regards the Commission are poorly thought out then? I can't think of any set-up other than the status quo that's good for Ireland.

Oh, Yes I would totally accepts that - I haven't given more than five minutes thought to the possible democratization of the commission. But I think it should be done.

One more thing as regards the Yes campaign. First they said the treaty introduced minor changes - even Micheal Martin said they were "modest" on Prime Time. Yes these are the guys that said we would be going back to the dark ages if we voted No. How stupid do Fianna Fail think the electorate are?

BMH

turgon wrote: »

Oh, Yes I would totally accepts that - I haven't given more than five minutes thought to the possible democratization of the commission. But I think it should be done.

Do give it thought. I know some of the most powerful figures in world politics haven't found any better scenario.

One more thing as regards the Yes campaign. First they said the treaty introduced minor changes - even Micheal Martin said they were "modest" on Prime Time. Yes these are the guys that said we would be going back to the dark ages if we voted No. How stupid do Fianna Fail think the electorate are?

I never heard anything along the lines of the dark ages, but if the 26 agree to go ahead with Lisbon on their own, we'll be sidelined, and suddenly placed on a slippery slope. Especially considering the resentment towards the EU that will arise from being shoved to the side, making any future referendum on the EU even harder to swing.

turgon

BMH wrote: »

I never heard anything along the lines of the dark ages, but if the 26 agree to go ahead with Lisbon on their own, we'll be sidelined, and suddenly placed on a slippery slope. Especially considering the resentment towards the EU that will arise from being shoved to the side, making any future referendum on the EU even harder to swing.

As regards the dark ages - you know what the whole party's fight were originally (and even today) based on - all the political favour and throwing a wobbly etc..

As I said on the other post - why would we want to be in the EU if it has such disrespect for democracy??

mumhaabu

My message to Europe is stop interfering in our affairs, as ordinary consumers we do not benefit from the European union. The killed our duty free and are watching to tax us at every opportunity. Imposing fines for nonsense like global warming is a regressive move.

Ireland did not benefit hugely from the EU and any benefit we got is now a negative. All I am hearing is "infrastructure" "infrastructure", if those rose tinted liberals cared to cycle outside their leafy burbs of D4, they would realise the Ireland has absolutely **** infrastructure, we don't have broadband, we don't have high speed rail, we have a few miles of motorways, (most of which are tolled), care to visit a hospital? or take a look at how we get raped for garbage collection. The Infrastructure arquement is nothing but a load of nonsense.

And then when ordinary Joe Soap like myself gets a brainwave and says "you know what I'll shop abroad in the free market for say an Automobile", what happens you get hammered with VRT which is an import tariff on Vehicles.

VoidStarNull

turgon wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commission

Doesnt sound democratic no matter how much you twist the representative democracy card.

The European Commission plays a role in Europe which is similiar to that of that played by the Irish civil service in a national context.

Their role is to help the national governments draw up proposals for legislation, and to implement legislation which has been passed into law by the Council of Ministers and European Parliament.

Their public profile is slightly higher than that of the typical Irish civil servant, for a number of reasons, mainly because the commissioners usually have to go on lengthy road-trips around the national capitals to get everybody's views. In that sense, they are somewhat more transparent than the national civil service.

EU commissioners are not elected by the public, anymore than Irish civil servants are.

BMH

turgon wrote: »

As regards the dark ages - you know what the whole party's fight were originally (and even today) based on - all the political favour and throwing a wobbly etc..

As I said on the other post - why would we want to be in the EU if it has such disrespect for democracy??

But that's what we voted for. If we consider that this reform is necessary, the EU has three options:
1. Ask us again. Undemocratic.
2. Cut out the objectionable parts. As we've seen from the arguments that Lisbon is 90% of the EU constitution, and thus should be rejected, this looks unlikely to work, as well as extremely difficult to negotiate.
3. Listen to our vote that says "We don't like this treaty". This means those that do move ahead with it without us.

I don't want it to happen, but option 3 looks the most likely.

Hitman Actual

Darragh29 wrote: »

well I reasoned perfectly legitimately that I was right to take into account an increasingly desparate political leadership in relation to this matter, which was evident to me when Eamon Gilmore said "now is not the time for this country to throw a wobbly on Europe". If people feel completely disconnected from Europe and feel disenfranchised by Europe and feel suspicious at the fact that our political leaders feel that they cannot return a no decision on this, then now is the time for the country to say it. The comments made by Eamon Gilmore were nothing other than a disgrace, they brought our already low standard of poliical courage down into the toilet and cemented my decision to vote no. To keep on topic, the message I want to send is that please learn some basic humility and at least give us, the people of Ireland, the respect we deserve and finally please do not ever attempt to dictate to us again with regard to what is best for us, we can work this out for ourselves. Just give us the facts and leave the rest to us.

Surely you mean "Just give us the facts and leave the rest to Libertas and Coir"?

turgon

VoidStarNull wrote: »

EU commissioners are not elected by the public, anymore than Irish civil servants are.

Ok I dont know if you read the first sentence of the article

"The European Commission (formally the Commission of the European Communities) is the executive branch of the European Union."

The cabinet is our executive branch. Saying the European Commission is some sort of civil service is simply wrong. The civil service don't have sole responsibility for starting legislation here do they??

turgon

lenny_leonard wrote: »

Surely you mean "Just give us the facts and leave the rest to Libertas and Coir"?

