EU plays hardball. complaints lodged

molloyjh

limklad wrote: »

I never said he would sign away the Corporation Tax. All I said that if they got CCTB through, then negotiations in future would be very difficult for smaller countries.

I can definitely say you are a YES voter by your comments or completely do not understand what CCTB is.

But CCCTB is all about tax harmonisation so passing it would be the death knell for our low corporation tax rate. Its one of the biggest issues the French and Germans have as they reckon its anti-competitive. The French can say and do what they like, but that doesn't mean anything unless it gets passed by the EU, which it won't, at least not for a good few years. Again this is completely irrelevant to what we are talking about, i.e. Lisbon, so why is it being discussed?

K-9

nesf wrote: »

Indeed, a few changes to how the US deals with tax paid in foreign countries by US companies and we could in an interesting position. That though will affect all countries so it's hard to predict how it will affect us if it happens.

Fair point, but it could affect us disproportionately with our extremely advantageous rules. There is a campaign already from companies whose 10% rate will soon increase to 12.5% to get the rate reduced. It's a major issue for companies.

marco_polo

molloyjh wrote: »

But CCCTB is all about tax harmonisation so passing it would be the death knell for our low corporation tax rate. Its one of the biggest issues the French and Germans have as they reckon its anti-competitive. The French can say and do what they like, but that doesn't mean anything unless it gets passed by the EU, which it won't, at least not for a good few years. Again this is completely irrelevant to what we are talking about, i.e. Lisbon, so why is it being discussed?

You know what they say, "Throw enough mud ....."

limklad

molloyjh wrote: »

To respond to the first part of your thread would be to go over all the points made again, and again, and again in all of these threads. I'm getting sick and tired of re-typing the same thing over and over. Its downright nauseating at this stage. All of your points have been dealt with repeatedly in almost every Lisbon thread and yet still yourself, and others like you, keep trotting them out. The Treaty was not that hard to understand, hard to read certainly, but not to understand. The politicians didn't need to read the Treaty itself, some of them were involved in drawing the thing up and the ones that weren't have busy jobs so didn't have the time. Instead a professional legal team would have reviewed the Treaty and reported their findings on it. And yes a lot of what was in the Treaty already exists, because a lot of it was not about the laws themselves but more about how the EU functioned. That was one of the major drivers behind the whole thing, i.e. make the EU more efficient.

As for your "proof" point (given that there's been a serious lack of same in your posts) I think all the proof I need is in the result. We said No to it because we wanted more from it. We hardly voted no because we wanted less......

You have completetly has gone against what politicians who have said that they did not read the treaty. How can anyone understand anything they did not Read?

Most No Voters did not say they wanted more and this point have been posted over all the posts as well that people do not understand the Treaty and that fact was highlighted on the EU own poll in which they took on the Day of the Referendum. Where your proof that we wanted more? Voting NO keeps the status quo

molloyjh

limklad wrote: »

You have completetly has gone against what politicians who have said that they did not read the treaty. How can anyone understand anything they did not Read?

Most No Voters did not say they wanted more and this point have been posted over all the posts as well that people do not understand the Treaty and that fact was highlighted on the EU own poll in which they took on the Day of the Referendum. Where your proof that we wanted more? Voting NO keeps the status quo

They don't need to read it if they have trained profesionals there to do it for them and present their findings. I can't see where the problem is with that. Do you really think all politicians always read all legal documents that they must pass? How many hours do you think are in a politicians day?

And if you don't want more from the Treaty then why did you vote no?

K-9

limklad wrote: »

You have completetly has gone against what politicians who have said that they did not read the treaty. How can anyone understand anything they did not Read?

I'd be worried if Brian Cowen was reading every minute detail in the Treaty. Frankly, there's more important things for him to be doing.

Highly paid and specialised legal advisors are there to read, interpret and indeed negotiate the Treaty.

limklad

molloyjh wrote: »

And if you don't want more from the Treaty then why did you vote no?

