why are we voting again

PopeBuckfastXVI

TimHanley wrote: »

I voted NO the first time and I'll continue to vote No.

So it's not impossible to keep voting 'no' then? So you might say that the Government can ask the question as many times as they like, and no-one needs to vote 'yes' without having actually changed their minds?

TimHanley

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

So it's not impossible to keep voting 'no' then? So you might say that the Government can ask the question as many times as they like, and no-one needs to vote 'yes' without having actually changed their minds?

Plato would be proud of such profound logic.

I say no more EU integration.

PopeBuckfastXVI

TimHanley wrote: »

I don't want to see further EU integration, infact I would perfer if we pulled out of the EU altogeather.

Ah, I understand where you're coming from!

Sorry I didn't assume that would be your attitude, as I keep getting told that 'no to Lisbon does not mean no to the EU'.

Well that being the case, there's really very little I'll be able to say to persuade you.

I do hope that other Eurosceptics are as honest as you are when setting out their stalls in the second vote.

brianthebard

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

So it's not impossible to keep voting 'no' then? So you might say that the Government can ask the question as many times as they like, and no-one needs to vote 'yes' without having actually changed their minds?

That's a silly argument. "you won the last time so why don't you just keep voting?" Is that really how you think referenda should work?

PopeBuckfastXVI

brianthebard wrote: »

That's a silly argument. "you won the last time so why don't you just keep voting?" Is that really how you think referenda should work?

I'm saying that if asked again there's nothing to stop you telling the government where to go, i.e. voting 'no' again.

Then turf them out at the next election.

Something stopping you?

TimHanley

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

I'm saying that if asked again there's nothing to stop you telling the government where to go, i.e. voting 'no' again.

Then turf them out at the next election.

Something stopping you?

You are letting yourself down with posts like this.

PopeBuckfastXVI

TimHanley wrote: »

You are letting yourself down with posts like this.

How so?

You can vote 'no' in the next referendum, correct?

You can vote against Fianna Fáil in the next election, correct?

TimHanley

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

How so?

You can vote 'no' in the next referendum, correct?

You can vote against Fianna Fáil in the next election, correct?

Yes, however these people should do as the people tell them. They have been told what the people think.

PopeBuckfastXVI

TimHanley wrote: »

Yes, however these people should do as the people tell them. They have been told what the people think.

Well I suggest you start a campaign to change the constitution to stop them.

brianthebard

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

I'm saying that if asked again there's nothing to stop you telling the government where to go, i.e. voting 'no' again.

Then turf them out at the next election.

Something stopping you?

You sound like a petulant child.
Besides that, all the main parties are pro-treaty so in this case 'turfing' out the government will have little or no effect.

TimHanley

brianthebard wrote: »

Besides that, all the main parties are pro-treaty so in this case 'turfing' out the government will have little or no effect.

True. And they say the people are stupid. Well every major political party, all media and all business organisations pushed for a YES vote. And yet the people still voted NO. Shows the total distaste people have for the EU.

PopeBuckfastXVI

brianthebard wrote: »

personal insult
Besides that, all the main parties are pro-treaty so in this case 'turfing' out the government will have little or no effect.

Vote for Sinn Féin, lobby Labour or Fine Gael to let them know that the electorate don't wish any more referenda and they'd do well on a platform of not having any more. Set up your own political party.

I mean we're in the world of a hypothetical 3rd and many subsequent referenda at this stage right? I'd imagine any party promising to stop this outrageous waste of time would do very well.

Also as I've said previously you could start a campaign to have the constitution changed to prevent reruns of referenda within a fixed time period. If your view is widely shared you should have no problem getting it passed.

PopeBuckfastXVI

TimHanley wrote: »

Shows the total distaste people have for the EU.

Some 'no' voters on this forum have been at pains to point out that 'no to lisbon' does not mean 'no to the EU'.

gizmo555

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

So it's not impossible to keep voting 'no' then? So you might say that the Government can ask the question as many times as they like, and no-one needs to vote 'yes' without having actually changed their minds?

This may bite the government in the ass - I don't have a problem in principle with a 2nd referendum (I'll just vote no again!), but many others do:

The vast majority of those opposed to the treaty say that it remained too complex and that there was a huge lack of information about what it means.

Many opposed also said they deeply resented being asked to vote a second time on the referendum.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/elections/massive-54-per-cent-now-plan-on-voting-yes-to-lisbon-treaty-1764851.html

http://www.lansdownemarketresearch.ie/pdf/RTE%20Lansdowne%20Exit%20Polls%205th%20June%202009.pdf

Notwithstanding the majority support for the treaty in the Indo's poll, in a real referendum situation, what will be the stronger motivator to actually get out and vote a second time: general feelings of goodwill towards the EU, or "deep resentment" at having the first referendum result disregarded?

PopeBuckfastXVI

gizmo555 wrote: »

This may bite the government in the ass - I don't have a problem in principle with a 2nd referendum (I'll just vote no again!), but many others do:

The vast majority of those opposed to the treaty say that it remained too complex and that there was a huge lack of information about what it means.

