EU going ahead with Lisbon even though we voted no

Purple Gorilla

Was just reading in the Independent today *goes to find link...damn can't find one* that the EU is going ahead with plans that require the Lisbon Treaty to be passed. More than 530 European Commission staff have begun training for the EU External Action Service.

Where the hell is democracy? They've completely disregarded our vote :mad:

If you have the Independent, it's page 8 on the bottom left

cls

If Ireland doesn't want it, we don't have to take it. Are you suggesting we dictate what the rest of the EU can and cannot do?

Purple Gorilla

No but I'm suggesting that they respect the vote of the Irish people. If a treaty requires unanimity to pass, and it doesn't get that, then that means the treaty doesn't come into force.

Scofflaw

Preparatory work for the External Action Service was put in motion immediately the Treaty was signed:

The Conference declares that, as soon as the Treaty of Lisbon is signed, the Secretary-General of the Council, High Representative for the common foreign and security policy, the Commission and the Member States should begin preparatory work on the European External Action Service.

"Signed" rather than ratified. Honestly, does nobody actually read these things?

As to "Lisbon is dead" - you may have noticed that it isn't. The Treaty will not be dead until two years have passed from signing without everybody being able to ratify, whereupon the matter is referred to the European Council to work out what happens next (again, that's in the Treaty). If we hold a referendum this autumn, and ratify Lisbon, that's legally identical to having ratified it last summer - since that vote will be just as respectable as the other. Unless perhaps you feel only the first vote should count?

cordially,
Scofflaw

r14

Scofflaw wrote: »

Honestly, does nobody actually read these things?

I think people not reading the actual Treaty may have been the problem with the Lisbon vote in the first place.

strathspey

Purple Gorilla wrote: »

No but I'm suggesting that they respect the vote of the Irish people. If a treaty requires unanimity to pass, and it doesn't get that, then that means the treaty doesn't come into force.

When are the Irish going to realise that they aren't special. Lets remember that Europe doesn't need us, but my God do we need Europe. A piss-willy nation on the periphery of Europe representing less than 1% of the EU population cannot hold the rest of Europe back. Europe will proceed whether we like it or not and we may as well hitch a ride!

greendom

So Ireland is the little kid who doesn't want to play and takes his ball away. Guess the bigger boys and girls have found another ball to play with

cls

Purple Gorilla wrote: »

No but I'm suggesting that they respect the vote of the Irish people.

Why should they? I'm not being smart, I hear this lack of respect for the Irish vote talk a lot and when I stop and think about it I cannot see what the argument behind it is. It probably comes from the fact that I myself have no respect for the outcome nor do I have any respect for our government. So please somebody explain why the outcome should be respected?

KerranJast

They can quite easily redraft the Treaty so it applies to everyone but Ireland (and possibly the Czechs) and get it re ratified in the various Parliaments without a need for referendums.

r14

cls wrote: »

Why should they? I'm not being smart, I hear this lack of respect for the Irish vote talk a lot and when I stop and think about it I cannot see what the argument behind it is. It probably comes from the fact that I myself have no respect for the outcome nor do I have any respect for our government. So please somebody explain why the outcome should be respected?

The Irish Government should respect the Irish vote (and hopefully they'll have the good sense to run it again soon so we can change our minds).

The other European States should respect their own votes. Why should Spain or Luxembourg who both had referendums on the text of the Constitutional Treaty (95% the same) disrespect their peoples votes by refusing to ratify a Treaty which their people clearly want.

We do not control Europe. If the other States want to go ahead they should and we can either catch up or get out. If one member of a team decides he doesn't want to play in the big match should the rest of the team be forced to respect his decision?

Nothingbetter2d

in all honesty it would have been a yes vote last time except fianna fail made a complete hash of the yes campaign like they did with the nice treaty

The reasons why most of the irish voted no were simple

1. the joe soap public had no real idea what it all about
2. liberatas knew this and found it easy to scare the public into a NO vote
3. fianna fail did nothing to explain in laymans terms what a yes vote would have done to benefit both the eu as a whole and the irish people.
4. information leaflets stuck in our mail boxes were vague at best

kevteljeur

Nothingbetter2d wrote: »

in all honesty it would have been a yes vote last time except fianna fail made a complete hash of the yes campaign like they did with the nice treaty

The reasons why most of the irish voted no were simple

1. the joe soap public had no real idea what it all about
2. liberatas knew this and found it easy to scare the public into a NO vote
3. fianna fail did nothing to explain in laymans terms what a yes vote would have done to benefit both the eu as a whole and the irish people.
4. information leaflets stuck in our mail boxes were vague at best

Leo Varadkar actually pointed out a massive reason, which you'll find isn't widely referred to by our local politicians, for the failure of the pro-Lisbon campaign. Which is that the 'main' political parties all promoted mostly themselves in the referendum campaign, as if they were running an election campaign, which made it much easier to run against that campaign using Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt since the actually issues weren't being readily referred to by the pro-Lisbon campaigners.