I have explained this so many times in other posts in other threadss under European Union why I voted NO and I am not repeating my self again and this thread have gone completely gone against it intention. You can argue with me in the What message were you trying to send? [Not "why did you vote No?"] section Here the thread link

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055313446
there are many more threads under the European where I posted, you can read fully and respond to:

Same goes to you seanie32.

marco_polo

limklad wrote: »

You have completetly has gone against what politicians who have said that they did not read the treaty. How can anyone understand anything they did not Read?

How about if they were heavily involved in the negotiations for many years and were very familiar with the provisions as set out within the treaty?

Most No Voters did not say they wanted more and this point have been posted over all the posts as well that people do not understand the Treaty and that fact was highlighted on the EU own poll in which they took on the Day of the Referendum.

Where is your evidence to support your assertion that No voters didn't want anything more?

Where your proof that we wanted more?

Sinn Fein and Libertas both we could get a better deal. As the two main bodies I assume they speak for at least a fair proportion of the No voters.

If we get more will that be enough to hold a referendum? Or do we just ban voting on EU treaties forever more?

Voting NO keeps the status quo

For now perhaps, but at what cost to our long term well being?

limklad

marco_polo wrote: »

How about if they were heavily involved in the negotiations for many years and were very familiar with the provisions as set out within the treaty?



Where is your evidence to support your assertion that No voters didn't want anything more?



Sinn Fein and Libertas both we could get a better deal. As the two main bodies I assume they speak for at least a fair proportion of the No voters.

If we get more will that be enough to hold a referendum? Or do we just ban voting on EU treaties forever more?



For now perhaps, but at what cost to our long term well being?

My last post applies to you too, This have been talk to death over and over again. The proof and links are available in the other posts.

hmmm

Keeping the status quo was not on offer and I blame our politicians for not making this clear. The choice was between going forward with the other EU countries or falling behind (or even out).

limklad

hmmm wrote: »

Keeping the status quo was not on offer and I blame our politicians for not making this clear. The choice was between going forward with the other EU countries or falling behind (or even out).

The Status Quo was on offer even though they never mentioned it. The Government would never mention that, when they are pushing through the New Treaty for that Union.



There have been calls from certain MEP’s for us to leave the European Union until that point was pointed out to them in the European Parliament in their heated debates after the NO vote.
The EU will continue exist but only at a slow pace only where common agreement is in place. Many of them will play HardBall at us in order to emotionally blackmail us to change our minds. Many comments on earlier part of this thread, RTE, Today FM's and other media have mentioned that.

hmmm

limklad wrote: »

The Status Quo was on offer even though they never mentioned it. The Government would never mention that, when they are pushing through the New Treaty for that Union.

It's not on offer. The other EU countries are not going to say "oh Ireland voted no we can't do anything else, everything freezes here". Lisbon is dead if we say no, but the others can pass their own Treaty and exclude us. It's not undemocratic, we were given the chance and opted out, it's perfectly democratic and a refutation of the "dictatorship" idea that some on the no side peddle.

Whether it's in Ireland's interests to remain outside is a different matter.

djpbarry

limklad wrote: »

It was in the Public Domain but ALL of the details of it was not public knowledge and we waited for our politicians and other bodies to understand this complicated treaty ...

Maybe YOU did. Personally, I couldn't give a rat's ass what any politician thinks of the treaty; I'm quite capable of making up my own mind.

It is incredibly arrogant of you to assume that just because you cannot understand the treaty, then nobody else possibly could.

limklad wrote: »

I am not the only one and many people did not understand the Treaty.

www.oxygen.ie/page/1634

limklad wrote: »

The EU will continue exist but only at a slow pace only where common agreement is in place.

I presume you are referring to unanimous agreement? How would this change under Lisbon?

limklad

djpbarry wrote: »

Maybe YOU did. Personally, I couldn't give a rat's ass what any politician thinks of the treaty; I'm quite capable of making up my own mind.

