North West Candidates

dreenman

I am amazed that so many people on this board are so Anti-Libertas they are basically saying that Democracy will be better without an Opposition!

Also

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

Europe has no say on the legality of abortion in Ireland.

Well this is not strictly true basically Declaration 17 of the Treaty "Declaration concerning Primacy" reiterates that "well settled" case law of the Court of Justice of European Union means that treaties and laws adopted under treaties have primacy over the law of member states.

Lisbon makes NO mention of abortion and neither therefore does it give any guarantees about future laws concerning abortion being adopted by the Union.

As for 'protection' under certain protocols - these can be amended without recourse to another treaty and therefore without recourse to a referendum in this country.

By the way for what it matters I would be opposed to much of the right wing garbage being spouted by Ganley and also I would be in favour of legalising abortion ... but I very much want to see real argument and scrutiny in Europe because once Lisbon is adopted there will be precious little of it in this country.

BlitzKrieg

so many people on this board are so Anti-Libertas they are basically saying that Democracy will be better without an Opposition!

yeah cause libertas are the only opposition...

oscarBravo

dreenman wrote: »

I am amazed that so many people on this board are so Anti-Libertas they are basically saying that Democracy will be better without an Opposition!

That's a total non-sequitur, tbh.

As for 'protection' under certain protocols - these can be amended without recourse to another treaty and therefore without recourse to a referendum in this country.

Nope. The protocols form part of the treaties, and as such any amendment to them would require unanimous ratification by all member states.

Given that the protocol in question directly refers to an article of our Constitution, I can't see us ratifying a change to it without a referendum, can you?

By the way for what it matters I would be opposed to much of the right wing garbage being spouted by Ganley and also I would be in favour of legalising abortion ... but I very much want to see real argument and scrutiny in Europe because once Lisbon is adopted there will be precious little of it in this country.

That's just bog-standard anti-Lisbon empty rhetoric.

Dinner

dreenman wrote: »

I am amazed that so many people on this board are so Anti-Libertas they are basically saying that Democracy will be better without an Opposition!

Yep, democracy will be better without opposition...
http://img8.imageshack.us/img8/5834/libertas.jpg

dreenman

oscarBravo wrote: »

That's a total non-sequitur, tbh. Nope. The protocols form part of the treaties, and as such any amendment to them would require unanimous ratification by all member states.

Given that the protocol in question directly refers to an article of our Constitution, I can't see us ratifying a change to it without a referendum, can you? That's just bog-standard anti-Lisbon empty rhetoric.

Thank you that is exactly the point! The amendment would be to a protocol no referendum required!! - only a new treaty would need a referendum! This is the last treaty ever needed to be voted on by the Irish people and remember member state law is subservient to European Union law - we can take all the referendum we want they will be meaningless.

oscarBravo

dreenman wrote: »

Thank you that is exactly the point! The amendment would be to a protocol no referendum required!! - only a new treaty would need a referendum! This is the last treaty ever needed to be voted on by the Irish people and remember member state law is subservient to European Union law - we can take all the referendum we want they will be meaningless.

All of the above is complete, total and utter fiction. It's archetypal Libertas FUD.

In other words, it's nonsense. You'll have to try harder.

Hitman Actual

dreenman wrote: »

Thank you that is exactly the point! The amendment would be to a protocol no referendum required!! - only a new treaty would need a referendum! This is the last treaty ever needed to be voted on by the Irish people and remember member state law is subservient to European Union law - we can take all the referendum we want they will be meaningless.

You are completely wrong in your deduction there. Any further amendments to the Treaties (post Lisbon) must be "ratified by all the Member States in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements". So if an amendment is adjudged to be in conflict with the Crotty judgement, we can only ratify it by referendum. This is a very basic part of Lisbon (see Article 48), and if you don't understand this you're in trouble with the rest of the Treaty.

Or are you trying to argue some other meaningless rhetorical point?

lostexpectation

marian harkin seems quite a reasonable person in comparison to the rest

dreenman

Hitman Actual wrote: »

You are completely wrong in your deduction there. Any further amendments to the Treaties (post Lisbon) must be "ratified by all the Member States in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements". So if an amendment is adjudged to be in conflict with the Crotty judgement, we can only ratify it by referendum. This is a very basic part of Lisbon (see Article 48), and if you don't understand this you're in trouble with the rest of the Treaty.

Or are you trying to argue some other meaningless rhetorical point?

Oh dear please dont use the "rhetorical point" jibe so beloved of the school debating society, well done junior what next... pointing out grammatical mistakes?

Meanwhile back to the real argument ... Dont start hiding behind The Crotty Judgement. It has indeed served this state well. But remember the Supreme court ruled that a referendum was required for amendments of European Union treaties where transfers of sovereignty to Europe are involved (even then the judgment only related to foreign policy) and without it we wouldn't of course have had a first and now a second referendum on Lisbon

However if passed Lisbon I would have handed over sovereignty!!

