New (6th March) Report Explaining the Lisbon Referendum Vote.

andrew

From report itself, which can be found here:

The defeat by referendum of the proposal to ratify the Treaty of Lisbon in
Ireland in June 2008 was the product of a complex combination of factors.
These included attitudes to Ireland’s membership of the EU, to Irish-only versus
Irish-and-European identity and to neutrality. The defeat was heavily influenced
by low levels of knowledge and by specific misperceptions in the areas of
abortion, corporate taxation and conscription. Concerns about policy issues (the
scope of EU decision-making and a belief in the importance of the country
having a permanent commissioner) also contributed significantly and
substantially to the treaty’s downfall, as did the perception that the EU means
low wage rates. Social class and more specific socio-economic interests also
played a role, the latter being shown by the differential effects of certain
variables conditional on participation/non-participation in the labour force.
Finally, while domestic politics played a role, it was only one factor among
many. The complexity just summarized is undeniable. Equally undeniable is the
need to address the issues and the underlying processes involved, not just now
and not just in the run-up to a referendum but on an on-going and long-term
basis.

It says a few things which surprised me a bit. Apparently attitudes to whatever govt. which is in place during a referendum tend not to have that much of an impact on the way people vote. As well was that people were worried about conscription

It also says that Irish people tend to know less, and feel they know less, about the EU than in other European countries - not a good sign considering we have to have a referendum every time something significant has to change on an EU level. Also, there appears to be a solid % of No voters, while the % of Yes voters varies depending on what % abstain (though this is slightly less true of the Lisbon vote.)

The main reason people Voted No seems to be a lack of Info (42%). I wonder if this will be the case in Lisbon II considering that the same reason was at 39% for Nice I and then fell to 14% for Nice II, or will people just switch to 'Bad idea in general' like they did for Nice?

Anyway, it's interesting stuff. Haven't been able to read it all yet. I

djpbarry

Interesting - thanks for the link.

Cue the inevitable cries of "What do they need a sixty page report for?!? No means no!".

turgon

The politically correct way of saying: The Irish Electorate were Stupid.

lostexpectation

the more and more i read i so surprised at how little effort the gov put into the ref, anyone remeber the ref commision leaflet it was very very short and sparse on detail.

a brief glance through the report, it doenst seem to make clear if they think we're actually neutral or not.

Valmont

Does anyone know what month the referendum will be in? I'm not sure If I'll be in the country and if I'm not, do we have absentee ballots or something?

thebman

andrew wrote: »

From report itself, which can be found here:



It says a few things which surprised me a bit. Apparently attitudes to whatever govt. which is in place during a referendum tend not to have that much of an impact on the way people vote. As well was that people were worried about conscription

It also says that Irish people tend to know less, and feel they know less, about the EU than in other European countries - not a good sign considering we have to have a referendum every time something significant has to change on an EU level. Also, there appears to be a solid % of No voters, while the % of Yes voters varies depending on what % abstain (though this is slightly less true of the Lisbon vote.)

The main reason people Voted No seems to be a lack of Info (42%). I wonder if this will be the case in Lisbon II considering that the same reason was at 39% for Nice I and then fell to 14% for Nice II, or will people just switch to 'Bad idea in general' like they did for Nice?

Anyway, it's interesting stuff. Haven't been able to read it all yet. I

I think they confused us not wanting to get involved on the military front as conscription TBH. My guess would be that we don't want to be part of a military union and they think the reason people that taught that voted no was fear of conscription in the future.

Its interesting that they say that party preference doesn't have much impact given our bloody political parties ran their campaign on the basis that people would vote whichever way they said to. Shows how out of touch with the people our politicians are that they ever taught this.

I would agree with Irish people thinking they know less about the EU. I think that is a failure of our politicians too. Anything good, we did it, anything bad, EU did it attitude doesn't help and neither does lack of teaching of EU structure in schools. I learned a little bit in Civics about Irish political institutions but the EU never came up. It is seen by a lot of Irish people as a far off place that make decisions that we have no choice in and the only real tangible benefit the people can see from the EU is funding since we have signs with EU symbols on them so our government can't say they weren't involved.

As for going forward to Lisbon II, who the hell knows if we will make the same mistakes. It is up to the government and they are just as likely to make the same mistakes again and wonder what happened as sort it out. Either way, an commission will be involved to look into the best way to do it, populated by the boys and paid a crazy amount of money to do it.

turgon

thebman wrote: »

Either way, an commission will be involved to look into the best way to do it, populated by the boys and paid a crazy amount of money to do it.

What else could they possibly spend it one, the people? Now that would be crazy.

