Lisbon Treaty Referendum 2 - Return of the Gombeen Man

Hagar

Taoiseach not ruling out second Referendum

Vote Yes if you agree with the proposal.
Vote Yes if you don't agree with the proposal.

1984 came and nobody noticed.

P.C.

You should have posted this in the Humour forum. :D:D

Rock Climber

Yes.
Lets repeal the divorce laws..

After all,we kept voting 'till we got the right answer..

dresden8

Rock Climber wrote: »

Yes.
Lets repeal the divorce laws..

After all,we kept voting 'till we got the right answer..

If you're going to quote divorce referenda, I'll give you a second Lisbon referendum after 9 years, no problem.

Villain

"We respect the choice of the people"

Now how long before we can ask them to vote again?

Its going to be interesting to see how the opposition go on this will they support another vote and push hard for a yes or will they simply not tell people which way they should vote. Labour seemed to be saying they wouldn't support another vote so it will be interesting to see if they stick to that.

I'm guessing the opposition will follow the polls this time, going against the majority of the electorate with local elections coming up isn't going to help anyone.

molloyjh

Oh FFS all Cowen said was that they were keeping their options open until they had a chance to analyse the results of the detailed investigation into the reason for the result. Noone is saying we are having another referendum and noone is saying we aren't. Stop making an issue over nothing.

He said that the Government were not at that point in the discussions yet and that they were examining the outcome of the referendum at the moment.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=1069 ?

dresden8

molloyjh wrote: »

Oh FFS all Cowen said was that they were keeping their options open until they had a chance to analyse the results of the detailed investigation into the reason for the result. Noone is saying we are having another referendum and noone is saying we aren't. Stop making an issue over nothing.

Oh dear molloy. We're being set up and softened up. How can you not see that?

He's not going to come out and say "You fecked up, vote again you tossers".

First the tame press come out and tell us how stupid we are and call for Cowen to do the brave thing and over-ride the result. Then the analysis as to why we're so stupid to have voted no. Pr1ck Roche then comes out and speaks in a personal basis. Which as a Minister in the government responsible for the issue, he cannot reasonably do.

Spurred on by his Ministers brave stand Cowen does indeed not rule out a second referendum.

Then there'll be som "Emperors new clothes" kind of deal where they will bang on for a few months about how "No" voters really were duped, gullible and idiotic. But God love them, we'll give them another chance to prove they're not stupid.

Then they'll bus every granny in the country to a polling station.

It you think that's not going to happen we'll just have to re-visit that scenario in a few months time.

Fratton Fred

The next vote should be Yes, accept Lisbon or No, leave the EU.

Force people into thinking about what they are voting for rather than taking the easy option of voting No and changing nothing.

Hagar

With all due respect Fred your Govt didn't give the people of Britain the opportunity to vote.
Who can say what their vote would have been?

If the tenacity with which Britain has clung to its currency is anything to go by a "Yes" vote would have been by no means certain.

molloyjh

dresden8 wrote: »

Oh dear molloy. We're being set up and softened up. How can you not see that?

He's not going to come out and say "You fecked up, vote again you tossers".

First the tame press come out and tell us how stupid we are and call for Cowen to do the brave thing and over-ride the result. Then the analysis as to why we're so stupid to have voted no. Pr1ck Roche then comes out and speaks in a personal basis. Which as a Minister in the government responsible for the issue, he cannot reasonably do.

Spurred on by his Ministers brave stand Cowen does indeed not rule out a second referendum.

Then there'll be som "Emperors new clothes" kind of deal where they will bang on for a few months about how "No" voters really were duped, gullible and idiotic. But God love them, we'll give them another chance to prove they're not stupid.

Then they'll bus every granny in the country to a polling station.

It you think that's not going to happen we'll just have to re-visit that scenario in a few months time.

I'm not so sure after what I saw this week. All the opposition parties are coming out against another referendum despite the fact that they were strongly in favour of Lisbon. This isn't because they value "democracy" or "the peoples will" or anything like that, its because there is political advantage in doing so. Similarly there is political disadvantage in pushing a referendum unless you've got bloody good reason.