Recall what we were being asked to vote on

“No provision of this [Irish] Constitution invalidates laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the State that are necessitated by membership of the European Union referred to 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.”

As all the pro-Lisbon apologists know any attempt to force a referendum on future changes as per Crotty would have almost no chance of succeeding in front of the Supreme Court today.

One of the main effects of the Lisbon Treaty is that European Union legislation changes will never ever again be held up by the likes of Ireland voting the "wrong" way!

Hitman Actual

Again, you are completely wrong. That Article already exists in our Constitution; it's just being renumbered. See here.

Irish Constitution Article 29 wrote:

10° No provision of this Constitution invalidates laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the State which are necessitated by the obligations of membership of the European Union or of the Communities, or prevents laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the European Union or by the Communities or by institutions thereof, or by bodies competent under the Treaties establishing the Communities, from having the force of law in the State.

If it already exists, how can Lisbon change the current position?

dreenman

oscarBravo wrote: »

All of the above is complete, total and utter fiction. It's archetypal Libertas FUD.

In other words, it's nonsense. You'll have to try harder.

Hey great repost! You conservatives are really getting the hang of free speech... and ermmm perhaps you should try reading the treaty?

BlitzKrieg

ermmm perhaps you should try reading the treaty?

perhaps you should read the Irish constitution

dreenman

Hitman Actual wrote: »

Again, you are completely wrong. That Article already exists in our Constitution; it's just being renumbered. Constitution[/b]%20of%20IrelandNov2004.pdf]See here.:



If it already exists, how can Lisbon change the current position?

So you're one of those who believe that even with reference to Crotty that in all likelihood that Lisbon could be ratified without a referendum!!

BlitzKrieg

One of the main effects of the Lisbon Treaty is that European Union legislation changes will never ever again be held up by the likes of Ireland voting the "wrong" way!

since you are such a fan of reading the treaty

article 48 section 4

4. A conference of representatives of the governments of the Member States shall be convened by
the President of the Council for the purpose of determining by common accord the amendments to be
made to the Treaties.
The amendments shall enter into force after being ratified by all the Member States in accordance with
their respective constitutional requirements.

and since you already pointed it out

Supreme court ruled that a referendum was required for amendments of European Union treaties where transfers of sovereignty to Europe are involved

I think you can stop praddling BS...

Hitman Actual

dreenman wrote: »

So you're one of those who believe that even with reference to Crotty that in all likelihood that Lisbon could be ratified without a referendum!!

Edit: I've read that quote wrong; I thought you were referring to what would happen if Lisbon was ratified. No, Lisbon can't be ratified without a (Yes vote in a) referendum.

Here's Article 48 of Lisbon anyway, which deals with further ratification of Treaty amendments:

wrote:

Article 48
(ex Article 48 TEU)
1. The Treaties may be amended in accordance with an ordinary revision procedure. They may also be amended in accordance with simplified revision procedures.

Ordinary revision procedure
2. The Government of any Member State, the European Parliament or the Commission may submit to the Council proposals for the amendment of the Treaties. These proposals may, inter alia, serve either to increase or to reduce the competences conferred on the Union in the Treaties. These proposals shall be submitted to the European Council by the Council and the national Parliaments shall be notified.

3. If the European Council, after consulting the European Parliament and the Commission, adopts by a simple majority a decision in favour of examining the proposed amendments, the President of the European Council shall convene a Convention composed of representatives of the national Parliaments, of the Heads of State or Government of the Member States, of the European Parliament and of the Commission. The European Central Bank shall also be consulted in the case of institutional changes in the monetary area. The Convention shall examine the proposals for amendments and shall adopt by consensus a recommendation to a conference of representatives of the governments of the Member States as provided for in paragraph 4.

The European Council may decide by a simple majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament, not to convene a Convention should this not be justified by the extent of the proposed amendments. In the latter case, the European Council shall define the terms of reference for a conference of representatives of the governments of the Member States.

4. A conference of representatives of the governments of the Member States shall be convened by the President of the Council for the purpose of determining by common accord the amendments to be made to the Treaties.

The amendments shall enter into force after being ratified by all the Member States in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements.

5. If, two years after the signature of a treaty amending the Treaties, four fifths of the Member States have ratified it and one or more Member States have encountered difficulties in proceeding with ratification, the matter shall be referred to the European Council.

Simplified revision procedures
6. The Government of any Member State, the European Parliament or the Commission may submit to the European Council proposals for revising all or part of the provisions of Part Three of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union relating to the internal policies and action of the Union.

The European Council may adopt a decision amending all or part of the provisions of Part Three of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. The European Council shall act by unanimity after consulting the European Parliament and the Commission, and the European Central Bank in the case of institutional changes in the monetary area. That decision shall not enter into force until it is approved by the Member States in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements.