Scofflaw

Valmont wrote: »

Does anyone know what month the referendum will be in? I'm not sure If I'll be in the country and if I'm not, do we have absentee ballots or something?

Regrettably not, unless you're a civil servant posted abroad.

cordially,
Scofflaw

oscarBravo

Posts by a banned user (and replies to him) deleted.

molloyjh

turgon wrote: »

The politically correct way of saying: The Irish Electorate were Stupid.

Ignorance of a topic and stupidity are two totally different things. The report is basically saying that we didn't know enough about what we were voting on. That does not mean we were stupid. As others have rightly said here, the lack of proper education and communication on the part of our Government played a huge role in the result. They need to own up to that and change their behaviour and approach accordingly.

acontadino

the school system would want to get its act together or tbh the future of ireland points to brain dead morons in the majority.

hatrickpatrick

I oppose Lisbon because it moves power further away from the people of Ireland. I am in favour of moving more power away from the government and to the direct control of the people of Ireland. this treaty does the opposite, moving more power even further away from the people.

In Ireland my vote is 1 out of 4m. In Europe my vote is 1 out of hundreds of millions. If a local group or party opposes something, where do they have more chance of having their voices heard? In a local government, in a national government, or in Europe?

Less power to europe, less power to the central government, and more power to the people please

Scofflaw

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I oppose Lisbon because it moves power further away from the people of Ireland. I am in favour of moving more power away from the government and to the direct control of the people of Ireland. this treaty does the opposite, moving more power even further away from the people.

In Ireland my vote is 1 out of 4m. In Europe my vote is 1 out of hundreds of millions. If a local group or party opposes something, where do they have more chance of having their voices heard? In a local government, in a national government, or in Europe?

Less power to europe, less power to the central government, and more power to the people please

Simply saying "let's not move power to Europe" won't move power to the people of Ireland. I've said it before, but it bears repeating - I've seen lobbying of MEPs get results, and I've never seen lobbying of TDs achieve anything. It's only worth lobbying a TD if they're in government, and if they're in government, they're simply going to vote whichever way the government votes, every time, no matter what. Saying "we want more power to the people" won't change that.

There are very good democratic controls available to Irish citizens at the EU level - they're just not being used. We're failing to hold our government to account either at the European level or nationally - there's little point in asking for more powers when we're not using the powers we already have.

cordially,
Scofflaw

thebman

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I oppose Lisbon because it moves power further away from the people of Ireland. I am in favour of moving more power away from the government and to the direct control of the people of Ireland. this treaty does the opposite, moving more power even further away from the people.

In Ireland my vote is 1 out of 4m. In Europe my vote is 1 out of hundreds of millions. If a local group or party opposes something, where do they have more chance of having their voices heard? In a local government, in a national government, or in Europe?

Less power to europe, less power to the central government, and more power to the people please

Have you seen what the people have done with their power?

Or what our political class gets up to?

More power to the EU please. They act more in our interest than our lobbied, political donation lead government.

Either vote Lisbon through or force political reform. Ireland is like Sin City but without the good characters A corrupt political class, organised crime, personal debt and state debt to borderline bankruptcy for the state and the people responsible, untouchable by the law and the public blind to all the problems in the state.

I'm for more power to the EU. I'm for anyone ruling this land over the current shenanigans and shenanigans is the only word to use unfortunately. So far the EU have shown more consideration for the people of Ireland than the elected officials of this land. The opposition have shown less consideration for what needs to be done than the EU political class you proclaim to be voting against IMO.

hatrickpatrick

Ireland voted once against Nice, then we were made to vote again and it was passed.

Ireland voted once against Lisbon. Now we're being asked to vote again.

And you're telling me that the EU is more likely to listen to the people?

View

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Ireland voted once against Nice, then we were made to vote again and it was passed.

Ireland voted once against Lisbon. Now we're being asked to vote again.

And you're telling me that the EU is more likely to listen to the people?

To explain this in a few steps:

i) We hold General elections. Anyone can stand for election whether pro- or anti-EU.
ii) The electorate over-whelmingly vote for TDs and parties that are pro-EU.
iii) These then form a Government.
iv) As per the wishes of the electorate, we are members of the EU.
v) The EU has stated objectives which the member states choose to pursue.
vi) This results in negotiations between the member states on how to acheive these objectives and, eventually, treaties.
vii) As per the terms of our constitution, our Government (or their selected representatives) are the ONLY people entitled to negotiate on behalf of the Irish people.
viii) They - and they alone - negotiate on our behalf during which seek the changes and/or make compromises that they believe are in Ireland's interests.
ix) Oddly enough, they tend to believe they do a good job in these negotiations.
x) The Government holds referenda to allow the Oireachtas to ratify the resulting treaties they negotiatied.
xi) If unsuccesful, they try and establish what were the problem issues that prevented them from securing majority approval.
xii) If these issues are addressable, they then seek clarifications or guarentees on these issues at EU level.
xiii) These typically amount to the equivalent of "As the Government explained to you in the referendum campaign, the treaty doesn't change the law in Ireland on abortion/conscription etc. (and what the No side was a lot of nonsense)".
xiv) As per the terms of our constitution, the Government can hold as many referenda as they (and they alone) so choose, so we go back to step x).
xv) This process can continue until either: a) the electorate give their approval for the Government's efforts, b) a general election intervenes and the electorate votes for anti-EU politicans/parties, or c) the Government gets fed up with the process in which case they can take the results of the No votes, announce that is clear we longer want to be in the EU and we are going to leave.
xvi) Since the last option, would take a withdrawal treaty (which the Government alone can negotiate) and a subsequent majority vote in the Oireachtas, this would leave the electorate facing into a political and economic abyss.
xvii) At that point, since a huge part of our economy is based on our access to and membership of the EU, the electorate would vote for just about anything the Government wants and you can be 100% certain that what the Government would want is that the Oireachtas would have the exclusive power to ratify EU Treaties without the need for referenda.
xviii) Finally either after step x), xv) or - worst case - xvii), the Oireachtas ratifies the treaty and we all move on with our lives.

If you don't like it, tough. I would refer you back to point i) and suggest you stand for your convictions in the next general election.

molloyjh

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I oppose Lisbon because it moves power further away from the people of Ireland. I am in favour of moving more power away from the government and to the direct control of the people of Ireland. this treaty does the opposite, moving more power even further away from the people.

In Ireland my vote is 1 out of 4m. In Europe my vote is 1 out of hundreds of millions. If a local group or party opposes something, where do they have more chance of having their voices heard? In a local government, in a national government, or in Europe?

Less power to europe, less power to the central government, and more power to the people please

Let's see if I have this right then. You oppose the whole idea of the EU because you feel your voice isn't strong enough. Is it strong enough out of 4 million people? For it to be stronger you obviously feel that either the electorate should be far smaller (how small is small enough?) or your voice should be proportionally more important than others. Which is it?

Do you think we should never have joined the EU despite the very obvious benefits membership has had for us? Do you believe that the EU acting as a collective body hasn't afforded it's members as a whole a greater position in the modern world therefore making us all more prosperous?

Your problem obviously isn't with the Lisbon Treaty, but with the EU itself. In that case you are by far in the minority in Ireland.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Ireland voted once against Nice, then we were made to vote again and it was passed.

It wasn't passed by magic, we said Yes. Should the second (and latest) democratic decision be ignored do you think? That doesn't sound very democratic to me! I must admit I liked the way you phrased that though. A nice use of langage. If you were to try and be consistant it should have read:

Ireland voted once against Nice, then we were allowed to vote again and voted in favour of it.

After all noone forced anyone to vote in the referendum at all, nevermind vote a certain way.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Ireland voted once against Lisbon. Now we're being asked to vote again.

And you're telling me that the EU is more likely to listen to the people?

Lisbon hasn't gone ahead so the EU has listened. There were stipulations added to the Treaty to address the main Irish concerns. So the EU did listen. We will be asked to vote again, at which time the EU will have to listen again and abide by our vote. Not sure where the issue is here.

Scofflaw

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Ireland voted once against Nice, then we were made to vote again and it was passed.

Actually - and speaking as someone who voted No in Nice I - we both expected and wanted to vote again on Nice, hence the Yes at Nice II. No campaigners didn't want to, for obvious reasons, but the electorate in general had no problems with the idea - the most common sentiment at the time was "ah sure if it's important they'll ask us again".

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Ireland voted once against Lisbon. Now we're being asked to vote again.

And you're telling me that the EU is more likely to listen to the people?

Er, yes - because it's our government that determines whether we have a second vote or not. It's not up to the EU.

cordially,
Scofflaw

hatrickpatrick

Er, yes - because it's our government that determines whether we have a second vote or not. It's not up to the EU.

Despite the obvious fact that the EU was more than willing to try to bully the Irish government into re running the vote if they didn't do it themselves?

oscarBravo

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Despite the obvious fact that the EU was more than willing to try to bully the Irish government into re running the vote if they didn't do it themselves?

That "fact" isn't at all obvious to me.

Scofflaw

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Despite the obvious fact that the EU was more than willing to try to bully the Irish government into re running the vote if they didn't do it themselves?

Well, would you have evidence of that - or is it something simply to be taken as true? I don't think there's any question that the government wants to ratify Lisbon.

cordially,
Scofflaw