Lisbon Mk 2 Predictions

bill_ashmount

P. Breathnach wrote: »

You came across this stuff today?

Indeed
Been too busy on the property pin for the last few years.

carveone

bill_ashmount wrote: »

Interesting quotes from Le Monde and Nicolas Sarkozy:

- Former French President V.Giscard D’Estaing, who helped to draw up the EU Constitution ....

I think you mean, "former French President and critic of the Lisbon Treaty who believed it was inferior to the EU Constitution". This quote was done to death last year.

Tony EH

And the point that you seem to be struggling with is that there is no constitutional requirement in other member states for the people to adopt it. You are falling into the trap of assuming that our approach to ratifying EU treaties is intrinsically superior to everyone else's...

What?

Putting issues that directly affect the public to a democratic public vote isn't far better than simply having governments ratify whatever they want?

Is that supposed to be a serious statement and anything other than a nonsensical, bullshit and intellectually dishonest position?

oscarBravo

Tony EH wrote: »

What?

Putting issues that directly affect the public to a democratic public vote isn't far better than simply having governments ratify whatever they want?

Is that supposed to be a serious statement and anything other than a nonsensical, bullshit and intellectually dishonest position?

Do you think that we, the people, should ratify Finance Bills?

carveone

Tony EH wrote: »

The PEOPLE haven't adopted it.

That's the point you and some others seem to be struggling with.

Fine. Do you have any suggestions how the PEOPLE can adopt it without violating their constitutions? Use Germany as an example given that it is the largest economy.

bill_ashmount

carveone wrote: »

I think you mean, "former French President and critic of the Lisbon Treaty who believed it was inferior to the EU Constitution". This quote was done to death last year.

No, I don't.

Tony EH

carveone wrote: »

Fine. Do you have any suggestions how the PEOPLE can adopt it without violating their constitutions? Use Germany as an example given that it is the largest economy.

Fuck their constitutions. That's such a non argument, it's ridiculous.

There's absolutely NOTHING standing in the way of any European country holding a public vote on Lisbon, if the government of that Nation so wished. What stands in the way of a Continental vote on Lisbon is the lack of political will.

Iwasfrozen

Tony EH wrote:

Fuck their constitutions. That's such a non argument, it's ridiculous.

There's absolutely NOTHING standing in the way of any European country holding a public vote on Lisbon, if the government of that Nation so wished. What stands in the way of a Continental vote on Lisbon is the lack of political will.

But why would they hold a referendum when they don't need to ?
Referendums cost alot of money and it would clog the eu up if they needed to wait on the results of 27 referendums.
BTW, I wouldn't mind a pan european referendum if the treaty could be passed by 14 countries yes votes...

oscarBravo

Tony EH wrote: »

Fuck their constitutions. That's such a non argument, it's ridiculous.

If someone from France or Germany said "F*ck the Irish constitution, just ratify the damn treaty already", do you think that would be a perfectly acceptable viewpoint?

Did you miss this question:

oscarBravo wrote: »

Do you think that we, the people, should ratify Finance Bills?

Tony EH

If someone from France or Germany said "F*ck the Irish constitution, just ratify the damn treaty already", do you think that would be a perfectly acceptable viewpoint?

I'm sure there are many people, even in this country, that hold that view. Simply, because it's convenient to political position at present.

Also, my point is that the "constitution" argument is a bogus non-issue.

There is nothing stopping Europe from having a vote in the treaty, except political will.

Do you think that we, the people, should ratify Finance Bills?

No, I ignored it, because it was idiotic.

oscarBravo

Tony EH wrote: »

I'm sure there are many people, even in this country, that hold that view. Simply, because it's convenient to political position at present.

It doesn't matter whether or not they hold that view. The constitution is the fundamental foundation of law in this state, and circumscribes what the government is allowed to do, required to do, and forbidden to do.

That's the role of a constitution in a sovereign state: to set the rules by which the country is governed.

For you to say "F*ck the constitution" of a sovereign state is the height of disrespect for that country.

