Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
EU going ahead with Lisbon even though we voted no
Options
Comments
-
ukraine_orange wrote: »No, because it was the result they wanted regardless of how they got it.
Well at least they were honest in that regard. One would hardly use the adjective "honest" to describe the No campaign, would you?0 -
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
Plus Cowen publicly saying he didn't read the Treaty and had no intention of reading it didn't help the "Yes" cause either.0 -
BlitzKrieg wrote: »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.
I know how it "bloody works", I just don't agree with it, and I don't think it's right that you can overturn the people's vote because you don't like the result. And when is this next referendum? Before October? I still haven't seen anything by the Government to help push the Yes vote. They can't sit on their arse and hope for the right result because that has failed many times before.
The reality is is that we are never going to have a "No to Lisbon" supporter party in Government, so we wouldn't even get the chance to vote on it again if it was originally a Yes result. It would have been signed and ratified in a heartbeat, regardless of how the result was reached, be it by people's knowledge of the treaty or lack-of.
I never said it was undemocratic or bullying. I said it is unfair for the people who have to vote again, regardless of what they voted for. I know a few people who are cheesed off at the fact they have to vote again, and they are Yes voters. They think it's an absolute joke.Well at least they were honest in that regard. One would hardly use the adjective "honest" to describe the No campaign, would you?
My friends didn't need any campaigns, they voted on the treaty, not what the posters and leaflets said. So I don't know who's being dishonest, nor do I care. The fact is is that the Government is biased and have made us look like fools. "The majority of the public didn't know what they were voting on" was the usual pish spouted by Cowen while Sarkozy prodded him, yet you'd find Yes voters voting on things that don't concern the treaty directly, like "Europe has been good to us".0 -
ukraine_orange wrote: »I know how it "bloody works", I just don't agree with it, and I don't think it's right that you can overturn the people's vote because you don't like the result.
Agreed. We decided in our first election in 1938 that Fianna Fail should be in Government so we should never have another general election. I mean it's not like opinions change or anything. While we're at it lets get rid of divorce because it was rejected the first time so it should never have been brought to the people ever again.
The argument that the people should never be asked their opinion more than once is not what I would call democracy.ukraine_orange wrote: »The reality is is that we are never going to have a "No to Lisbon" supporter party in Government, so we wouldn't even get the chance to vote on it again if it was originally a Yes result.
So the fact that the No campaign can't muster enough popular support to get elected into Dail Eireann is an argument for not putting the question to the people again? 10% of Dail deputies favoured the No campaign yet they got 50% of the airtime. This was blatantly undemocratic but because it favoured the No side no one ever comments on this particular democratic deficit.ukraine_orange wrote: »I said it is unfair for the people who have to vote again, regardless of what they voted for. I know a few people who are cheesed off at the fact they have to vote again, and they are Yes voters. They think it's an absolute joke.
If the Government fell tomorrow there would be a general election notwithstanding the fact that we just had one 2 years ago. Would this inconvenience your friends? They may have to exercise the responsibility that is their democratic voice even if they think it's a joke that the Government fell.
If they want their voice to count they should vote every time the proposition is put to them. Plenty of people would kill (literally) for the inconvenience of being asked to vote on important decisions.ukraine_orange wrote: »The fact is is that the Government is biased and have made us look like fools.
Thank God we had the wholly impartial No campaign to make us look smart by telling us that the treaty would allow "Europe" to microchip 3 year old kids.0 -
ukraine_orange wrote: »I never said it was undemocratic or bullying. I said it is unfair for the people who have to vote again, regardless of what they voted for. I know a few people who are cheesed off at the fact they have to vote again, and they are Yes voters. They think it's an absolute joke.
To be fair, the people have nobody to blame but themselves. A huge portion of voters claim to not know what they were voting on, which is strange that they felt it was their constitutional right to vote yet not their constitutional obligation to find out why they're voting. All the information was out there, but people refused to inform themselves and that is what makes Ireland look foolish.0 -
Advertisement
-
Purple Gorilla wrote: »Where the hell is democracy? They've completely disregarded our vote :mad:
If it wasn't for our constitution we wouldn't of had a vote at all... so I'm thankful we had a vote.
2ndly, as already mentioned, we are a small country in a big Union - who are we to stop Europe moving forward.