For as much as FF may have wanted Lisbon, the politicians in this country are exremely short-sighted and one thing overrides all others - reelection. I can't see FF putting their reelection prospects in serious risk over Lisbon.

Now while I agree that a re-run is probable at this stage, I think there is still good reason to assume that FF haven't made that decision yet because they are afraid it will backfire on them. I'd say they are hoping that the results of this investigation will provide them with a strong case for a re-run, but if it doesn't I doubt they are going to risk their positions over it.

That being said I have made my position clear on this elsewhere, i.e. that I believe that a re-run is probably a good thing assuming that ignorance did in fact play a significant factor in June and the right steps towards rectifying that are taken before any such re-run is held, and additionally that another investigation into that result is run (regardless of the result) to ensure that ignorance didn't play a significant factor again.

irish_bob

Fratton Fred wrote: »

The next vote should be Yes, accept Lisbon or No, leave the EU.

Force people into thinking about what they are voting for rather than taking the easy option of voting No and changing nothing.

agreed , when the decision is in black and white terms , peoples minds focus quicker , besides , people need to understand that we need the eu and they hardly need us at all

Fratton Fred

Hagar wrote: »

With all due respect Fred your Govt didn't give the people of Britain the opportunity to vote.
Who can say what their vote would have been?

If the tenacity with which Britain has clung to its currency is anything to go by a "Yes" vote would have been by no means certain.

That's right, they didn't but I don't think it would have been any different to Ireland.

The scare mongering by the "No" lobby was enough to get a no vote rather than people voting no because they had weighed up the pros and cons. My mother in law voted no because she is anti abortion ffs.

People's choices were

1 read this large boring document, make an informed decision all on your own and vote according to your own beliefs and wishes.

2 listen to a government that, franlkly. no one trusts and vote yes.

3 Listen to the scare mongers ("People died for your freedom, reject the treaty" etc etc) and vote No

4 do nothing, vote No and it will all go away.

it is no wonder it got rejected. It was the easiest decision

now, if you add in that rejecting the treaty will mean leaving the EU, then you may get people who actually read and understand what the treaty is all about as a no vote would have as much impact on people's lives as a yes vote.

Personally, I believe that politicians are there to make these decisions for us, that is what they are paid for. Giving them a chance to blame the people if it goes wrong gives them a huge get out of jail card.

landan

Hagar wrote: »

Taoiseach not ruling out second Referendum

Vote Yes if you agree with the proposal.
Vote Yes if you don't agree with the proposal.

1984 came and nobody noticed.

Nobody noticed alright, sure they still think they have a say in what happens.

I have been hoping for a second referendum, although I am against anything EU.

In my opinion, even the most docile, compliant idiot will have to accept the fact that they are living in a dictatorship, no matter what Brian Dobson may tell you.

landan

Fratton Fred wrote: »

The next vote should be Yes, accept Lisbon or No, leave the EU.

Force people into thinking about what they are voting for rather than taking the easy option of voting No and changing nothing.

Leave the EU, if only they would allow this. You see such a move would rapidly as the ordinary people of every other european country demanded such actions. The EU serves the elite, and only the elite.

molloyjh

landan wrote: »

Leave the EU, if only they would allow this. You see such a move would rapidly as the ordinary people of every other european country demanded such actions. The EU serves the elite, and only the elite.

Yes because the average Joe Bloggs has gotten nothing from the billions of Euro Ireland has received from the EU. And nothing from all the foreign investment that arrived as a result of membership. And nothing from the free movement of people within the EU. And nothing from the additional labour that the Eastern European countries provided us with in the construction industry. :rolleyes:

HalloweenJack

If we're asked to vote again on Lisbon, I'll spoil my vote.

I voted Yes first time round. Whether I like it or not, the No side won and the EU should accept it.

If they force it again, unchanged, then it shows democracy isn't accepted in the EU.

Also, I just caouldn't bring myself to vote No.

molloyjh

HalloweenJack wrote: »

If we're asked to vote again on Lisbon, I'll spoil my vote.

I voted Yes first time round. Whether I like it or not, the No side won and the EU should accept it.

If they force it again, unchanged, then it shows democracy isn't accepted in the EU.

