Why voting no?

Ellie The Mess

Yes, I know, there are probably about a million other threads on this subject but, indeed, I do feel the need to start a new one because, well, I started getting a little bit confused after, having read the 100th page on other threads, nobody had really told me what the reasons for a no vote were yet.

So I'm asking you, people of Ireland, why should an Irish person go and vote no in October even when the protocol is passed?

Rb

If this forum represents the people of Ireland, I am terrified for its future.

Ellie The Mess

Rb wrote: »

If this forum represents the people of Ireland, I am terrified for its future.

I was just indirectly saying that I am not part of the People of Ireland

conchubhar1

the veto is the only through safeguard or power we have in the eu

we loose it in many areas

Scofflaw

conchubhar1 wrote: »

the veto is the only through safeguard or power we have in the eu

we loose it in many areas

Here's the list of those areas.

cordially,
Scofflaw

conchubhar1

indeed

Pat Mustard

Ellie The Mess wrote: »

nobody had really told me what the reasons for a no vote were yet.

http://www.dfa.ie/home/index.aspx?id=73360. The Minister remarked that the survey shows that people felt they did not have enough clear information in the run-up to voting day. This lack of information was the single biggest reason given for the decision to vote No or to abstain on 12 June. For example, more than four in every ten people who voted against the Treaty said they had voted No due to a lack of information which gave rise to genuine concerns about what they were being asked to vote on.

Ellie The Mess wrote: »

So I'm asking you, people of Ireland, why should an Irish person go and vote no in October even when the protocol is passed?

My opinion is that we were already asked to vote on this. We voted. We are now being asked to vote again. I don't think that it's very democratic to be made to vote again, until we vote the way the government wants us to vote. I am going to vote no for that reason.

RandomName2

Voting no because this constitutional ammending treaty has been rejected in three referenda (and would be rejected in a fourth if UK got a vote)

conchubhar1

it has been rejected by one and would be rejected by another should the uk vote

the other 2 votes were on the constitution - i do slightly agree with your sentiment tho

oscarBravo

RandomName2 wrote: »

Voting no because this constitutional ammending treaty has been rejected in three referenda (and would be rejected in a fourth if UK got a vote)

If we were the first country to vote on it, how would you vote?

turgon

Notice Ellie The Mess how only one post so far has actually mentioned something in the Treaty. Otherwise we get the usual stuff of "more referenda = undemocratic" nonsense that has absolutely nothing to do with the Treaty.

In October you will be asked to vote on a proposal. The best way to evaluate this proposal is to pick the situation before (the EU under Nice) and the situation after (the EU under Lisbon), and see which one you prefer.

People here have said to vote No because we have been asked to vote twice. Or vote No because another EU Treaty was rejected. Well them voting No will not change this at all. They have effectively wasted their vote. The irony is, of course, that these people champion themselves as defenders of democracy, yet the attitude they take towards voting (ie not voting in an informed manner on relevant issues) is arguably the greatest failing of democracy.

P. Breathnach

When I see some of the arguments advanced here and elsewhere by the "no" camp, I become more and more convinced that some of them are on a kind of perverse power trip: they want a no vote because it would have a big impact, and the possibility that the consequences might be bad are less important than the fact that the consequences would be large.

Ellie The Mess

P. Breathnach wrote: »

When I see some of the arguments advanced here and elsewhere by the "no" camp, I become more and more convinced that some of them are on a kind of perverse power trip: they want a no vote because it would have a big impact, and the possibility that the consequences might be bad are less important than the fact that the consequences would be large.

That is exactly what I felt. I think it's so bad that the Lisbon Treaty will be re-voted on in October. Many people will not actually read the Treaty, will not understand it and therefore they either won't go voting or will vote no just because the Government have said people should vote yes.

turgon wrote: »

People here have said to vote No because we have been asked to vote twice. Or vote No because another EU Treaty was rejected. Well them voting No will not change this at all. They have effectively wasted their vote. The irony is, of course, that these people champion themselves as defenders of democracy, yet the attitude they take towards voting (ie not voting in an informed manner on relevant issues) is arguably the greatest failing of democracy.

Exactly, and another irony is that, championing themselves as defenders of democracy, they vote no the the one Treaty that brings more democracy into the Euraopen Union in terms of extention of the political influence and competencies of the Europen Parliament (which is and will be the only institution directly elected by the people)

ro09

Ellie The Mess wrote: »

Yes, I know, there are probably about a million other threads on this subject but, indeed, I do feel the need to start a new one because, well, I started getting a little bit confused after, having read the 100th page on other threads, nobody had really told me what the reasons for a no vote were yet.

So I'm asking you, people of Ireland, why should an Irish person go and vote no in October even when the protocol is passed?

I am voting no because I love my Country, I dont want to be Part of a United States of Europe where I will get very little say in the way my country is run or what laws are introduced. People who are making Plenty of money out of Europe will of course vote Yes to everything.