Also, my point is that the "constitution" argument is a bogus non-issue.

There is nothing stopping Europe from having a vote in the treaty, except political will.

Again, you seem to believe that repeating something makes it true.

There are countries in Europe that are constitutionally proscribed from either holding referenda at all, or from using referenda to ratify treaties. That means that ratifying treaties by referendum can't be done in those countries.

The fact that you'd like to see it done doesn't change that fact. It may be hard for you to handle this fact, but the world doesn't always work the way you personally would like it to.

No, I ignored it, because it was idiotic.

It was a yes or no question. What's idiotic about it?

djpbarry

Tony EH wrote: »

Also, my point is that the "constitution" argument is a bogus non-issue.

There is nothing stopping Europe from having a vote in the treaty...

...except legally-binding documents known as constitutions. You think that the Irish government can do whatever the hell it wants, regardless of whether it is constitutional or not? What would be the point in having a constitution in that case?

Tony EH

oscarBravo wrote: »

For you to say "F*ck the constitution" of a sovereign state is the height of disrespect for that country. Again, you seem to believe that repeating something makes it true.

Drop the fake indignation. You're fooling nobody.

My point in "Fuck the constitution" is pointing out that that particular argument against a European referendum on Lisbon is a bogus one.

But, of course, you knew that already.

There are countries in Europe that are constitutionally proscribed from either holding referenda at all, or from using referenda to ratify treaties. That means that ratifying treaties by referendum can't be done in those countries.

Who?

oscarBravo

Tony EH wrote: »

My point in "Fuck the constitution" is pointing out that that particular argument against a European referendum on Lisbon is a bogus one.

Heaven forbid you'd actually explain how it's possible to have a referendum that's proscribed by a constitution.

But, of course, you knew that already.

If you want to keep posting here, I suggest you stop implicitly accusing people of lying.

Who?

The Netherlands, for one.

Tony EH

Oh, I think you knew exactly what I meant OB. So drop the silliness.

And the Dutch can hold referenda, but they are not necessarily legally binding. The Government can choose to ignore the results.

oscarBravo

Tony EH wrote: »

And the Dutch can hold referenda, but they are not necessarily legally binding. The Government can choose to ignore the results.

The Dutch constitution (f*ck it, right?) gives Parliament the exclusive responsibility for ratifying treaties.

But I think I see what you're getting at. You want to hold referenda as popularity contests, to prove a point.

bill_ashmount

oscarBravo wrote: »

The constitution is the fundamental foundation of law in this state, and circumscribes what the government is allowed to do, required to do, and forbidden to do.

Agree 100% and we are lucky that we have the rights that we currently have to amend it.

oscarBravo wrote: »

There are countries in Europe that are constitutionally proscribed from either holding referenda at all, or from using referenda to ratify treaties. That means that ratifying treaties by referendum can't be done in those countries.

On a personal level I find it amazing that the Dutch people are willing to accept this. But anyway they are, so be it.

KINGVictor

oscarBravo wrote: »

If the people of those countries wanted to alter their constitutional arrangements for the ratification of treaties, I'm sure they'd initiate the process themselves. They are sovereign states, you know.

Except that ....Those countries you consistently refer to ...used referenda as a means to pass treaties in the past ...suddenly they were faced with the "challenge" of those treaties being rejected via a referendum and then decided to ratify them through parliamentary procedures...which in most cases would favour the Government in power.

You have to realise that because of the complexities of politics ...it would be absolutely false to assume that because the Parliament of a country passes a law or treaty(in this context)...it effectively reflects popular inclinations.In my opinion the Irish model should be best practise in other to have a legitimate and acceptable EU.

I agree that the EU cannot afford to have a refrendum on every directive but when it comes to a treaty that would have a major impact on national issues,it is only wise to let the people decide and not impose (directly or indirectly) it on them.....it would always create problems in future.

oscarBravo

KINGVictor wrote: »

Except that ....Those countries you consistently refer to ...used referenda as a means to pass treaties in the past ...suddenly they were faced with the "challenge" of those treaties being rejected via a referendum and then decided to ratify them through parliamentary procedures...which in most cases would favour the Government in power.