It is incredibly arrogant of you to assume that just because you cannot understand the treaty, then nobody else possibly could.
www.oxygen.ie/page/1634
I presume you are referring to unanimous agreement? How would this change under Lisbon?

I never reject that in a Referendum in that article your link provided because there was none! This is probably another smear tactic coming from another extreme YES campaign supporter because that article is a smear against No people.


Please respond to me under the "Why I voted No ...etc" Thread, link provided above on three posts ago that i posted in this thread.

Now have you any "EU plays Hardball, complaint lodged" to comment on? This thread has gone way off the mark.

d22ontour

FrankGrimes wrote: »

I'm a Yes voter but am quite concerned about the reaction across Europe to our No vote. This news just confirms the suspicion I had all along that people were underestimating just how isolated we would become from Europe if we voted No. That doesn't mean that it's right, but a certain amount of it was inevitable.

Isolated ?

From what exactly ? You are trying to say we are been bullied because we chose not to ratify a treaty we do not believe to comply with previous treaties ???

FrankGrimes wrote: »

That is patently not going to happen, so the focus in my opinion should be on getting a reasonably reliable indication of why people voted No, and then adding wording to the treaty to explicitly address these concerns.

Wait i thought we were all scare-mongered by SF ? You mean some of our concerns were actually valid ?

FrankGrimes wrote: »

If the findings of engaging with the public showed the government that the Irish people are happy to be isolated from the EU

Seriously , implying that is yet another of your feeble attempts to undermine any no voters.
[/QUOTE]

The vote failed on many scales and to think that it was a government bashing exercise is typical of almsot all the Yes voters.Maybe , just maybe they might come to realise we were not happy with was in the treaty ??

djpbarry

limklad wrote: »

I never reject that in a Referendum in that article your link provided because there was none! This is probably another smear tactic coming from another extreme YES campaign supporter because that article is a smear against No people.

I honestly don't have a clue what you're saying here.

d22ontour wrote: »

You mean some of our concerns were actually valid ?
...
Maybe , just maybe they might come to realise we were not happy with was in the treaty ??

Which elements of the treaty were you unhappy with?

molloyjh

limklad wrote: »

I have explained this so many times in other posts in other threadss under European Union why I voted NO and I am not repeating my self again and this thread have gone completely gone against it intention. You can argue with me in the What message were you trying to send? [Not "why did you vote No?"] section Here the thread link

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055313446
there are many more threads under the European where I posted, you can read fully and respond to:

Same goes to you seanie32.

I gone through that entire thread and have found a few posts from you alright, but none that state why you voted No. Could you please provide a link to the actual post, as that thread is just so long its far too easy to miss it.....cheers.

limklad

djpbarry wrote: »

I honestly don't have a clue what you're saying here.

Then you never read the page on the link that you provided and here it it again and the topic is:
"Ireland rejects cure for AIDS on basis its too complicated to understand"
www.oxygen.ie/page/1634

djpbarry wrote: »

Which elements of the treaty were you unhappy with?

I have stated my points in many many other posts in other threads for all to read, so do your search.


Now back to EU Playing Hardball.

On Yesterday Paper I read on the Irish Times
That Sarkozy and Merkel are objecting to further enlargement without Lisbon claiming that NICE Treaty is stopping them.
The Polish leader (From another Large population country) claims that NICE is not stopping enlargement and here a Link for you to read to prove his point.
http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/2000/12/feature/eu0012288f.htm

This 27 argument was brought up before NICE and the NICE Treaty was used to rectify that problem.
http://www.historiasiglo20.org/europe/niza.htm


Today On The Sunday Tribune, Brian Cowen comments is
"We're either In or Out: You decide" and that on Lisbon 2 Referendum next Spring.

