Let's talk about Maastricht!

brianthebard

Did people realize at the time that they were voting to move from a purely (or nearly so) economic European organization to one that had political, social and economic ambitions? Perhaps they didn't, but the people in the 18-24 age groups that voted in the last referendum saw what had happened, which contributed to a large no turnout from this demographic? I don't think that I would have voted in favour of Maastricht. Opinions?

Scofflaw

brianthebard wrote: »

Did people realize at the time that they were voting to move from a purely (or nearly so) economic European organization to one that had political, social and economic ambitions? Perhaps they didn't, but the people in the 18-24 age groups that voted in the last referendum saw what had happened, which contributed to a large no turnout from this demographic? I don't think that I would have voted in favour of Maastricht. Opinions?

Let me just check this...people in the 18-24 bracket at this referendum voted No because of something that happened when they were 2-6 years old? They were specifically bothered by the fact that the EU has been a political union pretty much their entire lives? They'd prefer a purely economic union they have no experience of whatsoever?

somewhat dubiously,
Scofflaw

brianthebard

thank you for your cynicism. Yes i think that its entirely possible that many people ( I never suggested all of them) were unhappy with the way the EU has shaped up in the last decade or so, which is related both directly and indirectly to the Maastricht treaty. I'm not saying they said to themselves "well i couldn't vote on it then, but I can now!" just that they were unhappy with what has come about as a result of Maastricht. I don't see why having no experience of a different EU should or would matter, you have no experience of the EU that would have come about as a result of the Lisbon treaty but you were in favour of it.

Scofflaw

brianthebard wrote: »

thank you for your cynicism. Yes i think that its entirely possible that many people ( I never suggested all of them) were unhappy with the way the EU has shaped up in the last decade or so, which is related both directly and indirectly to the Maastricht treaty. I'm not saying they said to themselves "well i couldn't vote on it then, but I can now!" just that they were unhappy with what has come about as a result of Maastricht. I don't see why having no experience of a different EU should or would matter, you have no experience of the EU that would have come about as a result of the Lisbon treaty but you were in favour of it.

I don't know whether it really qualifies as cynicism - it's more honest doubt. I can certainly understand someone who feels (on principle, I presume) that the EU ought not to be political, but I'm not sure why that would particularly be relevant to the 18-24 age group on account of Maastricht.

If one feels that the EU ought not to be a political organisation, then it's hard to see one doing anything other than voting No - whether or not one "missed out" on Maastricht.

cordially,
Scofflaw

baztard

I'd imagine people voted yes to Maastricht due to the bags of money that came with it. This probably over shodowed any fears or signs of 'political, social and economic ambitions'.

Lisbon had no financial incentive for us. The concept of it, that was plain for everyone to see, was to advance 'political, social and economic ambitions'.

In retrospect I would have voted yes on Maastricht (way too young at the time to vote), as it helped get us where we are now. Which is a far better place than we were back in the early ninties.

I think centralised european power has advanced far enough though. We're in danger of letting europe go from helping us, to dominating us. Lisbon would have been another firm step down this road to this I think.

molloyjh

baztard wrote: »

I'd imagine people voted yes to Maastricht due to the bags of money that came with it. This probably over shodowed any fears or signs of 'political, social and economic ambitions'.

Lisbon had no financial incentive for us. The concept of it, that was plain for everyone to see, was to advance 'political, social and economic ambitions'.

In retrospect I would have voted yes on Maastricht (way too young at the time to vote), as it helped get us where we are now. Which is a far better place than we were back in the early ninties.

I think centralised european power has advanced far enough though. We're in danger of letting europe go from helping us, to dominating us. Lisbon would have been another firm step down this road to this I think.

But Lisbon didn't really expand the power of the EU, it just restructured the way in which it does the things it is already responsible for......

thebman

I think it is more the manner in which this restructuring is being forced on people that a lot of people don't like especially since we voted no and are being told we voted wrong, try again (you can say this isn't what they are saying but it is how it is perceived by many so this is the a lot of peoples views on it and will be if forced to vote again. It looks like our vote isn't respected in Europe to the citizens and that we are told to vote yes because of the money we got in the past which is ridiculous because that wasn't in the previous treaty that we had to vote yes to this one to get EU money so we don't really owe them anything).

But even before we voted no it was made out that voting no wasn't an option which I think probably p*ssed a lot of 18-24 year old people off since they have just gotten the right to vote and were being told they had one option. Kind of makes the voting process look stupid and ridiculous and maybe some of these people voted no as a fook you to the government for trying to tell them how to vote instead of just educate them on the issue and let them make up their own minds which way they wanted to vote.

Personally I think Lisbon is too complex to be voted on in a simple yes/no referendum so it should probably broken down to a number of questions about the policies in it and if people vote no to one at least you know what they don't like about the treaty.

Scofflaw

brim4brim wrote: »

I think it is more the manner in which this restructuring is being forced on people that a lot of people don't like especially since we voted no and are being told we voted wrong, try again (you can say this isn't what they are saying but it is how it is perceived by many so this is the a lot of peoples views on it and will be if forced to vote again. It looks like our vote isn't respected in Europe to the citizens and that we are told to vote yes because of the money we got in the past which is ridiculous because that wasn't in the previous treaty that we had to vote yes to this one to get EU money so we don't really owe them anything).

But even before we voted no it was made out that voting no wasn't an option which I think probably p*ssed a lot of 18-24 year old people off since they have just gotten the right to vote and were being told they had one option. Kind of makes the voting process look stupid and ridiculous and maybe some of these people voted no as a fook you to the government for trying to tell them how to vote instead of just educate them on the issue and let them make up their own minds which way they wanted to vote.

Personally I think Lisbon is too complex to be voted on in a simple yes/no referendum so it should probably broken down to a number of questions about the policies in it and if people vote no to one at least you know what they don't like about the treaty.

I think the other issue there is that Ireland actually can't really afford to say No to the EU - which is something that perhaps the younger voters either don't grasp, or don't consider acceptable.

cordially,
Scofflaw