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

Are multiple referendums undemocratic?

Options
1234568

Comments

  • Options
    #212
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    So, are we saying here that after each general election we should poll the electorate as to why they voted as they did, and if we feel their answers aren't good enough we send them back again to make the right decision?


  • Options
    #213
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    dresden8 wrote: »
    So, are we saying here that after each general election we should poll the electorate as to why they voted as they did, and if we feel their answers aren't good enough we send them back again to make the right decision?

    No - but we need to have referendums as long as there are questions being asked which our government is not entitled to answer by itself.

    If the EU wants to ask us again whether we really want to turn down Lisbon, the government has no option but to put that question to the people at referendum.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Options
    #214
    limklad
    Registered Users Posts: 1,980 ✭✭✭limklad


    R0C0 wrote: »
    Thats not really acceptable because where do you draw the line with letting people change their minds?

    If we'd voted Yes do you think we'd be asked have we changed our minds?
    If we Vote No again will we have a Lisbon 3? A Lisbon 4?
    Should we just keep checking every month? Or do we just stop when we get a Yes vote??
    Let me paint a picture, From your point of view from your statement, you can correct me anytime.

    We should put in the constitution to block any future change of minds on referendum matters as it is the only way to block future referendums on previous matter held by referendums.
    You said No today to any matter that requires a Referendum and later (perhaps 5 years down the road) you change your mind because of some new information that either received that came to light or events that impacted you. Now You are not allow to change your mind to Yes on the matter you voted NO to because it is not acceptable according to you and you have yourself and those like you who voted NO are to blame for the situation.

    If we did that we (Ireland) would be making smaller moves going forward than the one currently exists with the EU. We would be back in the dark ages again.

    These are Referendums where we change our minds here in Ireland.

    Nice Treaty would not be ratified (denying Eastern European Countries & Malta from Joining the EU.)
    Divorce would not be allowed.
    R0C0 wrote: »
    Are you suggesting that people who voted No did so with uneducated opinions??
    No I did not suggest that, they (The Politicians) never explain from questions that was put to them from media but kept on about previous benefits that have nothing to do with Lisbon Treaty. Politicians gave the impression that there is something to hide, by not answering the question put to them. Now we know they knew if there was any negative impacts of the Lisbon Treaty because they probably never checked it , They just did what they were told.


  • Options
    #215
    SkepticOne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,718 ✭✭✭SkepticOne


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    No - but we need to have referendums as long as there are questions being asked which our government is not entitled to answer by itself.

    If the EU wants to ask us again whether we really want to turn down Lisbon, the government has no option but to put that question to the people at referendum.
    No. Say the government decided they did not want to ratify the treaty, they have the option of not putting it to the people. They may apply political pressure but Ireland has no legal obligation.

    The reason it went to the people this time is because the government wished to ratify the treaty but could not without a referendum.


  • Options
    #216
    ShooterSF
    Registered Users Posts: 8,824 ✭✭✭ShooterSF


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    No - but we need to have referendums as long as there are questions being asked which our government is not entitled to answer by itself.

    If the EU wants to ask us again whether we really want to turn down Lisbon, the government has no option but to put that question to the people at referendum.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw

    Given that we already voted on the subject, couldn't the government informed of our decision and supposedly the representative of the people not inform the E.U that we already rejected it? Fair enough if they actually managed to re-negotiate it, which I doubt they can, but putting the same treaty to us again I'd be deeply disappointed in our governments backbone.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #217
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    No - but we need to have referendums as long as there are questions being asked which our government is not entitled to answer by itself.

    If the EU wants to ask us again whether we really want to turn down Lisbon, the government has no option but to put that question to the people at referendum.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw

    What's this really want to b*ll*cks? The statement stands, the people voted, the answer is no.

    If it's a no again what's the next referendum "Are you really, really, not messin' this time, sure?"

    The most disappointing thing about Lisbon is that there are so many people out there who think they really are too stupid to have a vote.


  • Options
    #218
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    Oh, and the Government does have another option. They can tell the EU to feck off, Lisbon is dead. As per the Lisbon Treaty. You know, the one all the Yes people support, ironically enough.