This type of bullying will only lead to his downfall. Bertie Ahern (and other politicians [both Fine Gael and Fianna Fail] tried to blame him for their referendum failure) would have listened to the people and listen to their concerns and respond appropriately.
Brian Cowan is clearly ignoring the electorate and using Gun shot wedding tactics to force his will. He is using his government board meeting tactics onto the electorate. Fianna Fail leadership is exploding into Failure and going back to the Charlie Haughty Days with more general Elections quite often. So expect an General Election before the Lisbon 2 Referendum.

Scofflaw

It's increasingly obvious that Cowen isn't scaremongering. The next referendum will essentially decide whether we stay on as a core member of the Union or not. There may be no legal mechanism for removing us, but one will be found if it's a choice between us or reform. Pretending this is not the case is grossly irresponsible.

The prospects of a third 'no' vote (three strikes and we're out?) is so dreadful to contemplate for the political establishment that they almost can't bear to spell out what it will mean. "If you think we're in sackcloth and ashes now..." said one senior source, his voice trailing off.

Another observer is more precise. "There is no legal mechanism in place for a country to leave the EU, but a way will be found to do it. It could involve negotiating some kind of bi-lateral treaty, giving us a Norwegian type arrangement [involving economic co-operation but not membership]."

If the EU chooses to play hardball, Ireland has no comeback.

regards,
Scofflaw

murphaph

It seems to me the EU has become what it wants- an all consuming monster which is not in fact an equal partnership of willing states. Each state on it's own is petrified of being out of the equation (ie, that the remaining former 'friends' will behave poorly towards the individual state). Whilst legally the EU appears to be fair and democratic, it patently is not, because individual nations clearly fear not following the herd. Truth be told of course, no single vote has ever been taken across Europe, nor even any comprehensive continent wide debate or process of meaningful engagement, with the people, to determine just what kind of Europe WE want!

We are simply told what we want by a political elite. This strongarm tactic clearly works when one reads the hysterical reactions put forward to us voting NO. I'm extremely happy the EU has had the brakes applied for some time of reflection.

Scofflaw

murphaph wrote: »

It seems to me the EU has become what it wants- an all consuming monster which is not in fact an equal partnership of willing states. Each state on it's own is petrified of being out of the equation (ie, that the remaining former 'friends' will behave poorly towards the individual state). Whilst legally the EU appears to be fair and democratic, it patently is not, because individual nations clearly fear not following the herd. Truth be told of course, no single vote has ever been taken across Europe, nor even any comprehensive continent wide debate or process of meaningful engagement, with the people, to determine just what kind of Europe WE want!

We are simply told what we want by a political elite. This strongarm tactic clearly works when one reads the hysterical reactions put forward to us voting NO. I'm extremely happy the EU has had the brakes applied for some time of reflection.

The EU has no separate existence from the member states. It is the member states that are likely to play hardball with us - the EU itself cannot do so.

regards,
Scofflaw

limklad

molloyjh wrote: »

I gone through that entire thread and have found a few posts from you alright, but none that state why you voted No. Could you please provide a link to the actual post, as that thread is just so long its far too easy to miss it.....cheers.

My Apologies, there are so many threads I selected the one I thought that I had responded to, Here are the correct one.


http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055314835&page=4

limklad

Scofflaw wrote: »

It's increasingly obvious that Cowen isn't scaremongering. The next referendum will essentially decide whether we stay on as a core member of the Union or not. There may be no legal mechanism for removing us, but one will be found if it's a choice between us or reform. Pretending this is not the case is grossly irresponsible.

Stating that there is only one path to reform is grossly irresponsible too. They are always many paths to take. It takes time to find them.
Yes, Brian is scaremongering, because most of the people knows that their Jobs is very depended on been within the EU for trade reasons. You right there is no legal mechanism for removing us, therefore Brian Cowen is scaremongering.

Merkel ruled out two speed europe.