Throughout the history of the EU, EEC, and so on, there have been member states which have ratified treaties.

What percentage of ratifications have been by referendum in the history of the Union? You seem to imply that referenda were the norm, and have been phased out. Would it surprise you to learn that only two countries held referenda on the Single European Act?

You have to realise that because of the complexities of politics ...it would be absolutely false to assume that because the Parliament of a country passes a law or treaty(in this context)...it effectively reflects popular inclinations.

It would also be false to assume that any act of Parliament necessarily reflects popular inclinations. The role of government is to govern. In those countries where ratification of treaties by Parliament is the norm, that's where such ratification should happen.

In my opinion the Irish model should be best practise in other to have a legitimate and acceptable EU.

I honestly disagree. I don't believe the EU lacks legitimacy, and I've yet to see any convincing argument why it does, other than that it doesn't match up to some poorly-rationalised theoretical basis for why voting on some things is life-and-death, but the suggestion that we should vote on others is dismissed as idiotic.

I agree that the EU cannot afford to have a refrendum on every directive but when it comes to a treaty that would have a major impact on national issues,it is only wise to let the people decide and not impose (directly or indirectly) it on them.....it would always create problems in future.

Wise? The people have singularly failed to demonstrate wisdom where voting is concerned. Too many people seem to feel that voting is a zero-cost entitlement that they can squander at a whim. As long as people continue to espouse that philosophy, I'll stick to my guns that democracy is not always - perhaps, not often - a good thing.

Red Sleeping Beauty

Prediction : It'll be passed.

Scofflaw

KINGVictor wrote: »

Except that ....Those countries you consistently refer to ...used referenda as a means to pass treaties in the past ...suddenly they were faced with the "challenge" of those treaties being rejected via a referendum and then decided to ratify them through parliamentary procedures...which in most cases would favour the Government in power.

I may have missed those 'consistent references' - what countries have previously ratified EU treaties by binding referendum?

KINGVictor wrote: »

You have to realise that because of the complexities of politics ...it would be absolutely false to assume that because the Parliament of a country passes a law or treaty(in this context)...it effectively reflects popular inclinations.In my opinion the Irish model should be best practise in other to have a legitimate and acceptable EU.

Sayeth the Irishman...you're aware, I'm sure, that Germans, or Italians, or Spaniards, or Maltese, or (etc), may rather disagree that the Irish model is "best practice"?

amused,
Scofflaw

djpbarry

KINGVictor wrote: »

I agree that the EU cannot afford to have a refrendum on every directive but when it comes to a treaty that would have a major impact on national issues,it is only wise to let the people decide...

You might list off some of those "major impacts"? Personally, I don't foresee any radical changes if Lisbon is passed - it's a pretty unremarkable document.

kn

Can someone put up a Lisbon 2 poll - How do you intend to vote. Just with Yes/No options. When polls add in other options it devalues the result.

I went to start a new thread with a poll but I could not see a 'poll' option. Maybe there is a minimum post limit? As it has been in the news of late a poll would be useful. Can someone put one up?

oscarBravo

We don't generally do polls in the Politics forum - they have none of the controls applied to real-world polls, and are statistically meaningless.

O'Morris

kn wrote: »

Can someone put up a Lisbon 2 poll

They have a poll on this over on the politics.ie site
http://www.politics.ie/lisbon-treaty/78972-lisbon-2-how-will-you-vote.html

P. Breathnach

O'Morris wrote: »

They have a poll on this over on the politics.ie site
http://www.politics.ie/lisbon-treaty/78972-lisbon-2-how-will-you-vote.html

I'm not at all interested in what happens over there.

Bad and all as things can get here with ill-informed and intemperate participants, that site makes this one look like a model of decorous behaviour.

conchubhar1

no, indeed it does not ^

Sage'sMama

No due to FF still being in power