  • Options
    #219
    IRLConor
    Subscribers Posts: 4,076 ✭✭✭IRLConor


    dresden8 wrote: »
    Oh, and the Government does have another option. They can tell the EU to feck off, Lisbon is dead. As per the Lisbon Treaty. You know, the one all the Yes people support, ironically enough.

    Yes, but then the question is "How do we reform the EU if Lisbon as it stands isn't an option?".

    Possible answers are:
    1. Rip up the treaty and start from scratch.
    2. Modify the treaty until it passes in all countries.
    3. Do nothing and pretend that the EU doesn't need changing.

    Which would you prefer and why?


  • Options
    #220
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    That's for the EU bods to decide and get back to us.

    Re-running referenda with the proviso that you will vote until you vote the correct way really is the death of democracy. If it's a yes next time will it be counted as a score draw and best of three? I think not.


  • Options
    #221
    IRLConor
    Subscribers Posts: 4,076 ✭✭✭IRLConor


    dresden8 wrote: »
    That's for the EU bods to decide and get back to us.

    But 1/27 of the EU bods is one of us. We need to have suggestions for them too.
    dresden8 wrote: »
    Re-running referenda with the proviso that you will vote until you vote the correct way really is the death of democracy.

    And that hasn't happened yet. Not with Nice, not with divorce, abortion or anything else that has been put to the Irish people.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #222
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    Nice?

    The one they made us vote twice on? The one that is now apparently a pile of crap?

    Here's one for a start though. Cut the military element.

    Obviously as it stands it doesn't mean we're going to invade Iran tomorrow and no eight year olds are going to be conscripted and forced to have abortions. But it is a first step. So far this time. Next time it will be "You've come this far, what's another small step?" And then another, and then another etc. This is my line in the sand as it were. Stop it now. If anybody trusts Sarkozy they're a fool.


  • Options
    #223
    IRLConor
    Subscribers Posts: 4,076 ✭✭✭IRLConor


    dresden8 wrote: »
    Nice?

    The one they made us vote twice on?

    Yawn. This has been explained over and over and over again. The second version was different to the first. If you didn't notice then maybe you should have paid more attention at the time.
    dresden8 wrote: »
    Here's one for a start though. Cut the military element.

    Strangely enough, that's kinda the modification that was made to the Nice amendment to our constitution.
    dresden8 wrote: »
    Obviously as it stands it doesn't mean we're going to invade Iran tomorrow and no eight year olds are going to be conscripted and forced to have abortions. But it is a first step. So far this time. Next time it will be "You've come this far, what's another small step?" And then another, and then another etc. This is my line in the sand as it were.

    We can opt out of the defence parts*, we don't need to force all of the rest of the countries to abandon their common goals.

    * We opted out of the common defence parts in the amendment that was recently defeated, the bits that we didn't opt out of there we had either a veto on or the opportunity to opt out later. The only thing I noticed that we were obliged to do is to improve our military capability and we do that anyway as a matter of national policy.


  • Options
    #224
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    IRLConor wrote: »
    Yawn. This has been explained over and over and over again. The second version was different to the first. If you didn't notice then maybe you should have paid more attention at the time.



    Strangely enough, that's kinda the modification that was made to the Nice amendment to our constitution.



    We can opt out of the defence parts*, we don't need to force all of the rest of the countries to abandon their common goals.

    * We opted out of the common defence parts in the amendment that was recently defeated, the bits that we didn't opt out of there we had either a veto on or the opportunity to opt out later. The only thing I noticed that we were obliged to do is to improve our military capability and we do that anyway as a matter of national policy.


    The first small step.


  • Options
    #225
    IRLConor
    Subscribers Posts: 4,076 ✭✭✭IRLConor


    dresden8 wrote: »
    The first small step.

    ...towards a better EU. Pity we rejected it.


  • Options
    #226
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    IRLConor wrote: »
    ...towards a better EU. Pity we rejected it.

    Maybe. But reject it WE did. You included. That's what democracy means.


