Ireland <3 Lison Treaty

Dave!

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2008/1117/1226700658973.html

Middle classes and farmers firmly in treaty Yes camp

STEPHEN COLLINS, Political Editor

Mon, Nov 17, 2008

OPINION POLL:THE SWING to the Yes side in the latest Irish Times/TNS mrbi poll is mainly due to a hardening of support for the Lisbon Treaty among middle-class voters, who are now much more strongly in favour of the treaty than in the final poll of the referendum campaign last June.

Working-class voters are still against the treaty by a significant margin. A majority of women and young people are also opposed, but farmers have moved decisively into the Yes camp.

Support for the treaty among the better-off ABC1 social category is now running at 55 per cent while opposition to it is at 30 per cent.

In the last Irish Times poll, a week before the referendum in June, the Yes side was ahead in this category by 36 per cent to 31 per cent. The poll question is based on the assumption that Ireland will be allowed to retain an EU commissioner in a clarification of the treaty.

As it stands the treaty provides that all EU states, big and small, will lose a commissioner for five out of every 15 years. However, the treaty provides that this can be changed by unanimity and there has been speculation since last June that agreement on maintaining a commissioner for every country may be possible.

The poll question also assumes that the Government will be able to negotiate clarifying declarations on issues like abortion, neutrality and taxation, which could be appended to the treaty.

While the poll result will come as a boost for the Yes side, it should be pointed out that the Irish Times polls in January and May also indicated a clear lead for the Yes side and it was only the final poll of the campaign that put the No side ahead.

However, one important difference between the current poll and the earlier polls that put the Yes side ahead is that a substantial majority of voters have now come to a clear view on the issue.

The first poll on the treaty in January showed that 64 per cent had no opinion and even the May poll, in the middle of the campaign, found that 47 per cent had no opinion, compared with 35 per cent for the Yes side and 18 per cent No.

This time over 80 per cent of the voters have a view on the issue and there is a much smaller number of undecided voters in the middle to play for.

The big weakness of the Yes campaign is among women voters and people in the youngest age group.

Among 18-24-year-olds just 32 per cent intend to vote Yes and 38 per cent No. However, there is a substantial 30 per cent in this category who have no opinion. The strongest Yes support comes from middle-aged voters with the over-65s being less enthusiastic.

Among women 40 per cent intend to vote No compared with 38 per cent Yes, with 23 per cent in the don't know category. This is still a big improvement on the last poll in June, which showed that 32 per cent of women were in the No camp, just 25 per cent intended to vote Yes, and a substantial 36 per cent were undecided.

Men are for the treaty by 48 per cent to 38 per cent, with 15 per cent having no opinion. Again this is a significant change since June when men were against by 39 per cent to 34 per cent.

In regional terms, the Yes lead is biggest in Munster where 45 per cent are in the Yes camp and 35 per cent on the No side.

The Yes side has a narrower lead in Dublin of 44 per cent against 40 per cent; the rest of Leinster is almost identical. The sides are closest in Connacht-Ulster with a Yes lead of 41 per cent against 39 per cent.

In party terms Fianna Fáil voters are the most positive with 51 per cent intending to vote Yes and 34 per cent No.

Supporters of the other pro-treaty parties have all shifted back into the Yes side since the last poll in June. Sinn Féin is the only party whose supporters are still opposed to the treat.

© 2008 The Irish Times

Biggins

Its already clear more so now, that more time (than last time) should be spend convincing those that are "unsure". Hopefully in a better and more professional process than one filled with personal attack from one side to the other.
* To briefly mention the US election a few weeks back - this is one area that McCain failed to pick up enough support - the "unsures" - it aided to his losing. McCain it is also said lost due to his negative campaign.
The Irish government some felt, spend too much time in attacking individual persons than attacking the ideology behind the policies the opposition was presenting to the people. A negative process that leaves a bad taste in the mouth of the public. Last time around the Government I felt was mostly on the defensive. If they are to win over the public they should be more positive and on the offensive.

I hope they make their next case based more around the policies rather than the principles involved.
God knows this country needs some sort of hope for the future - not negative attacking from a defensive position.

oscarBravo

Dave!, please read the charter, specifically the bit about starting threads without offering your own opinions.

Dave! wrote: »

As it stands the treaty provides that all EU states, big and small, will lose a commissioner for five out of every 15 years. However, the treaty provides that this can be changed by unanimity and there has been speculation since last June that agreement on maintaining a commissioner for every country may be possible.

I'd be less than impressed if this comes to pass. It's an exercise in pure pandering; a concession to a Libertas-style hysteria campaign. "Save our commissoner!" Um, why?