The decision referred to in the second subparagraph shall not increase the competences conferred on the Union in the Treaties.

Our constitutional requirements are through the Crotty judgement, and this won't change one bit with the Lisbon Treaty. This is fact.

Out of curiosity, why do you believe what you've posted in this thread? Is it Libertas brain-washing? Why can't you do a bit of research on your own? Do many more of you believe these things?

BlitzKrieg

as it came up in a recent debate that drove me up the wall

5. If, two years after the signature of a treaty amending the Treaties, four fifths of the Member States have ratified it and one or more Member States have encountered difficulties in proceeding with ratification, the matter shall be referred to the European Council.

Subsection 5 does not give the european council any powers over the national governments to overturn decisions or delays, the subsection's role is to stop unadressed amendments getting sidetracked by a sort national filebusters. Going by the current and future powers of the council of europe, the worse they can do is ask our government to ask us again in a 2nd referendum, in the more common scenario, they will more likely discuss adjusting amendments to suit the state with a disagreement. And after that we will still have to ratify it by our constitutional requirements

Scofflaw

dreenman wrote: »

Oh dear please dont use the "rhetorical point" jibe so beloved of the school debating society, well done junior what next... pointing out grammatical mistakes?

Meanwhile back to the real argument ... Dont start hiding behind The Crotty Judgement. It has indeed served this state well. But remember the Supreme court ruled that a referendum was required for amendments of European Union treaties where transfers of sovereignty to Europe are involved (even then the judgment only related to foreign policy) and without it we wouldn't of course have had a first and now a second referendum on Lisbon

However if passed Lisbon I would have handed over sovereignty!!

Recall what we were being asked to vote on

“No provision of this [Irish] Constitution invalidates laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the State that are necessitated by membership of the European Union referred to 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.”

As all the pro-Lisbon apologists know any attempt to force a referendum on future changes as per Crotty would have almost no chance of succeeding in front of the Supreme Court today.

One of the main effects of the Lisbon Treaty is that European Union legislation changes will never ever again be held up by the likes of Ireland voting the "wrong" way!

Here's Article 29.4.10 of Bunreacht:

10° No provision of this Constitution invalidates laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the State which are necessitated by the obligations of membership of the European Union or of the Communities, or prevents laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the European Union or by the Communities or by institutions thereof, or by bodies competent under the Treaties establishing the Communities, from having the force of law in the State.

Notice anything? Why yes - it's exactly the same stipulation as you say Lisbon is introducing. It's been there since 1973. The only reason it's appearing in the Lisbon amendment is to update the text to reflect the final abolition of the EC.

cordially,
Scofflaw

dreenman

You can quote article 48 all you like you know fine it is all about future treaty changes. The whole idea of Lisbon is to streamline legislation making and to virtually make future treaty amendments redundant.

The whole point of the referendum is to amend the constitution to accept the Lisbon Treaty including Declaration 17.
As everybody knows Declaration 17 clarifies and restates that Union law takes supremacy over member state law.

Laws made under the Treaty of European Union will then assume the primacy of European Law as per Declaration 17.
Only future amendments to treaties would possibly require another referendum. Not law changes! Hopefully another Crotty will emerge to challenge this but I fear not.

The only protection for the Irish people will be the voting rights of our representatives and the so called protocols.

As for what stance I come from - a socialist stance - You probably havent heard of a great Brit politician called Tony Benn ( think he was the only good Brit). You should check out his opinions he recognises the EU for what it has become i.e. a means to prevent any democratically elected socialist govenment from enacting socilaist polcies and to oil the wheels of capitalism. (the same wheels that have now come off!).

I'm off to have a whiskey, good luck to all you right wing pit bulls.

Scofflaw

dreenman wrote: »

You can quote article 48 all you like you know fine it is all about future treaty changes. The whole idea of Lisbon is to streamline legislation making and to virtually make future treaty amendments redundant.

The whole point of the referendum is to amend the constitution to accept the Lisbon Treaty including Declaration 17.
As everybody knows Declaration 17 clarifies and restates that Union law takes supremacy over member state law.

Laws made under the Treaty of European Union will then assume the primacy of European Law as per Declaration 17.
Only future amendments to treaties would possibly require another referendum. Not law changes! Hopefully another Crotty will emerge to challenge this but I fear not.

The only protection for the Irish people will be the voting rights of our representatives and the so called protocols.

As for what stance I come from - a socialist stance - You probably havent heard of a great Brit politician called Tony Benn ( think he was the only good Brit). You should check out his opinions he recognises the EU for what it has become i.e. a means to prevent any democratically elected socialist govenment from enacting socilaist polcies and to oil the wheels of capitalism. (the same wheels that have now come off!).