Also, I just caouldn't bring myself to vote No.

There has been some evidence thus far that ignorance and a convincing No campaign played significant part in the result. While I'm all for democracy I would rather the people voted on the Treaty itself and not out of ignorance and/or on how convincing the campaigns were. If these factors did play a significant part can we be sure the people will regardng the Treaty itself was actually done? To me there is no way of guaranteeing it in this case.

Fratton Fred

molloyjh wrote: »

Yes because the average Joe Bloggs has gotten nothing from the billions of Euro Ireland has received from the EU. And nothing from all the foreign investment that arrived as a result of membership. And nothing from the free movement of people within the EU. And nothing from the additional labour that the Eastern European countries provided us with in the construction industry. :rolleyes:

So human rights, basic working time directives, minimum wage etc only serves the elite does it. ok....:rolleyes:

I suppose these things, as well as the billions of investment, only serves the elite, but THEY want us to believe they benefit joe Soap.

molloyjh

Fratton Fred wrote: »

So human rights, basic working time directives, minimum wage etc only serves the elite does it. ok....:rolleyes:

I suppose these things, as well as the billions of investment, only serves the elite, but THEY want us to believe they benefit joe Soap.

I presume your sarcastic post was in addition to, and not in response to, my sarcastic post?

HalloweenJack

molloyjh wrote: »

There has been some evidence thus far that ignorance and a convincing No campaign played significant part in the result. While I'm all for democracy I would rather the people voted on the Treaty itself and not out of ignorance and/or on how convincing the campaigns were.

While I'll agree with those points, I am certain that a second referendum for an unchanged Lisbon would be voted down again. It'll give the No side too much ammo and they wouldn't have to work too hard to drum up support.

Drakmord

To be honest, I think the Lisbon treaty was rejected due to people becoming more and more dissatisfied with our internal affairs.
I'm just beginning college and the thought of fees coming back really scares me. I have a lot of friends who would vote no in the Lisbon treaty 2 if the fees were brought back.
It's easy to pass an EU treaty if the country is going well and the citizens are content, but if things are starting to go badly, issues become distorted and parties such as Sinn Fein gain power. Which, might I add is never a good thing. A lot of people voted yes because sinn fein said to vote no.
There is ignorance on both the yes and no sides of the argument.
To be honest I didn't vote in the Referendum as I had a leaving cert exam on the day. It really annoyed me that the voting day and the lc clashed as many lc students can vote now due to transition year.
I really don't know how I'd vote in a second referendum. The yes vote seems to be a vote against democracy and the no side is aligned to Sinn Fein. Maybe I'd be better not to vote at all.

molloyjh

Drakmord wrote: »

To be honest, I think the Lisbon treaty was rejected due to people becoming more and more dissatisfied with our internal affairs.
I'm just beginning college and the thought of fees coming back really scares me. I have a lot of friends who would vote no in the Lisbon treaty 2 if the fees were brought back.
It's easy to pass an EU treaty if the country is going well and the citizens are content, but if things are starting to go badly, issues become distorted and parties such as Sinn Fein gain power. Which, might I add is never a good thing. A lot of people voted yes because sinn fein said to vote no.
There is ignorance on both the yes and no sides of the argument.
To be honest I didn't vote in the Referendum as I had a leaving cert exam on the day. It really annoyed me that the voting day and the lc clashed as many lc students can vote now due to transition year.
I really don't know how I'd vote in a second referendum. The yes vote seems to be a vote against democracy and the no side is aligned to Sinn Fein. Maybe I'd be better not to vote at all.

You're right that internal unrest does work against the likes of the Treaty. That was one of the contributors to the French No vote in their referendum re the Constitution. And I agree ignorance was abound on all sides for the referendum. However there is nothing anti-democratic about Lisbon, or being asked to vote again. Voting again gives you just as much freedom to vote either way as the first referendum. The only way the EU and/or our Government can ever be accused of being anti-democratic would be if they went ahead and implemented the Treaty despite the No vote.