  • Options
    #227
    IRLConor
    Subscribers Posts: 4,076 ✭✭✭IRLConor


    dresden8 wrote: »
    Maybe. But reject it WE did. You included. That's what democracy means.

    Yep, and democracy means that everyone gets an equal vote every time a question gets put to the people.

    Since I'm respecting the No vote (if not all the no voters) I'm sure you'll respect the Yes vote if it comes on a modified Lisbon Treaty? And you'll respect the result of both Nice referenda?


  • Options
    #228
    nesf
    Registered Users Posts: 27,645 ✭✭✭✭nesf


    dresden8 wrote: »
    Maybe. But reject it WE did. You included. That's what democracy means.

    The dissenting minority are perfectly entitled to keep their voice. They must abide by the decision of the majority but they are not forced to change their views or their opinions to those of the majority.


    In other news, according to the Economist, Cowen is resisting calling a second referendum and is getting some support in the Council: http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11605152&fsrc=nwl


  • Options
    #229
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    IRLConor wrote: »
    Yep, and democracy means that everyone gets an equal vote every time a question gets put to the people.

    Since I'm respecting the No vote (if not all the no voters) I'm sure you'll respect the Yes vote if it comes on a modified Lisbon Treaty? And you'll respect the result of both Nice referenda?

    Ah "Respect". Every yes commentator, politico etc starts off with "Of course I respect the Irish No vote" and then they spend the rest of the interview/ article whatever saying it should be overturned in whatever manner as soon as possible. At least they seem to have given Cowen a year to "respect" the vote before he ****s the result out.

    Ah well, c'est la vie!


  • Options
    #230
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    dresden8 wrote: »
    At least they seem to have given Cowen a year to "respect" the vote before he ****s the result out.

    Ah well, c'est la vie!

    Sorry, I meant to say "Period of Reflection"


  • Options
    #231
    tolosenc
    Registered Users Posts: 6,889 ✭✭✭tolosenc


    Respecting and agreeing with are two very different things.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #232
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    obl wrote: »
    Respecting and agreeing with are two very different things.

    So are respecting the vote and letting the result stand, and pushing to get the same thing run again asap until you get the answer you wanted.


  • Options
    #233
    tolosenc
    Registered Users Posts: 6,889 ✭✭✭tolosenc


    dresden8 wrote: »
    If anybody trusts Sarkozy they're a fool.

    I don't quite get what people think he has to gain here...


  • Options
    #234
    tolosenc
    Registered Users Posts: 6,889 ✭✭✭tolosenc


    dresden8 wrote: »
    So are respecting and ignoring the result.

    I don't think anyone is ignoring the result.


  • Options
    #235
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    obl wrote: »
    I don't quite get what people think he has to gain here...


    Sarkozy is already trying to grab the British Aircraft carriers.


  • Options
    #236
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    obl wrote: »
    I don't quite get what people think he has to gain here...

    ....


  • Options
    #237
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    obl wrote: »
    I don't think anyone is ignoring the result.

    Not yet, but they will try.


  • Options
    #238
    tolosenc
    Registered Users Posts: 6,889 ✭✭✭tolosenc


    dresden8 wrote: »
    Sarkozy is already trying to get his hands on a British aircraft carrier.

    Source?


  • Options
    #239
    dresden8
    Registered Users Posts: 3,290 ✭✭✭dresden8


    obl wrote: »
    Source?

    http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,559702,00.html

    And apparently he's for nuclear proliferation.


  • Options
    #240
    is_that_so
    Registered Users Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    dresden8 wrote: »
    So are respecting the vote and letting the result stand, and pushing to get the same thing run again asap until you get the answer you wanted.

    The result stands as do the problems the result caused. The EU will attempt to find a way to fix it politically and that includes attempting to understand what problem we have with it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #241
    tolosenc
    Registered Users Posts: 6,889 ✭✭✭tolosenc


    dresden8 wrote: »
    http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,559702,00.html

    And apparently he's for nuclear proliferation.

    That's source has nothing of his intentions for the naval unit.

    And France already has nukes. Apparently he likes to eat babies too.


Advertisement