Dob74

No means No! How dare the government force another referendum down our throats. If there was a Yes vote would we be re-running the referendum. Its clear the government has done nothing for young people and the working class since June. So why go to the people again. They did a deal for farmers before the referendum and bought there votes. But they wont do anything for the urban workers. The only thing we can do is to reject this Treaty again.

oscarBravo

Dob74 wrote: »

No means No!

I'm going to ask a question that I don't think I've ever received a straight answer to: is it your position that not a single provision contained in the Lisbon Treaty should ever again be put to the Irish electorate under any circumstances?

Dave!

Sorry oscar, in my haste I forgot!

I have to say I'd be quite surprised if it was passed next time. I would have thought it would be OVERWHELMINGLY rejected if put to the vote again any time soon, in the aftermath of the budget. Everybody's p*ssed at the government, and I'm sure alot of people would see this as a way of sticking 2 fingers up at FF (again).

I'd like to see some more polls tbh

Furious-Dave

Hello everyone. This is my first post on this forum.

One joke made by a comedian recently about the referendum that I really enjoyed was "it's either a 'Yes' vote or as many times as is needed so that people get it right"...or something along those lines.

Anyway, I could go on a rant about this and that but I'm just going to keep it short. I am a hardcore 'YES' voter and I believe that others like me, not only in Ireland but all over the EU, need to organize and confront Libertas and others like them on every move they make. I believe the sole purpose of Libertas is to destablize the EU political process and in doing so preventing it from solidifying into the super power it should be. An EU superpower would make NATO obsolete.

Peace.

Hitman Actual

oscarBravo wrote: »

Dave!, please read the charter, specifically the bit about starting threads without offering your own opinions. I'd be less than impressed if this comes to pass. It's an exercise in pure pandering; a concession to a Libertas-style hysteria campaign. "Save our commissoner!" Um, why?

Agreed, I cringed when I read that part.

One thing I still don't get is why so many women are against the treaty. I thought a lot of the gender/social equalities in Ireland are a direct result of EU legislation in the '70s when Patrick Hillary was the social affairs commissioner?

As regards younger people being against the treaty, the film "Idiocracy" comes to mind.

Dob74

oscarBravo wrote: »

I'm going to ask a question that I don't think I've ever received a straight answer to: is it your position that not a single provision contained in the Lisbon Treaty should ever again be put to the Irish electorate under any circumstances?

No means do not put this before the electorate again. Is was voted down fair and square. If we had voted yes would they be trying to re-run the referendum. I dont think so. Should we go back and re-run the Nice Treaty the score is one all. First to two. Has the government told us how much money they paid Millward Brown for that report in September. Funny how they come out with these answers in there latest poll just in time for the summit in December. They have not published their finding on this poll on their website. If the government what to bully the no voters into Lisbon2 it will be interesting to see how people react.
They did a nice deal with the farmers on the eve of the Referendum and the ERSI held back there report on the economy going into the tank until just after the vote. Coincidentally just before the pay talks.
So I dont know what rabits in the hat they can produce now. But it will be interesting to see what happens.

oscarBravo

Dob74 wrote: »

No means do not put this before the electorate again. Is was voted down fair and square.

Not one single provision contained in the treaty should ever be presented to the Irish public, ever again, under any circumstances?

Dob74

oscarBravo wrote: »

Not one single provision contained in the treaty should ever be presented to the Irish public, ever again, under any circumstances?

Never say never , but there definately has to be a cooling of period of about 5 years. I think most people are happy with the way things are now so why rock the boat. France and holland said no , more probably would have followed if they were allowed to vote. The way things are going the world economy is about to go in the sh**er and since we are the most globalised economy were F**ked.

oscarBravo

Dob74 wrote: »

Never say never , but there definately has to be a cooling of period of about 5 years.

Why?

utick

lets vote on nice again, we got it wrong last time

ateam

Patricia McKenna was on Vincent Brown tonight for the No side. How is that woman allowed on television.

Dob74

oscarBravo wrote: »

Why?

We voted no so please just except it. I bet the opposition would like to have a re-run of the last election. The lisbon treaty is dead so why cant the yes side get over it.
I have not heard one good reason to vote yes. Just attacks on the no side. When Ganley meet the Czech President the media went crazy. Since most of or media is owned by two of the biggest tax dogders in the country(well they live in other countries on their tax returns!!!) its a bit rich to be complaining about protocols.

Lisbon will never pass so let it go please.

Dave!

Shock horror, you can't actually defend your position

Mahatma coat

Oscar, what are you getting at, People on the yes side complain that the no side dont make a coherent argument, I've yet to hear a coherent argument for voting yes, I've heard things like

"Europe Needs this"

"It'll be better For Europe"

"It Streamlines Europe"

"Just shut up and go back to sleep"

"Oh you wouldnt understand anyway"


But vry little about the actual content of the Treaty

Yes there is weighted Voting, but depending on who you ask this is described in diferent ways

and theres the loss of the permanent Comissioner

but dont we have Proportional representation on the European Parliment anyway?

oscarBravo

Mahatma coat wrote: »

I've yet to hear a coherent argument for voting yes

Then you haven't been paying attention.