HalloweenJack

Drakmord wrote: »

It's easy to pass an EU treaty if the country is going well and the citizens are content, but if things are starting to go badly, issues become distorted and parties such as Sinn Fein gain power. Which, might I add is never a good thing. A lot of people voted yes because sinn fein said to vote no.

Drakmord wrote:

I really don't know how I'd vote in a second referendum. The yes vote seems to be a vote against democracy and the no side is aligned to Sinn Fein. Maybe I'd be better not to vote at all.

You shouldn't vote one way simply because you don't want to be associated with the people who vote the other way. You should vote on the issues at hand. It seems like you want to vote No, then do it. Don't worry about who else votes no.

Drakmord wrote:

To be honest I didn't vote in the Referendum as I had a leaving cert exam on the day. It really annoyed me that the voting day and the lc clashed as many lc students can vote now due to transition year.

It's classic Gov policy. Have the elections in May/June in the hope that college and Leaving students will be too busy to worry about voting. As a lot of them are first-time voters, they are an unreliable demographic.

molloyjh

HalloweenJack wrote: »

While I'll agree with those points, I am certain that a second referendum for an unchanged Lisbon would be voted down again. It'll give the No side too much ammo and they wouldn't have to work too hard to drum up support.

Probably true. That would be a case of people voting for something other than the matter at hand though which is counter to the whole point of democracy. Yet many of those people are doing so to, supposedly, protect democracy. Maybe it's me, but I can't understand that logic at all.

Fratton Fred

molloyjh wrote: »

I presume your sarcastic post was in addition to, and not in response to, my sarcastic post?

yes it was. I really must try and get the hang of this interweb thingamybob:D

djpbarry

dresden8 wrote: »

First the tame press come out and tell us how stupid we are and call for Cowen to do the brave thing and over-ride the result. Then the analysis as to why we're so stupid to have voted no. Pr1ck Roche then comes out and speaks in a personal basis. Which as a Minister in the government responsible for the issue, he cannot reasonably do.

Spurred on by his Ministers brave stand Cowen does indeed not rule out a second referendum.

Then there'll be som "Emperors new clothes" kind of deal where they will bang on for a few months about how "No" voters really were duped, gullible and idiotic. But God love them, we'll give them another chance to prove they're not stupid.

Then they'll bus every granny in the country to a polling station.

You’re a funny guy. Really.

Hagar wrote: »

With all due respect Fred your Govt didn't give the people of Britain the opportunity to vote.
Who can say what their vote would have been?

If the tenacity with which Britain has clung to its currency is anything to go by a "Yes" vote would have been by no means certain.

I’m not sure what your point is? We should vote ‘No’ because that’s what Britain would do?

landan wrote: »

Nobody noticed alright, sure they still think they have a say in what happens.

I have been hoping for a second referendum, although I am against anything EU.

In my opinion, even the most docile, compliant idiot will have to accept the fact that they are living in a dictatorship, no matter what Brian Dobson may tell you.

Thanks for that, Casey.

Drakmord wrote: »

To be honest I didn't vote in the Referendum as I had a leaving cert exam on the day.

The exam lasted the whole day, did it?

Drakmord

djpbarry wrote: »

The exam lasted the whole day, did it?

I did the exam in Limerick and I'm from Cork.
I couldn't vote in Limerick and I had another exam to do the next day.
I couldn't travel to Cork as I had to study for the next exam.
Happy?

sink

Drakmord wrote: »

I did the exam in Limerick and I'm from Cork.
I couldn't vote in Limerick and I had another exam to do the next day.
I couldn't travel to Cork as I had to study for the next exam.
Happy?

I'm not criticising you. But for future reference students who are studying away from home are allowed to register at the polling station where they study as well as home.

is_that_so

If he's asked the question often enough eventually he has to concede an answer and what else was that answer going to be. At this point there seems to be a three-pronged approach to this.
I also agree that the timing , coinciding with economic woes and of course the Bertie goodbye didn't help matters at all.

1. Explore opt-outs ala the Danish Maastricht approach
2. Get guarantees - as with Nice.
3. Legislate part of the the treaty that does not effect a constitutional change.