Many opposed also said they deeply resented being asked to vote a second time on the referendum.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/elections/massive-54-per-cent-now-plan-on-voting-yes-to-lisbon-treaty-1764851.html

http://www.lansdownemarketresearch.ie/pdf/RTE%20Lansdowne%20Exit%20Polls%205th%20June%202009.pdf

Notwithstanding the majority support for the treaty in the Indo's poll, in a real referendum situation, what will be the stronger motivator to actually get out and vote a second time: general feelings of goodwill towards the EU, or "deep resentment" at having the first referendum result disregarded?

Well in a few months we'll be able to step out of the hypothetical and into the reality on that one!

P. Breathnach

TimHanley wrote: »

Yes, however these people should do as the people tell them. They have been told what the people think.

You are letting yourself down with posts like this.

At the last three general election "the people" thought that FF should play the lead role in government. In the tradition of winning sports trophies, should they now be able to claim that three consecutive wins entitles the prize forever?

gizmo555

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

Well in a few months we'll be able to step out of the hypothetical and into the reality on that one!

Actually, the Indo story is rather simplistic in saying "The vast majority of those opposed to the treaty say that it remained too complex and that there was a huge lack of information about what it means."

28% of those polled said they would vote no and their reasons broke down as follows:

Lack of information,knowledge, understanding, treaty too complex: 31%
We should not be asked a second time / shouldn’t be a second referendum: 23%
Not convinced by Yes arguments: 15%
No confidence in Government: 15%
Lisbon treaty a bad deal, bad for Ireland: 14%
Loss of / diminution of Irish Neutrality: 12%
Loss of power, domination by large countries, dictated to by other countries: 12%
Loss of / threat to Ireland’s independence: 9%
Loss of Irish Commissioner on a rotating basis: 9%
I trust those who say we should vote in favour against: 2%
Other: 7%

So, 6.4% (28% x 23%) of voters feel there shouldn't be a 2nd referendum and intend to vote "No" accordingly - that's easily enough to swing it in a tight contest.

Scofflaw

brianthebard wrote: »

You sound like a petulant child.

Brian, you know better than to post that kind of thing.

moderately,
Scofflaw

molloyjh

TimHanley wrote: »

Yes, however these people should do as the people tell them. They have been told what the people think.

Yes and they took that feedback to Brussles to see what could be done.

gizmo555 wrote: »

This may bite the government in the ass - I don't have a problem in principle with a 2nd referendum (I'll just vote no again!), but many others do:

The vast majority of those opposed to the treaty say that it remained too complex and that there was a huge lack of information about what it means.

Many opposed also said they deeply resented being asked to vote a second time on the referendum.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/elections/massive-54-per-cent-now-plan-on-voting-yes-to-lisbon-treaty-1764851.html

http://www.lansdownemarketresearch.ie/pdf/RTE%20Lansdowne%20Exit%20Polls%205th%20June%202009.pdf

Notwithstanding the majority support for the treaty in the Indo's poll, in a real referendum situation, what will be the stronger motivator to actually get out and vote a second time: general feelings of goodwill towards the EU, or "deep resentment" at having the first referendum result disregarded?

As I've said before I don't think there should be another referendum until the electorate have been educated on the Treaty. Doesn't look good though at this stage.....

PopeBuckfastXVI

gizmo555 wrote: »

So, 6.4% (28% x 23%) of voters feel there shouldn't be a 2nd referendum and intend to vote "No" accordingly - that's easily enough to swing it in a tight contest.

Very much so, I wouldn't discount the evidence from this very forum though, of people who originally voted no making massive noise about how unfair a 2nd referendum is. I wonder what proportion of that 6.4% would ever have voted yes.

gizmo555

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

I wonder what proportion of that 6.4% would ever have voted yes.

The exact number is of course unknowable - there are some though:

Madam, - I voted Yes. The people, however, voted No.
Unlike the Government, I will be respecting their position. - Yours, etc,

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/letters/2008/1217/1229035810507.html

Also, what way they voted first time around doesn't alter the facts that 6.4% of the electorate could easily be enough to swing it, and these people cannot be persuaded by more information, reassurances on tax & neutrality, etc.

PopeBuckfastXVI

gizmo555 wrote: »

The exact number is of course unknowable - there are some though:

Madam, - I voted Yes. The people, however, voted No.
Unlike the Government, I will be respecting their position. - Yours, etc,

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/letters/2008/1217/1229035810507.html

I don't doubt there are some.

I personally wouldn't be comfortable with voting 'on behalf' of someone else. What if, and it's a big if, I know, but what if a huge majority of those who voted no, changed their minds, but at the same time a huge majority of people who voted yes decided to vote no 'on behalf' of those no voters from the first referendum.

We end up with something defeated, that in reality, a vast majority support.

I think the safest thing to do is not guess at the positions of others and mimic them, but to use your vote to express your own opinion.

gizmo555 wrote: »

Also, what way they voted first time around doesn't alter the facts that 6.4% of the electorate could easily be enough to swing it, and these people cannot be persuaded by more information, reassurances on tax & neutrality, etc.