Scofflaw wrote: »

If the EU chooses to play hardball, Ireland has no comeback.

regards,
Scofflaw

Neither do the EU. They can play hardball, but that will affect other small nations, if Ireland is kicked out, for not ticking their Boxes on a Referendum. Which is not protecting democracy from the EU stand point and do not say that the Citizens are for Lisbon Treaty, as there is no proof in either Polls or Referendum performed in other nations. They would have plastered that fact in our face. The Last four Referendums on the EU Constitution (which is identical to Lisbon Treaty in content) have 2 for and 2 against the treaty.
Small Nations within will see, if Ireland is Kicked out then what rights have they? It will come back to the same old argument, that Bigger Nations will overtake smaller nations and dictate their policy, their treatment of Ireland will reinforce their point!
My concern is and expect if the EU continue to play Hardball, then the EU will fall as it goes against the principles in which the EU was born.

limklad

limklad wrote: »

My Apologies, there are so many threads I selected the one I thought that I had responded to, Here are the correct one.


http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055314835&page=4

So your reason for voting no was to do with the European elite and the lack of an EU wide referendum and not to do with Ireland specefic reasons?

Do you seriously expect a no vote when the question is put next year (as is likely) "do we leave the EU or stay based on Lisbon" ?

dresden8

Deleted User wrote: »

So your reason for voting no was to do with the European elite and the lack of an EU wide referendum and not to do with Ireland specefic reasons?

Do you seriously expect a no vote when the question is put next year (as is likely) "do we leave the EU or stay based on Lisbon" ?

Now that's sh*te. If that is the best deal Cowan can come back with
he's an even more incompetent fool than I thought. Why would we want to slink away? If push comes to shove let them try and throw us out.

oscarBravo

dresden8 wrote: »

Now that's sh*te. If that is the best deal Cowan can come back with
he's an even more incompetent fool than I thought. Why would we want to slink away? If push comes to shove let them try and throw us out.

Hell, why don't we just invade France? That'll show 'em.

I can't understand why so many participants in this discussion are unwilling to consider the necessities of realpolitik.

dresden8

oscarBravo wrote: »

Hell, why don't we just invade France? That'll show 'em.

I can't understand why so many participants in this discussion are unwilling to consider the necessities of realpolitik.

Under what mechanism would the EU throw us out?

How would that look internationally?

How would smaller countries within the EU take to that? They may be annoyed at us not passing Lisbon but are they really going to bring in a mechanism whereby smaller countries can be thrown out purely because they displease France and Germany?

Talk about Turkeys voting for Christmas.

limklad

Deleted User wrote: »

So your reason for voting no was to do with the European elite and the lack of an EU wide referendum and not to do with Ireland specefic reasons?

I not debating the my reasons on this thread , ask your questions on the other thread. Yes they do have to do with Lisbon Treaty and how it affect Ireland.

oscarBravo

dresden8 wrote: »

Under what mechanism would the EU throw us out?

I don't know. Is it any more unrealistic to suggest that they'll come up with one than to insist that they'll just rewrite the whole Lisbon treaty to suit the assortment of No camps in Ireland?

There seems to be a lot of posturing, along the lines that we should say to the EU: "do your worst." Unfortunately, it's predicated on the assumption that the EU won't do anything to upset us.

It reminds me of the build-up to the referendum when the No camps kept telling us that there would be no negative consequences of a rejection. Now that it looks possible that there could be negative consequences, we're being told that there shouldn't be negative consequences.

Presumably, after there are negative consequences, we'll be told there shouldn't have been negative consequences. Which will be very comforting.

marco_polo

dresden8 wrote: »

Under what mechanism would the EU throw us out?

How would that look internationally?

How would smaller countries within the EU take to that? They may be annoyed at us not passing Lisbon but are they really going to bring in a mechanism whereby smaller countries can be thrown out purely because they displease France and Germany?

Talk about Turkeys voting for Christmas.

There are many more countries than France and Germany involved in this. To be honest lack of understand of european politics is quite frankly staggering. You don't strut around giving fellow EU members the two fingers forever more and expect to have any friends or meaningful influence when you come looking for favours. If this is your bright vision of our EU future then perhaps we would be better of outside of it.