I do believe the proposition will be changed in some way but more along the lines of 1 & 2.
I am inclined to think they will have a go at 1 & 2 as I can't really see them risking the wrath of the electorate with 3, although as posted above our internal well-being may have improved when it comes around and we may be less inclined to punish them. Not sure how I feel about that myself but there is an inescapable logic to it.


Off-topic

I am mildly amused, through not surprised, that in this part of the internet the tantrums continue. In real life answers need to be found and jumping up and down is not going to make it otherwise.

oscarBravo

HalloweenJack wrote: »

I voted Yes first time round. Whether I like it or not, the No side won and the EU should accept it.

...and do... what?

It's a serious question, and one I'd like to see answered seriously. If the attitude is that our "no" vote is the EU's problem, then we can't really complain if the EU does what it feels is necessary to solve that problem, even if it doesn't suit us.

If they force it again, unchanged, then it shows democracy isn't accepted in the EU.

How in the name of the gods is anything being "forced" when we're asked a yes/no question?

Drakmord wrote: »

I have a lot of friends who would vote no in the Lisbon treaty 2 if the fees were brought back.

Why don't those friends make their protest vote in a general election? I mean, they might as register a protest vote with a reality TV show phone-in poll as vote down a constitutional amendment just because they're unhappy with a government policy.

is_that_so wrote: »

1. Explore opt-outs ala the Danish Maastricht approach

Those would be the same opt-outs they're currently looking at holding a referendum to roll back?

We have opt-outs. I have yet to see a coherent response as to what form of the Lisbon treaty would be acceptable to the "no" voters who claim not to be Euroskeptics.

Villain

The problem is the treaty is deliberatley designed to be over complicated and has areas which are open to legal argument, I have read large parts of the treaty and I understand these documents have to be complex and detailed for legal reasons, but I can read our constition a lot easier then this treaty, I'm not against the treaty but I don't understand it enough to be able to say yes I want to change our constitution so I voted no previously and unless we get declarations on all the topics which are not 100% clear cut I will vote again.

How many times do the people of Ireland have to vote NO before the EU accept that the Lisbon treaty as it stands cannot be adopted?

oscarBravo

Has there ever had to be a Supreme Court decision to interpret our wonderfully straightforward constitution?

Villain

Oh I'm not saying our Constitution is water tight but if you read it compared to the Lisbon treaty it's much easier to read and understand, obviously the treaty being a constitution for the entire EU is going to be longer, and be more complicated but imo the treaty has been over complicted deliberatley to ensure the ordinary voter can't understand it.

molloyjh

Villain wrote: »

The problem is the treaty is deliberatley designed to be over complicated and has areas which are open to legal argument, I have read large parts of the treaty and I understand these documents have to be complex and detailed for legal reasons, but I can read our constition a lot easier then this treaty, I'm not against the treaty but I don't understand it enough to be able to say yes I want to change our constitution so I voted no previously and unless we get declarations on all the topics which are not 100% clear cut I will vote again.

How many times do the people of Ireland have to vote NO before the EU accept that the Lisbon treaty as it stands cannot be adopted?

A Treaty, no matter what the Treaty, will never be as readable as a Constitution. As for Lisbon, it is a Treaty that by its nature has to refer to multiple other treaties which is only going to make it more complex.

You don't need to read the whole thing to understand it. There are non-biased summaries out there to do that for you. In GEs and other referenda we don't vote on the details, i.e. the exact detailed policies in each area the parties are going to implement or the articles of law in referenda, we vote on the summary.

is_that_so

oscarBravo wrote: »

Those would be the same opt-outs they're currently looking at holding a referendum to roll back?

We have opt-outs. I have yet to see a coherent response as to what form of the Lisbon treaty would be acceptable to the "no" voters who claim not to be Euroskeptics.

Yes they are and yes we do, however in my view everything should be explored. There may something within that Danish process that can offer solutions. In answer to the second comment I doubt we will see one. Positions appear to have become even more entrenched and the right to outrage seems to far outweigh any desire to engage beyond "No".

Fratton Fred

Villain wrote: »

How many times do the people of Ireland have to vote NO before the EU accept that the Lisbon treaty as it stands cannot be adopted?