The more Treaties that are passed the more we loose control of our own affairs. Remember all EU law supersedes our Constitutional Law.

I dont think our Founders who gave their lives so we could have independance would be happy with us throwing this very independance away!

There are Plenty of Countries out there who are not in Europe and are individually doing very well indeed!

Lets keep our traditions and our way of life by saying no to the EU.

P. Breathnach

ro09 wrote: »

I am voting no because I love my Country, I dont want to be Part of a United States of Europe where I will get very little say in the way my country is run or what laws are introduced. People who are making Plenty of money out of Europe will of course vote Yes to everything.

The more Treaties that are passed the more we loose control of our own affairs. Remember all EU law supersedes our Constitutional Law.

I dont think our Founders who gave their lives so we could have independance would be happy with us throwing this very independance away!

There are Plenty of Countries out there who are not in Europe and are individually doing very well indeed!

Lets keep our traditions and our way of life by saying no to the EU.

What happens when we run out of turf?

Rb

P. Breathnach wrote: »

What happens when we run out of turf?

What does that have to do with the Treaty?

cooperguy

I am voting no because I love my Country, I dont want to be Part of a United States of Europe where I will get very little say in the way my country is run or what laws are introduced. People who are making Plenty of money out of Europe will of course vote Yes to everything.

The more Treaties that are passed the more we loose control of our own affairs. Remember all EU law supersedes our Constitutional Law.

I dont think our Founders who gave their lives so we could have independance would be happy with us throwing this very independance away!

There are Plenty of Countries out there who are not in Europe and are individually doing very well indeed!

Lets keep our traditions and our way of life by saying no to the EU.

All European law that we agree to with a referendum supersedes Irish law. So what specifically is your problem with these laws?

And we have all made plenty of money from Europe whether it be through being employed in 1 of the thousands of jobs created by our membership of the EU or any one of the projects funded by EU grants that we use every day.

Also where exactly does this change our traditions?

Surely you have a better argument than misguided patriotism?

Mario007

conchubhar1 wrote: »

the veto is the only through safeguard or power we have in the eu

we loose it in many areas

ireland used veto once in 35 years...yeah lots of power being lost there. besides veto is one of the most undemocratic mechanisms out there, and democracy is the big arguement for the 'no' side

The Mustard wrote: »

http://www.dfa.ie/home/index.aspx?id=73360. The Minister remarked that the survey shows that people felt they did not have enough clear information in the run-up to voting day. This lack of information was the single biggest reason given for the decision to vote No or to abstain on 12 June. For example, more than four in every ten people who voted against the Treaty said they had voted No due to a lack of information which gave rise to genuine concerns about what they were being asked to vote on.



My opinion is that we were already asked to vote on this. We voted. We are now being asked to vote again. I don't think that it's very democratic to be made to vote again, until we vote the way the government wants us to vote. I am going to vote no for that reason.

its your opinion and you're entitled to it, but just to point out one thing the second referendum is democratic and legitimate, its just like any other law that wants to be passed by the government out there...it can be reintroduce

RandomName2 wrote: »

Voting no because this constitutional ammending treaty has been rejected in three referenda (and would be rejected in a fourth if UK got a vote)

ro09 wrote: »

I am voting no because I love my Country, I dont want to be Part of a United States of Europe where I will get very little say in the way my country is run or what laws are introduced. People who are making Plenty of money out of Europe will of course vote Yes to everything.

The more Treaties that are passed the more we loose control of our own affairs. Remember all EU law supersedes our Constitutional Law.

I dont think our Founders who gave their lives so we could have independance would be happy with us throwing this very independance away!

There are Plenty of Countries out there who are not in Europe and are individually doing very well indeed!

Lets keep our traditions and our way of life by saying no to the EU.

i dont agree with you, but you're one of the first people to come out and quite boldly said what you don't like, so i say well done.

P. Breathnach

Rb wrote: »

What does that have to do with the Treaty?

Quite a lot, really, albeit indirectly.

Rb

cooperguy wrote: »

All European law that we agree to with a referendum supersedes Irish law. So what specifically is your problem with these laws?

And we have all made plenty of money from Europe whether it be through being employed in 1 of the thousands of jobs created by our membership of the EU or any one of the projects funded by EU grants that we use every day.

Also where exactly does this change our traditions?

Surely you have a better argument than misguided patriotism?

The hope that the EU will be an economical union, not a political one (or a superstate), is as valid a reason as any really.

Rb

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Quite a lot, really, albeit indirectly.

So you're admitting it has nothing to do with the text?

P. Breathnach

Rb wrote: »

So you're admitting it has nothing to do with the text?

Turf is not, so far as I can recall, mentioned in the text of the treaty. Neither are many of the other things that people have expressed worries about. The treaty is essentially concerned about arrangements for dealing with things. Energy is one of the things that is, and will continue to be, a major concern that will need to be dealt with.