No, they are only enough to swing it if they aren't core 'no' voters already.

Scofflaw

gizmo555 wrote: »

The exact number is of course unknowable - there are some though:

Madam, - I voted Yes. The people, however, voted No.
Unlike the Government, I will be respecting their position. - Yours, etc,

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/letters/2008/1217/1229035810507.html

Also, what way they voted first time around doesn't alter the facts that 6.4% of the electorate could easily be enough to swing it, and these people cannot be persuaded by more information, reassurances on tax & neutrality, etc.

They are outnumbered by the 8.68% who don't feel they know enough to vote Yes...yet.

cordially,
Scofflaw

gizmo555

Scofflaw wrote: »

They are outnumbered by the 8.68% who don't feel they know enough to vote Yes...yet.

cordially,
Scofflaw

I believe this is a more significant block of opinion for a number of reasons:

(1) They are annoyed at a 2nd referendum being called, and as a result may be more motivated than average to vote and I would suggest certainly more likely to vote than people who feel they don't yet have enough information.

(2) As I've already said, in a tight vote this block could easily be crucial.

(3) Lastly and most importantly, their problem is with the fact of a 2nd referendum being called at all, so they are not amenable to persuasion on the merits or demerits of the treaty.

No doubt we will see a similar exit poll when the referendum takes place, but if it does turn out that this block decides the outcome, it ought to make future governments more cautious about re-running referenda on the same question.

Scofflaw

gizmo555 wrote: »

I believe this is a more significant block of opinion for a number of reasons:

(1) They are annoyed at a 2nd referendum being called, and as a result may be more motivated than average to vote and I would suggest certainly more likely to vote than people who feel they don't yet have enough information.

(2) As I've already said, in a tight vote this block could easily be crucial.

(3) Lastly and most importantly, their problem is with the fact of a 2nd referendum being called at all, so they are not amenable to persuasion on the merits or demerits of the treaty.

No doubt we will see a similar exit poll when the referendum takes place, but if it does turn out that this block decides the outcome, it ought to make future governments more cautious about re-running referenda on the same question.

I actually think that the government is extremely cautious about running this one. There's every sign that they won't go ahead unless they get the necessary guarantees from the other member states - and if they do get the necessary guarantees, then we're not voting on the same question any more, because the 'guarantees' are intended to be protocols which will amend the same treaties Lisbon amends - we won't be voting on Lisbon alone, but 'Lisbon Plus'.

cordially,
Scofflaw

conchubhar1

i for one will be waiting till these additions come to light
''lisbon plus'' may be worth implementing

but - i extremely doubt that if it is passed there will be a lisbon 3

also we were told this is the best deal for ireland and for europe - yet look at what we are touted to get as extras if it is passed...

PopeBuckfastXVI

conchubhar1 wrote: »

also we were told this is the best deal for ireland and for europe - yet look at what we are touted to get as extras if it is passed...

I think having 27 commissioners is actually a worse deal, as it's a waste of money and is a case of jobs for the boys.

I believe the guarantees on things like neutrality, abortion and taxes are totally unnecessary, as they are already implicit in, or untouched by, Lisbon, but whatever, if people need it in black and white fair enough.

Still, I can live with the 27 commissioners thing if it means Lisbon goes through and we can commit the EU to important stuff like fighting global warming, and getting us cheaper electricity.

conchubhar1

things have to be in black and white - and no harm is done
i will argue the commissioners comment - less said about that the better as that is nonesense

otherwise it can be taking and interpreted and if a court agrees to it, it is deemed legal.

this is what happened to the us, im not sure if this appies to the eu as law is surely not my strongpoint.

K-9

conchubhar1 wrote: »

i for one will be waiting till these additions come to light
''lisbon plus'' may be worth implementing

but - i extremely doubt that if it is passed there will be a lisbon 3

also we were told this is the best deal for ireland and for europe - yet look at what we are touted to get as extras if it is passed...

There can't be a Lisbon 3 if its passed. We can't say after Lisbon 2, ok we agree and then 18 months later say "wait a minute, we didn't really mean that". It's different to a No vote in that respect because we haven't changed anything by voting No. When you think about it, it would be unworkable if countries pass Treaties and then renege on them.

On the assurances we'll need to see them, but it appears it may just be keeping the Commissioner (which is ridiculous) and some more assurances on Neutrality and Abortion which we already have in Nice. The only thing actually new maybe a guarentee on Direct Taxes and the Commissioner issue.

K-9

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

I think having 27 commissioners is actually a worse deal, as it's a waste of money and is a case of jobs for the boys.

I believe the guarantees on things like neutrality, abortion and taxes are totally unnecessary, as they are already implicit in, or untouched by, Lisbon, but whatever, if people need it in black and white fair enough.

Still, I can live with the 27 commissioners thing if it means Lisbon goes through and we can commit the EU to important stuff like fighting global warming, and getting us cheaper electricity.

Thing is if it's limited to 27, when Croatia joins and if/as more join we will eventually lose our Commissioner at some stage!