While I'm fairly pro-Lisbon myself, I think the pro-Lisbon campaign got the humiliating defeat they deserved.

Scofflaw

kevteljeur wrote: »

Leo Varadkar actually pointed out a massive reason, which you'll find isn't widely referred to by our local politicians, for the failure of the pro-Lisbon campaign. Which is that the 'main' political parties all promoted mostly themselves in the referendum campaign, as if they were running an election campaign, which made it much easier to run against that campaign using Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt since the actually issues weren't being readily referred to by the pro-Lisbon campaigners.

While I'm fairly pro-Lisbon myself, I think the pro-Lisbon campaign got the humiliating defeat they deserved.

I have no option but to agree with you there...

sadly,
Scofflaw

Killaqueen!!!

r14 wrote: »

The Irish Government should respect the Irish vote (and hopefully they'll have the good sense to run it again soon so we can change our minds).

The other European States should respect their own votes. Why should Spain or Luxembourg who both had referendums on the text of the Constitutional Treaty (95% the same) disrespect their peoples votes by refusing to ratify a Treaty which their people clearly want.

We do not control Europe. If the other States want to go ahead they should and we can either catch up or get out. If one member of a team decides he doesn't want to play in the big match should the rest of the team be forced to respect his decision?

How are we to know that certain member states want to ratify the Treaty if they don't hold referendums?

Scofflaw

Killaqueen!!! wrote: »

How are we to know that certain member states want to ratify the Treaty if they don't hold referendums?

If you look, you'll see that he's referring to Spain and Luxembourg, which held referendums on the Constitution:

Why should Spain or Luxembourg who both had referendums on the text of the Constitutional Treaty (95% the same) disrespect their peoples votes by refusing to ratify a Treaty which their people clearly want.

You just need to read the whole sentence.

cordially,
Scofflaw

evercloserunion

Scofflaw wrote: »

I have no option but to agree with you there...

sadly,
Scofflaw

Hey, don't tar us all with the one brush.

BlitzKrieg

you're part of the campaign from the last referendum?

View

Purple Gorilla wrote: »

No but I'm suggesting that they respect the vote of the Irish people. If a treaty requires unanimity to pass, and it doesn't get that, then that means the treaty doesn't come into force.

The treaty requires each member state to ratify the treaty in accordance with their own consitutional provisions, thus, all member states are still required to ratify the treaty, even if ratification fails in Ireland.

This would then lead to a meeting at which the other member states would ask the Irish delegation "Where exactly are the problems in the treaty that you have?".

At this point, if the Irish delegation CAN point to line X or Y within the treaty, then the other member states can potentially do something about it. This is not to say they will like it, since they could not unreasonably ask why the electorate didn't raise these issues with our government prior to our government agreeing to the treaty on our behalf (To which the answer is a rather embarassing - the electorate were asleep).

Alternatively, if the Irish delegation CANNOT point to line X or Y within the treaty, then the other member states cannot fix any problems we have. At that point, they will probably point out that - under the existing EU treaties - one of the objectives of the EU is to build on the existing treaties (i.e. to have new treaties, such as Lisbon). That would then mean Ireland is in breech of our commitments under the existing EU treaties to do so, which of course would raise the issues of: a) why we are a member of the EU in the first place, and, b) why the other member states should honour their (EU) commitment to free trade with/from us, when we are not prepared to honour our (EU) commitments to them.

Still, not to worry, what better time to go it alone than in the middle of biggest global economic turmoil since the 1930s...

evercloserunion

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

you're part of the campaign from the last referendum?

I volunteered with a non-party organization (the Alliance for Europe). We worked damn hard and got our point across well, but unfortunately it was a drop in the ocean compared to groups like Libertas as well as the pro-Lisbon political parties.

Run_to_da_hills

Full story in the Telegraph.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/belgium/5144364/EU-trains-a-new-diplomatic-corps---without-waiting-for-Lisbon-Treaty.html

djpbarry

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Full story in the Telegraph.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/belgium/5144364/EU-trains-a-new-diplomatic-corps---without-waiting-for-Lisbon-Treaty.html

telegraph.co.uk wrote:

Irish voters blocked the Lisbon Treaty, which provides the legal basis for a new Euro-diplomatic corps, when they rejected the renamed EU Constitution in a referendum last June.

The disclosure that the Commission has simply pressed on regardless and begun training the euro-diplomats infuriated Irish politicians.