Furious-Dave

The Irish commissioner to the EU does NOT represent Ireland. They represent the EU commission. So what difference does it make if we have our own commissioner or operate it on a rotation with a few other countries? Having fewer commissioners in the EU means things will get agreed upon quicker.

Dob74

Dave! wrote: »

Shock horror, you can't actually defend your position

The yes voters can not justify there vote because they only voted yes on the command of there party. Most older voters, party loyalist and of course the west brits on dublins southside.
Older voters fair enough they have been voting yes consistly and generally follow FF and FG.
Party loyalists , Laois Offlay,Clare ,Kildare north. Cowen was able to get his constituency so did McCreevy. Clare is a FF stronghold as well. And in other FF strongholds the campaign did well but this was not because they read the treaty line for line. It was just out of political loyality which is amiable.
But the most frieghtening thing is that class detates the way people vote now. The upperclass of this country huddled together in the southside enclave of the dart line all voted yes by over 60% in favour of the treaty.
When you exploit a foreign worker and drive down wages of irish people you can see why they voted in favour.
Let them fumble in there greasy til


Reasons for voting no
The is EU is fine as it is, if we had voted yes it would be the last step to the United States of Europe. We have a common currency and open boarders what next? The eurocrats are pushing strong for countries like Turkey to be let in. Despite there appalling human rights record. Plus its not in Europe except for a small piece.

Furious-Dave

I have no loyalty to any political party. I voted yes, as I said, because I want a stronger Europe. The way I see it is Ireland is too small to be completely independent. Sure we had a good relationship with the EU but the EU is now changing and so we can either make sure that we remain part of it and have our say, small as it may be, from the inside, or we can isolate ourselves from it and become a poor nation on the outskirts with no say what so ever. We need to be part of a larger group, so it's either the "United States of Europe" or the United States of America. I say Europe.

Also, as I said before, a lot of people voted no because they didn't have a clue what was going on and because they bought the lies spread by Libertas.

oscarBravo

What was that about showing respect for other people's decisions?

[In reply to Dob74]

Dob74

oscarBravo wrote: »

What was that about showing respect for other people's decisions?

[In reply to Dob74]

Good tactic go on the attack. I wonder where you got that idea

Dob74

Furious-Dave wrote: »

I have no loyalty to any political party. I voted yes, as I said, because I want a stronger Europe. The way I see it is Ireland is too small to be completely independent. Sure we had a good relationship with the EU but the EU is now changing and so we can either make sure that we remain part of it and have our say, small as it may be, from the inside, or we can isolate ourselves from it and become a poor nation on the outskirts with no say what so ever. We need to be part of a larger group, so it's either the "United States of Europe" or the United States of America. I say Europe.

Also, as I said before, a lot of people voted no because they didn't have a clue what was going on and because they bought the lies spread by Libertas.

Well thats fair enough if you want a United States of Europe. I don't so i will continue to vote no.

oscarBravo

Dob74 wrote: »

Good tactic go on the attack. I wonder where you got that idea

You're having a laugh, right?

Dob74 wrote: »

Well thats fair enough if you want a United States of Europe. I don't so i will continue to vote no.

Can you point out the provision in the Lisbon Treaty that provides for a United States of Europe?

sink

Dob74 wrote: »

The yes voters can not justify there vote because they only voted yes on the command of there party. Most older voters, party loyalist and of course the west brits on dublins southside.
Older voters fair enough they have been voting yes consistly and generally follow FF and FG.
Party loyalists , Laois Offlay,Clare ,Kildare north. Cowen was able to get his constituency so did McCreevy. Clare is a FF stronghold as well. And in other FF strongholds the campaign did well but this was not because they read the treaty line for line. It was just out of political loyality which is amiable.
But the most frieghtening thing is that class detates the way people vote now. The upperclass of this country huddled together in the southside enclave of the dart line all voted yes by over 60% in favour of the treaty.
When you exploit a foreign worker and drive down wages of irish people you can see why they voted in favour.
Let them fumble in there greasy til


Reasons for voting no
The is EU is fine as it is, if we had voted yes it would be the last step to the United States of Europe. We have a common currency and open boarders what next? The eurocrats are pushing strong for countries like Turkey to be let in. Despite there appalling human rights record. Plus its not in Europe except for a small piece.

I would find that insulting if I didn't know it came from a place of complete ignorance. I dont exactly fit into any of your categories, 25, middle class, north County Dublin and independent. I have posted my reasons for voting yes many times and I have researched the treaty quiet extensively so feel free to ask me any questions.