What if the rest of Europe want to adopt the treaty as it stands and the Irish keep saying no? how long should 200m people have to be dictated to by the 800,000 Irish no voters?

Villain

molloyjh wrote: »

A Treaty, no matter what the Treaty, will never be as readable as a Constitution. As for Lisbon, it is a Treaty that by its nature has to refer to multiple other treaties which is only going to make it more complex.

You don't need to read the whole thing to understand it. There are non-biased summaries out there to do that for you. In GEs and other referenda we don't vote on the details, i.e. the exact detailed policies in each area the parties are going to implement or the articles of law in referenda, we vote on the summary.

Well the treaty is basically the EU Constitution and does ammend our Constitution as follows:

Proposed changes to the text

* Deletion of entirety of Article 29.4.9:

The State shall not adopt a decision taken by the European Council to establish a common defence pursuant to Article 1.2 of the Treaty referred to in subsection 7° of this section where that common defence would include the State.

* Deletion of entirety of Article 29.4.11:

The State may ratify the Agreement relating to Community Patents drawn up between the Member States of the Communities and done at Luxembourg on the 15th day of December, 1989.

* (Existing subsection 10 of Article 29.4 retained but renumbered as subsection 9)
* Insertion of new Article 29.4.10:

The State may ratify the Treaty of Lisbon amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community, signed at Lisbon on the 13th day of December 2007, and may be a member of the European Union established by virtue of that Treaty.

* Insertion of new Article 29.4.11:

No provision of this Constitution invalidates laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the State that are necessitated by the obligations of membership of the European Union referred to in subsection 10 of this section, or prevents laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the said European Union or by institutions thereof, or by bodies competent under the treaties referred to in this section, from having the force of law in the State.

* Insertion of new Article 29.4.12:

The State may exercise the options or discretions provided by or under Articles 1.22, 2.64, 2.65, 2.66, 2.67, 2.68 and 2.278 of the Treaty referred to in subsection 10 of this section and Articles 1.18 and 1.20 of Protocol No. 1 annexed to that Treaty, but any such exercise shall be subject to the prior approval of both Houses of the Oireachtas.

* Insertion of new Article 29.4.13:

The State may exercise the option to secure that the Protocol on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice annexed to the Treaty on the European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (formerly known as the Treaty establishing the European Community) shall, in whole or in part, cease to apply to the State, but any such exercise shall be subject to the prior approval of both Houses of the Oireachtas.

* Insertion of new Article 29.4.14:

The State may agree to the decisions, regulations or other acts under —

i. Article 1.34(b)(iv),
ii. Article 1.56 (in so far as it relates to Article 48.7 of the Treaty referred to in subsection 4 of this section),
iii. Article 2.66 (in so far as it relates to the second subparagraph of Article 65.3 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union),
iv. Article 2.67 (in so far as it relates to subparagraph (d) of Article 69A.2, the third subparagraph of Article 69B.1 and paragraphs 1 and 4 of Article 69E of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union),
v. Article 2.144(a),
vi. Article 2.261 (in so far as it relates to the second subparagraph of Article 270a.2 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union), and
vii. Article 2.278 (in so far as it relates to Article 280H of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union), of the Treaty referred to in subsection 10 of this section, and may also agree to the decision under the second sentence of the second subparagraph of Article 137.2 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (as amended by Article 2.116(a) of the Treaty referred to in the said subsection 10), but the agreement to any such decision, regulation or act shall be subject to the prior approval of both Houses of the Oireachtas.

* Insertion of new Article 29.4.15:

The State shall not adopt a decision taken by the European Council to establish a common defence pursuant to —

i. Article 1.2 of the Treaty referred to in subsection 7 of this section, or
ii. Article 1.49 of the Treaty referred to in subsection 10 of this section, where that common defence would include the State.

SO before I vote Yes to ammend OUR constitution I'd like to be certain about the consequences and what exactly the the Treaty does and I can't do that by reading it as its far too complex.

Villain

Fratton Fred wrote: »

What if the rest of Europe want to adopt the treaty as it stands and the Irish keep saying no? how long should 200m people have to be dictated to by the 800,000 Irish no voters?