I'm off to have a whiskey, good luck to all you right wing pit bulls.

Given the hash you've made of something quite simple - bit in Constitution = bit in Constitution = no change - I dread to imagine what you think socialism consists of.

Anyway, enjoy your whiskey.

cordially,
Scofflaw

sink

dreenman wrote: »

You can quote article 48 all you like you know fine it is all about future treaty changes. The whole idea of Lisbon is to streamline legislation making and to virtually make future treaty amendments amending treaties redundant.

FYP

Lisbon allows individual amendments to be ratified separately through the normal national ratification procedures, instead of requiring an new international treaty between the agreed parties just to amend the existing treaties. Any amendments using this new procedure that have any impact upon our constitution would require a referendum.

PopeBuckfastXVI

dreenman wrote: »

You can quote article 48 all you like you know fine it is all about future treaty changes. The whole idea of Lisbon is to streamline legislation making and to virtually make future treaty amendments redundant.

The whole point of the referendum is to amend the constitution to accept the Lisbon Treaty including Declaration 17.
As everybody knows Declaration 17 clarifies and restates that Union law takes supremacy over member state law.

Laws made under the Treaty of European Union will then assume the primacy of European Law as per Declaration 17.
Only future amendments to treaties would possibly require another referendum. Not law changes! Hopefully another Crotty will emerge to challenge this but I fear not.

The only protection for the Irish people will be the voting rights of our representatives and the so called protocols.

As for what stance I come from - a socialist stance - You probably havent heard of a great Brit politician called Tony Benn ( think he was the only good Brit). You should check out his opinions he recognises the EU for what it has become i.e. a means to prevent any democratically elected socialist govenment from enacting socilaist polcies and to oil the wheels of capitalism. (the same wheels that have now come off!).

I'm off to have a whiskey, good luck to all you right wing pit bulls.

You are incorrect in your interpretation of the treaty, and the truth was pointed out to you, that's all.

You are objectively wrong.

It's like arguing that 1 + 1 = 5, and that anyone who points out your error is only doing so because of ideology.

I suggest you read more of Benn, he's an extremely intelligent man and would never make the basic errors you have, you could learn a lot from him.

Indecently the EU is an organisation designed to enable and promote the free movement of goods, capital and labour. If you can't sign up for those principles you've no business being in the thing.

You can elect any socialist government you like, but if they don't want to play by the rules of the club, why should the club keep them in, and more to the point, why would they want to stay?

Lockstep

Ganley had a full page in today's Galway Advertiser cheering himself for stopping Ireland losing it's commissioner.

Words cannot describe the fail, given that Ireland's commissioner doesn't work for Ireland.

PopeBuckfastXVI

kickoutthejams wrote: »

Ganley had a full page in today's Galway Advertiser cheering himself for stopping Ireland losing it's commissioner.

Words cannot describe the fail, given that Ireland's commissioner doesn't work for Ireland.

Unfortunately most people don't understand that.

Unsurprisingly, his ad doesn't say "I saved Charlie McCreevy's Job".

smiles302

Just asking

What does Lisbon have to do with the candidates for tomorrow?

PopeBuckfastXVI

smiles302 wrote: »

Just asking

What does Lisbon have to do with the candidates for tomorrow?

Not much.

We will be having a second referendum on Lisbon (+ assurances) regardless of who ends up going to Brussels tomorrow.

ionix5891

looks like something terrible is about to happen in here in galway :mad:

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055582467

PopeBuckfastXVI

ionix5891 wrote: »

looks like something terrible is about to happen in here in galway :mad:

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055582467

Galway is supposedly his 'base' and in that poll he's currently running 2:1 down against Harkin/O'Keefe.

If that's the best he can do in Galway he hasn't a prayer.

Also, and I'm proud of this, boards.ie/galwaycity is full of malcontented contrarians... we're never going to be a representative sample!

ionix5891

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

Galway is supposedly his 'base' and in that poll he's currently running 2:1 down against Harkin/O'Keefe.

If that's the best he can do in Galway he hasn't a prayer.

Also, and I'm proud of this, boards.ie/galwaycity is full of malcontented contrarians... we're never going to be a representative sample!

yah sorry for negativity, its almost a year now since the last "incident"

i dunno i think we galwegians got embarrassed enough last year with that lady and her "my sons are too good to be conscripted" speech , im loosing faith in the sheeple around here tbh

bleh back to work i go

Steviemak

kickoutthejams wrote: »

Ganley had a full page in today's Galway Advertiser cheering himself for stopping Ireland losing it's commissioner.

Words cannot describe the fail, given that Ireland's commissioner doesn't work for Ireland.

Unbelievable - we lose the commissioner unless lisbon is passed - is he now going to campaign for a yes on Lisbon because if he campaigns for a no then we lose the commissioner.

Is there no end to his lies??