1. Increase of power to the European Parliament.

The parliament currently votes on only 80% legislation, the Lisbon Treaty increases this to 95%. The parliament currently only approves 20% of the budget, this will be increased to 100%

2. The commission is slimmed down fairly and all states are represented equally

Under the Nice treaty the commission will be slimmed down in 2009. However the rules are not yet set, Lisbon sets those rules in a manner which gives 100% equality to all states big and small. The larger states originally wanted a permanent commissioner and all the small states would rotate. The Irish delegation got them to agree to agree to a binding system of equality. If the treaty does not pass this is back on the table.

3. Permanent President of the European Council

The current system for President of the European Council rotates between states every six months. The head of government of each state fills the role, this causes the President to push his/her countries agenda often against the will of others. The Lisbon treaty replaces this system with an elected President by the European council for a two and a half year term. The new President will be obligated to do what is best for everyone not just one individual state.

4. The Councils must meet in the open.

At present the European Council and the Council of Ministers meet behind closed doors. This arouses suspicion in the public as they do not get to see how deals are reached. Under the Lisbon treaty the Councils must meet in the open providing valuable transparency.

5. Energy and the Environment become greater EU competencies

Ireland has a minuscule amount of power and influence in these areas. The EU can provide better legislation and act more effectively for our benefit than we can on our own.

6. Greater role for EU peacekeepers

The treaty provides for a greater role for EU militaries to co-operate on UN mandated peacekeeping missions, while guaranteeing our neutrality.

7. Includes charter of human rights

For the first time EU all laws will be based on a charter of rights guaranteeing all EU citizens human rights.

8. Increases co-operation in Justice and Policing

The treaty increases the ability of national police forces and judiciary to combat international crime such as drug smuggling and people trafficking.

9. The two foreign policy posts are merged into one

The Lisbon creates an new role as the High Representative For Foreign affairs. It merges the two positions of 'High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy' with the 'European Commissioner for External Relations and European Neighbourhood Policy'. This is to provide a coherent and consistent voice for Europe in the international sphere. Currently there are so many people representing the foreign policy of the EU, few governments are clear who to contact in regards to specific areas.

10. Three pillar structure scrapped and merged into one structure

The Lisbon treaty merges the three pillars of the EU into one single organisation. This is designed to improve strategic alignment trough better communications and control and to cut down on costs and bureaucracy by eliminating unnecessary duplicate rolls and reducing staff.

Lemming

Dob74 wrote: »

No means No! How dare the government force another referendum down our throats. ... SNIP ...

Dob74 wrote: »

No means do not put this before the electorate again. Is was voted down fair and square. ... SNIP ...

So we shouldn't have amended our constitution to allow for divorce then (to use one example).

tolosenc

oscarBravo wrote: »

Can you point out the provision in the Lisbon Treaty that provides for a United States of Europe?

I can provide one that essentially rules it out. Something along the lines of each state maintaining control over national borders and security. I posted it an awful lot back in June, I can probably dig it up if needs be.

And again, could I be reminded about when voting on something became undemocratic? Or should I just not feed the troll?

ParkRunner

If a larger State like Germany, Italy, Spain put this referendum to the people and it was rejected, would it be put to them again? In the next referendum on a European treaty they might as well just put yes on the ballot paper

Vote09ireland

On an interesting note Libertas head Ganley stated he wanted an constituiton like document for Europe (25 pages long only) to the commitee on the lisbon treaty which perhaps proves he is simply Anti Lisbon not anti Europe
Lisbon was in effect a last effort (by Bertie Ahern as Council president) to pass the shreds of the Constitutional treaty which makes Ganleys comments slightly ironic
Lisbon did contain allot of controversial stuff It did not get rid of an Irish commissioner but insured we kept it Under Nice the commission was to be made smaller by 2009 the Lisbon treaty set up a system for every country to have a commissioner for 10 out of every 15 years.
There will be another vote, we will get assurances that lisbon won't upset our neutrality won't make us part of an EU army etc etc, and this will be enough to ask the people again as happened with Denmark and Nice
Before this the vote for the European Parliament will occur in june and even if the increased powers of lisbon don't pass the Parliament is still a important vote and the irish people will be asked whether they are anti lisbon or anti Europe

Furious-Dave

I don't think that Ganley is anti-Europe as such, he just wants to make sure that his company keeps getting contracts from the pentagon. A stronger, more united Europe could reduce the number of US military operations around the world, and so in turn reduce the demand by the pentagon for the military systems that his company manufactures. The US also don't want Europe to be strong enough to hinder their "war on terror" and could be using Ganley to disrupt the European political process.