Well then they need to agree a new a treaty among themselves because this treaty CANNOT be adopted unless ALL states including Ireland ratify it and how many of those 200m have being given the right to vote on the treaty?

Of those who were asked to vote the Dutch and the French voted no.

sink

Villain wrote: »

SO before I vote Yes to ammend OUR constitution I'd like to be certain about the consequences and what exactly the the Treaty does and I can't do that by reading it as its far too complex.

Have you ever used Satellite navigation? Do you perfectly understand Einstein's theory of general relativity? Because what you just said sounds something like 'i'm not going to use sat nav because I don't understand the scientific theory that allows it to work and I don't know the entire implications of that theory'.

But you do use sat nav or other such complex systems because you accept that experts in the relevant field know what the are doing. Why should a treaty be any different? All legal experts seem to be pretty unanimous about what Lisbon means but you reject their understanding because you yourself don't have the same understanding.

Sounds like a recipe for ignorance to me.

Villain

sink wrote: »

Have you ever used Satellite navigation? Do you perfectly understand Einstein's theory of general relativity? Because what you just said sounds something like 'i'm not going to use sat nav because I don't understand the scientific theory that allows it to work and I don't know the entire implications of that theory'.

But you do use sat nav or other such complex systems because you accept that experts in the relevant field know what the are doing. Why should a treaty be any different? All legal experts seem to be pretty unanimous about what Lisbon means but you reject their understanding because you yourself don't have the same understanding.

Sounds like a recipe for ignorance to me.

Its quite easy to understand GPS and assoicated navigation . Simply put sink I don't trust polictians they are not experts in their area they are simply people who have been elected through democracy, which is funny when you consider they won't accept the democratic result of a referendum.

djpbarry

Villain wrote: »

Well then they need to agree a new a treaty among themselves because this treaty CANNOT be adopted unless ALL states including Ireland ratify it…

All they have to do is stick a new cover on the Lisbon Treaty, remove Ireland from the text and call it something else.

Villain wrote: »

…and how many of those 200m have being given the right to vote on the treaty?

How many of them want to?

Villain wrote: »

Of those who were asked to vote the Dutch and the French voted no.

18 other countries voted ‘Yes’ (three by referendum; Luxembourg, Spain and Romania).

This has already been done to death on this forum.

djpbarry

Villain wrote: »

Simply put sink I don't trust polictians they are not experts in their area they are simply people who have been elected through democracy, which is funny when you consider they won't accept the democratic result of a referendum.

Won't accept? How exactly has the result of the Lisbon referendum not been accepted? Has Ireland ratified the treaty?

sink

Villain wrote: »

Its quite easy to understand GPS and assoicated navigation.

Really because I don't understand it perfectly. Do you know that it relies on atomic clocks that tick slightly faster than those on earth because they are not under as much influence of earth's gravity as predicted in general relativity. Now if you don't understand general relativity which most people don't (Including me, I only have a rough understanding) how claim to understand how the GPS system works?

Villain wrote: »

Simply put sink I don't trust polictians they are not experts in their area they are simply people who have been elected through democracy, which is funny when you consider they won't accept the democratic result of a referendum.

I don't trust politicians either but I'm not putting my faith in politicians but in solicitors. None of whom with credibility seem to disagree with the interpretation of the lisbon treaty set out by the revenue commissioners. If we were being lied to I would expect at least a significant number of solicitors to be crying fowl.

Villain

djpbarry wrote: »

Won't accept? How exactly has the result of the Lisbon referendum not been accepted? Has Ireland ratified the treaty?

If it was accepted there wouldn't be a need for another vote on it and I think its pretty obvious from Dick Roche's comments and those from Brian Cowen that they will look for another vote and thus disregard the result of a democratic vote

Villain

sink wrote: »

I don't trust politicians either but I'm not putting my faith in politicians but in solicitors. None of whom with credibility seem to disagree with the interpretation of the lisbon treaty set out by the revenue commissioners. If we were being lied to I would expect at least a significant number of solicitors to be crying fowl.

But the thing is what solictors believe they have achieved in text and what the European Courts decide if the parts of the treaty are challenged may differ.