I dont know what the big deal is, Libertas and Coir were a lot less present in Cork than the Yes side. They probably just focused on Dublin.

cheeky_monkey

turgon wrote: »

The bitterness on this thread is unbelievable. The yes side have not got what they were obviously divinely entitled to and are among other things claiming that most/all people voted No out of ignorance and are blatantly ignoring the rational reasonings of the No-side and dismissing them with silly old reasons like the fear that the EU might encroach on nations sovereignty. :rolleyes:

On the money again turgon. There was little sustance in the Yes campaign to begin with and, having taken the vote, it is the responsibility of the No campaign to come up with the solution for where we go next?

It's sad but true - many people who don't understand something will not make a genuine attempt to educate themselves so they can make an informed decision. It was patatantly obvious that a significant amount didn't understand the treaty and there was an opportunity for the Yes campaign to identify this and take action. Instead, the same old generalisations, tripe and scare mongering was spat out day after day (Vote yes, for Europe, economy, jobs etc) with little proactive discussion on key advantages to the treaty (this behavious in itself gave fuel to the No vote).

The right decision was made for Ireland and for Europe but some important points have been raised. How can the very government (good or bad as they may be as a government) who were so supportive of this treaty go back to Europe to credibly negotiate the next steps?

BMH

mumhaabu wrote: »

My message to Europe is stop interfering in our affairs, as ordinary consumers we do not benefit from the European union.

I'd disagree strongly with this. Look at everything from employment due to foreign investment and how Polish immigrants avoided a labour shortage.

Imposing fines for nonsense like global warming is a regressive move.

The majority of Ireland seems to want to combat global warming. Most major parties last election brought global warming into their manifesto, and the Greens are now in power.

Ireland did not benefit hugely from the EU and any benefit we got is now a negative. All I am hearing is "infrastructure" "infrastructure", if those rose tinted liberals cared to cycle outside their leafy burbs of D4, they would realise the Ireland has absolutely **** infrastructure, we don't have broadband, we don't have high speed rail, we have a few miles of motorways, (most of which are tolled), care to visit a hospital? or take a look at how we get raped for garbage collection. The Infrastructure arquement is nothing but a load of nonsense.

I really don't see the point in arguing this one. I see the positive effect of the EU everywhere, and they have poured billions into infrastructure. I come from a small town and I've seen the changes, but if you think the government is focusing on Dublin, that's there fault.

And then when ordinary Joe Soap like myself gets a brainwave and says "you know what I'll shop abroad in the free market for say an Automobile", what happens you get hammered with VRT which is an import tariff on Vehicles.

And nothing to do with the EU. A way of raising taxes to pay for infrastructure though. All in all, quite a mixed message that doesn't seem to have anything to do with the actual content of Lisbon.

BMH

turgon wrote: »

Ok I dont know if you read the first sentence of the article

"The European Commission (formally the Commission of the European Communities) is the executive branch of the European Union."

The cabinet is our executive branch. Saying the European Commission is some sort of civil service is simply wrong. The civil service don't have sole responsibility for starting legislation here do they??

Indeed, the Commission is exactly like our cabinet. Decision-making body, doesn't represent regional interests, and, of course, not elected to that position.

turgon

Of course, Fianna Fail were definitely not given a mandate by the people. What was that stats - 41% first preference voted. Definitely not elected. IN fact becoming Taoisieach is just a game of luck. Nothing to do with the electorate at all. Completely random decision.

BMH

turgon wrote: »

Of course, Fianna Fail were definitely not given a mandate by the people. What was that stats - 41% first preference voted. Definitely not elected. IN fact becoming Taoisieach is just a game of luck. Nothing to do with the electorate at all. Completely random decision.

I don't remember mentioning the Taoiseach. We don't choose cabinets, and they're regularly changed without referenda(see about 5 weeks ago). Our government(the people we give a mandate to) select our commissioner. The Commission can turn him or her down of course, but only in the interest in protecting the integrity of commission, in that regional interests cannot be prioritised.

turgon

Ok you win. I realize that we have no control over who the Taoiseach is, and that our vote actually counts for nothing.

BMH

turgon wrote: »

Ok you win. I realize that we have no control over who the Taoiseach is, and that our vote actually counts for nothing.

We vote for our parliament, and they select our commissioner. We vote for our parliament, and they select our Ministers.

Jimkel

bill_ashmount wrote: »

People were simply saying they didn't agree with the treaty and decided not to ratify it.

Why do the people who voted Yes have such difficulty understanding the basic concept of saying No to something.

I think because the middle class are so used to getting their own way, they are flummoxed by people with different views.

OPENROAD

Main message is that too much of our legislation is been decided by the European parliment which I think people feel far too detached from.

Hitman Actual

turgon wrote: »

I dont know what the big deal is, Libertas and Coir were a lot less present in Cork than the Yes side. They probably just focused on Dublin.

I work in the heart of Dublin and walk past the Government buildings everyday, and Libertas and Coir were the two groups I've seen more than anyone else. If it wasn't some kid from Coir handing out leaflets, I was nearly being run over by that big blue b*****d of a Libertas bus. I couldn't get away from them! And ironically I rarely saw anyone from the main parties, which says a lot for the Yes campaign.

But in fairness to the No posters here, I don't think Coir or Libertas had as much, if any, influence as they may have had over other people.