And I wonder, if the first vote was taken in the Economic situation that we are in now.... would we have voted no!! I mean we have a great history of voting no (the first time) in times of Economic Success but we have an equally great history of voting yes in the first count in times of Economic Depression!!
Just my two cents.... let the debate ensue...0 -
I’d be amazed if he ever said any such thing.Plus Cowen publicly saying he didn't read the Treaty and had no intention of reading it didn't help the "Yes" cause either.
Whose vote is being overturned?ukraine_orange wrote: »I know how it "bloody works", I just don't agree with it, and I don't think it's right that you can overturn the people's vote because you don't like the result.
What does that say about the electorate? What does that say about the ‘No’ campaign?ukraine_orange wrote: »The reality is is that we are never going to have a "No to Lisbon" supporter party in Government...
If the majority of voters did the same then we wouldn’t be having this discussion.ukraine_orange wrote: »My friends didn't need any campaigns, they voted on the treaty...0 -
ukraine_orange wrote: »I know how it "bloody works", I just don't agree with it, and I don't think it's right that you can overturn the people's vote because you don't like the result.
That's a very slanted way of putting it, though. Who can overturn the people's vote? Do you mean that the government will reverse the referendum result by fiat?
The people might reverse the referendum result by voting differently - but how is that "overturning the people's vote"?ukraine_orange wrote: »And when is this next referendum? Before October? I still haven't seen anything by the Government to help push the Yes vote. They can't sit on their arse and hope for the right result because that has failed many times before.
True that.ukraine_orange wrote: »The reality is is that we are never going to have a "No to Lisbon" supporter party in Government, so we wouldn't even get the chance to vote on it again if it was originally a Yes result. It would have been signed and ratified in a heartbeat, regardless of how the result was reached, be it by people's knowledge of the treaty or lack-of.
I never said it was undemocratic or bullying. I said it is unfair for the people who have to vote again, regardless of what they voted for. I know a few people who are cheesed off at the fact they have to vote again, and they are Yes voters. They think it's an absolute joke.
I'm not sure why it's such a surprise. The government wants to ratify LIsbon, and they're entitled to ask the people to allow them to do so. They don't have to back off the moment things go against them - if government policy is defeated in a Dáil vote or at a referendum it doesn't mean the government has to change its policy.ukraine_orange wrote: »My friends didn't need any campaigns, they voted on the treaty, not what the posters and leaflets said. So I don't know who's being dishonest, nor do I care. The fact is is that the Government is biased and have made us look like fools. "The majority of the public didn't know what they were voting on" was the usual pish spouted by Cowen while Sarkozy prodded him, yet you'd find Yes voters voting on things that don't concern the treaty directly, like "Europe has been good to us".
Whatever the government says, it remains the case that a lot of voters didn't feel they knew enough about the Treaty. Sure the Yes side wouldn't have minded that if the result had been a Yes - but the No side isn't troubled by it either, as long as it delivered the right result for them, which it did.
It's also true that objective levels of knowledge of the EU are not exactly great in Ireland, which is rather disturbing for a vote on modifying the EU.
cordially,
Scofflaw0 -
Your friends are in the stark minority of people, unfortunately.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.
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.
Also, the difference between voting Yes despite not knowing much about the Treaty, and voting No despite not knowing about it, is that if the unknowledgable Yes voters learned more about the Treaty they'd probably still vote Yes.0 -
2ndly, as already mentioned, we are a small country in a big Union - who are we to stop Europe moving forward.
All the other countries agreed that change to treaties would only happen by unanimous decision. the 26 have given us the power to hold them back. What if the majority here wanted the Constitution instead but France held us back?
At least all of Ireland is actually in Europe, not like France.0 -
Advertisement
-
Carawaystick wrote: »All the other countries agreed that change to treaties would only happen by unanimous decision. the 26 have given us the power to hold them back. What if the majority here wanted the Constitution instead but France held us back?
True but there's nothing to stop them giving us the heave-ho and continuing in our absence. In my opinion if we vote No again our position in Europe would be untenable.
Everyone else wants to continue with the European project but we would want to stay put. Solution: a divorce citing irreconcilable differences.Carawaystick wrote: »At least all of Ireland is actually in Europe, not like France.