I'm sure this has been discussed to death on here before the vote, so apologies if this is a repeat of old arguments I wasn't around back then.

djpbarry

Villain wrote: »

If it was accepted there wouldn't be a need for another vote on it...

Why not? Tell you what, why don't you tell us what should happen next; where does the EU go from here (considering almost every other member state has ratified)?

Villain

djpbarry wrote: »

Why not? Tell you what, why don't you tell us what should happen next; where does the EU go from here (considering almost every other member state has ratified)?

The Lisbon treaty in its current state cannot be adopted, so the EU either need to address the issues that Irish voters had and ammend the treaty if all the other countries agree or they need to leave Ireland behind and move on with a new treaty.

You can't say you accept the democratic result of a vote and then ask the voters to vote again on the same thing?

Darragh29

Fratton Fred wrote: »

The next vote should be Yes, accept Lisbon or No, leave the EU.

Force people into thinking about what they are voting for rather than taking the easy option of voting No and changing nothing.

+1. I voted no on Lisbon and I'll be voting no on the next occasion. This startling refusal to accept the will of voters, not just on this occasion, has in my opinion completely vindicated my decision to vote no on Lisbon...

O'Morris

djpbarry wrote: »

where does the EU go from here (considering almost every other member state has ratified)?

The Lisbon Treaty needs unanimous support before it can come into effect. One member state cannot ratify the treaty because it has been rejected in a referendum. This means that the treaty lacks unanimous support and so the only direction the EU can go in is the direction it would have gone in if the Lisbon Treaty never existed.

The EU needs to scrap the Lisbon Treaty completely and continue to function as it has done since enlargement. If a 27 member EU is found to be unworkable then the sensible thing for them to do would be to offload some of their responsibilities and hand back competences to the member states. That would leave a downsized EU to more effectively deal with those things which it should be responsible for i.e. the successful functioning of a single market.

If the Euro elite is not happy with that then they might consider leaving the current EU as the free-trade area that it was originally intended to be and they can then set up some alternative union of like-minded European countries who do share the same ambitions of a politically integrated federal Europe.

Begob

Villain wrote: »

SO before I vote Yes to ammend OUR constitution I'd like to be certain about the consequences and what exactly the the Treaty does and I can't do that by reading it as its far too complex.

The thing is though (and here's the problem I have with the it's so full of legalese argument) in my opinion,this treaty should have had the "experts" working for another 6 months on it to engineer it such that it didn't need a referendum here.

Our relationship with the EU is too important for this small open economy to be left to the mercy of a pencil and minds that either don't understand the legalese or don't want to so don't care about scuppering the whole thing.

I too have read the treaty.I voted yes because I thought for myself,I did the research and discovered there was nothing bad or of harm to Ireland in it.

Ironically,the two biggest proponents of a No vote that I saw were friendly to the Euroskeptic Tory party on the one hand and to Sinn Féin on the other as well as a mish mash of other silly people like Cóir spouting delusional stuff about abortion etc.
The biggest element of the No vote seems to have been the if you don't know vote no brigade and the stick it to them brigade.
None of those categories have anything to offer other than from what I can see , the disruption of our good relations with Europe.
They'll all deny this of course but it is and always was plain as day for anyone neutral and informed to see.

We elect politicians to run a country usually to be judged on their performance at the end of their 5 year term.
That's what should have happened here.
They should have engineered the thing for ease of passage through the Irish legislative system and not left it open for an obvious roadblock.
Whats laughable is that our politicians were chieftains in Lisbons design and yet failed to make the case or see the need for tweaking it to avoid constitutional hurdles here.

I don't know how they could have done that,But I sure will be giving them grief for not even trying.

By the way,I'll vote yes again for the simple reason,that I'm not happy with the don't give a damn stick it to them don't know brigade harming the countries relationship with Europe.
I doubt it will do any good though,it will still be voted down.
Not see'ing this coming is an indictment on the politicians.

The feckers should be made put every piece of legislation in the Dáil to referendum for the next ten years and have their salaries based on how many pass.Most mightn't for the same main reason as Lisbon because they are all in half latin legalese..
That would be punishment for them