That's news to me. Unless of course the Telegraph is trying to suggest that Ganley is a politician? I am shocked and appalled.

evercloserunion

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Full story in the Telegraph.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/belgium/5144364/EU-trains-a-new-diplomatic-corps---without-waiting-for-Lisbon-Treaty.html

I love the way the move allegedly infuriated Irish politicians but the only Irish "politician" quoted was Declan Ganley.

live2thewire

so spain and luxembourg passed it, surely if 16 out of 27 states pass it then lisbon should go ahead. after all that is a democracy.

evercloserunion

live2thewire wrote: »

so spain and luxembourg passed it, surely if 16 out of 27 states pass it then lisbon should go ahead. after all that is a democracy.

No, the Lisbon Treaty requires unanimous support to pass. As it has not received such support (Ireland holding back everyone else) it has not been implemented. All the Commission are doing are beginning the ground work of the post-Lisbon diplomatic corps in anticipation of Ireland voting Yes the second time round, which evidently they expect to happen. This is not, as the Torygraph would have us believe, the same as actually establishing and operating a common diplomatic agency as if the Lisbon Treaty had passed when it hasn't. All they are doing is attempting to get the training out of the way while we're waiting for it to be passed, thus saving a lot of time and maybe even money.

BaconZombie

No the main reason was because it was a "self-reinforcing" Treaty .

Nothingbetter2d wrote: »

in all honesty it would have been a yes vote last time except fianna fail made a complete hash of the yes campaign like they did with the nice treaty

The reasons why most of the irish voted no were simple

1. the joe soap public had no real idea what it all about
2. liberatas knew this and found it easy to scare the public into a NO vote
3. fianna fail did nothing to explain in laymans terms what a yes vote would have done to benefit both the eu as a whole and the irish people.
4. information leaflets stuck in our mail boxes were vague at best

r14

Privately, officials are concerned that disclosure of the EU's pre-emptive moves could sway Irish voters and make a "Yes" vote in the referendum harder to achieve. Secret minutes on the EEAS negotiations recognise the need "to remain cautious in presenting these issues" ahead of the second Irish vote.

These guys should get a new thesaurus. I lost count of he number of times they used the word secret in that article. If it's so secret how come it's common knowledge.

I believe Scofflaw already addressed the reason why they are going ahead with the preparation for the EAS but it may need to be reiterated.

Preparatory work for the External Action Service was put in motion immediately the Treaty was signed:

Quote:
The Conference declares that, as soon as the Treaty of Lisbon is signed, the Secretary-General of the Council, High Representative for the common foreign and security policy, the Commission and the Member States should begin preparatory work on the European External Action Service.
"Signed" rather than ratified. Honestly, does nobody actually read these things?

People should really pay attention when things are explained clearly to them. Preparation for the EAS is going ahead because that was always the plan and it is not a "secret" conspiracy to controvert our will.

Nice to know the telegraph are so concerned about the health of our democracy though

oscarBravo

BOFH_139 wrote: »

No the main reason was because it was a "self-reinforcing" Treaty .

It was a what now?

sink

oscarBravo wrote: »

It was a what now?

Perhaps he means 'self-amending'! No doubt misinterpreting what 'self-amending' actually means.

BlitzKrieg

so uhmm are we sure these are policies only linked to the lisbon treaty or is this like the whole commisioner thing where it was something we already agreed to but hadnt defined how it would work?

ukraine_orange

If we got a Yes result, yet people didn't know what they voted for, would we be sitting here wondering when we would have to vote again? No, because it was the result they wanted regardless of how they got it.

I find it unfair that my friends have to vote again because they "didn't understand it". No, they didn't read the Libertas crap. They read the treaty, understood it, but didn't agree with most of it.

I sway between Yes and No regularly, but I will abstain from voting.

BlitzKrieg

ukraine_orange wrote: »

If we got a Yes result, yet people didn't know what they voted for, would we be sitting here wondering when we would have to vote again? No, because it was the result they wanted regardless of how they got it.

Simple representative democracy

The government the people vote in are free to hold referendums on any number of issues.

Including ones that have already been up for referendum and had been passed or not.

The reason why a Yes vote would never be put to a 2nd referendum is because the parties that would push for it are never in government.

If they were in government you can bet your socks it would be up for a 2nd referendum in a heartbeat.

its how the system works.

There is nothing undemocratic or bullying or anything involved in the process, its how it works and how it always works.

If we had a referendum on gay marriage tomorrow and it passed and then a year down the line a right wing conservative christian movement got in power, they are fully within their rights to have another referendum on the issue and the theory would be the prior one would be overturned because why would people vote for such a party unless they wanted such issues addressed.

Its how it bloody works.