Are you talking about the DOM-TOM? If you are you may be interested to know that the Departments Outre Mer are integral parts of the European Union. They use the euro and elect MEPs.
Really I don't see how the territorial organisation of another Member State is really any concern of ours.0 -
...which is why the treaties haven't been changed yet.Carawaystick wrote: »All the other countries agreed that change to treaties would only happen by unanimous decision.0 -
ukraine_orange wrote: »I sway between Yes and No regularly, but I will abstain from voting.
What exactly will that acheive? And why do you sway between Yes and No out of curiosity?Plus Cowen publicly saying he didn't read the Treaty and had no intention of reading it didn't help the "Yes" cause either.
I didn't think it was Cowen that said that, was it? Either way I wouldn't blame him. He has legal advisors that do that for him. A manager in a bank doesn't sign off on every last decision in the bank, (s)he delegates responsibility to those who are qualified to make certain decisions. That's the job of management. That's exactly what Cowen should be doing. He doesn't have time in a job like that to read every last page of every last piece of legislation. To expect that is madness.ukraine_orange wrote: »I don't think it's right that you can overturn the people's vote because you don't like the result.
As Scofflaw has pointed out the only ones who can overturn the peoples result is the people. What's wrong with that?ukraine_orange wrote: »And when is this next referendum? Before October? I still haven't seen anything by the Government to help push the Yes vote. They can't sit on their arse and hope for the right result because that has failed many times before.
Agreed, although given the other issues we're facing at the moment I can see how it has taken a back-seat.ukraine_orange wrote: »The reality is is that we are never going to have a "No to Lisbon" supporter party in Government
That alone should tell you everything you need to know. If people aren't willing to vote the No groups into Government why the hell would they listen to them about something like Lisbon? The fact of the matter is that the only ones who opposed Lisbon were the extremists and the shady groups like Libertas. All union and employers groups supported it and all parties that stand a snowballs chance in hell of ever being elected to Government supported it. So why were we swayed by the opposition on this issue when we aren't on any others?ukraine_orange wrote: »I never said it was undemocratic or bullying. I said it is unfair for the people who have to vote again, regardless of what they voted for. I know a few people who are cheesed off at the fact they have to vote again, and they are Yes voters. They think it's an absolute joke.
I don't think it's a joke that I'm being asked for my position again. I take my participation in democracy very seriously and if another vote is required then I am in full support of it. Before the referendum itself I was saying another one was needed regardless of the result because at that stage it was clear that most people had no idea what they were voting on at all. The amount of ignorance I came across on internet forums and in face to face conversations was staggering. Another vote needs to be preceeded by a campaign to educate the public. If done right this will ensure the peoples will is done, and that is no joke.ukraine_orange wrote: »My friends didn't need any campaigns, they voted on the treaty, not what the posters and leaflets said. So I don't know who's being dishonest, nor do I care. The fact is is that the Government is biased and have made us look like fools.
The Governments bias did not make us look like fools. In fact had they not been biased that would have! After all they were involved in drafting the Treaty themselves, and they agreed to it. To sit on the fence then would look a bit ridiculous. What made us look like fools was the Governments Yes campaign and the fact that we voted No without really knowing why.ukraine_orange wrote: »"The majority of the public didn't know what they were voting on" was the usual pish spouted by Cowen while Sarkozy prodded him, yet you'd find Yes voters voting on things that don't concern the treaty directly, like "Europe has been good to us".
Probably true, but surely that's not a reason against voting again, but more a reason in favour of it. After all, don't we want to be sure that the people's will on the Treaty be done?0 -
-
Carawaystick wrote: »All the other countries agreed that change to treaties would only happen by unanimous decision. the 26 have given us the power to hold them back. What if the majority here wanted the Constitution instead but France held us back?
At least all of Ireland is actually in Europe, not like France.
It is ludicrous to have 4 million people deciding the fate of 500 million. To have a situation where the fate of all European citizens is being interfered with because people in Ireland voted No as much to express their anger at Fianna Fail as anything else. Where would we be if it wasn't for the EU, we are lucky to be getting a second chance at this referendum and hopefully the silent majority will come out in stronger forces than the vocal minority this time round. We are in enough economic trouble as it is and if we vote No again we can look forward to a serious collapse in confidence in our economy and even less international money flowing through our system.0
Advertisement