Mario007

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Quite a lot, really, albeit indirectly.

no, its more to do with the eu as a whole. but really i guess what we should be deciding is not, yes or no to lisbon, but rather do we want lisbon or nice? cos thats really the choice at the end of the day. this isnt about whether or not we like eu or the way it works but if we want nice or lisbon

askitnice

What is really starting to get to me is the amount of bulls**t and fear mongering being put out by the yes campaign, and its on this forum to.

Simply put another NO vote does NOT mean that we have to leave the EU or the Euro, it just means Lisbon can not be implemented and we use existing treaty's.

In fact at te moment there is no way we can be kicked out of EU without our Goverment specifically asking for it/voting for it which will not happen.

cooperguy

askitnice wrote: »

Simply put another NO vote does NOT mean that we have to leave the EU or the Euro, it just means Lisbon can not be implemented and we use existing treaty's.
.

Nobody said that!

Mario007

askitnice wrote: »

What is really starting to get to me is the amount of bulls**t and fear mongering being put out by the yes campaign, and its on this forum to.

Simply put another NO vote does NOT mean that we have to leave the EU or the Euro, it just means Lisbon can not be implemented and we use existing treaty's.

In fact at te moment there is no way we can be kicked out of EU without our Goverment specifically asking for it/voting for it which will not happen.

i agree this demagogy must end, and that goes to both camps...use facts from the treaty...i mean its easy enough to argue with the factual evidence so stick to it

P. Breathnach

askitnice wrote: »

What is really starting to get to me is the amount of bulls**t and fear mongering being put out by the yes campaign, and its on this forum to.

Simply put another NO vote does NOT mean that we have to leave the EU or the Euro, it just means Lisbon can not be implemented and we use existing treaty's.

In fact at te moment there is no way we can be kicked out of EU without our Goverment specifically asking for it/voting for it which will not happen.

If we vote no to Lisbon, we will frustrate the ambitions of every other member of the EU. In a world where alliances are essential, it is not a good thing to be friendless.

One of the reasons why Ireland has done so well out of membership of the EEC/EC/EU is that we have been (mostly correctly) seen as "good Europeans". It is an advantage that we should not throw away lightly.

I have yet to see a downside to the Lisbon Treaty that outweighs the benefits to us of being an EU member in good standing.

Riskymove

there are always going to be issues raised that have nothing to do with treaty or misconstrued so as to cause fear in people

In the last referendum a big fuss was made about Ireland not always having a commissioner..I mean..so what?...you'd swear it was some important position for Ireland with important repurcussions for Ireland rather than just a well-paid plum role for some political person

I mean people voting no over this? ....can't understand it

no, does our Governemnt try and defend the proposal (a good one imo)..no..lets just get the EU to scrap it


and the other issues, taxation etc...last time they told us treaty has nothing to do with these issues, people still vote no...now we have them saying..look, they really have nothing to do with treaty, we swear and these EU heads agree and they swear too....what's the difference

they are just going down the same route as far as i can see. No attempt to really explain the treaty or discuss issues..lets just get rid of issues people seemed to be concerned about last time

askitnice

P. Breathnach wrote: »

If we vote no to Lisbon, we will frustrate the ambitions of every other member of the EU. In a world where alliances are essential, it is not a good thing to be friendless.

One of the reasons why Ireland has done so well out of membership of the EEC/EC/EU is that we have been (mostly correctly) seen as "good Europeans". It is an advantage that we should not throw away lightly.

I have yet to see a downside to the Lisbon Treaty that outweighs the benefits to us of being an EU member in good standing.

More alarmist crap, the funding we recieve from EU is only dependent on us being members and having qualified infrastructure projects same as any other EU member. Not that we're seen as good europeans, what a childish argument, be a good country or else.. or else what? We can not be removed we still have veto powers etc...

You allude to funding being cut or us removed from EU, how exactly are the EU going to punish us, they cannot remove us, they cannot specifically target Ireland with cuts in funding unless its across the board throughout the EU.

Our refusal of this treaty did not and will not make us bad Europeans as you say, just democratic ones. You sound very alarmist "what happens when turf runs out" blah blah blah... Turf!! what year do you think it is 1909.

hobochris

Riskymove wrote: »

there are always going to be issues raised that have nothing to do with treaty or misconstrued so as to cause fear in people

In the last referendum a big fuss was made about Ireland not always having a commissioner..I mean..so what?...you'd swear it was some important position for Ireland with important repurcussions for Ireland rather than just a well-paid plum role for some political person

I mean people voting no over this? ....can't understand it

no, does our Governemnt try and defend the proposal (a good one imo)..no..lets just get the EU to scrap it


and the other issues, taxation etc...last time they told us treaty has nothing to do with these issues, people still vote no...now we have them saying..look, they really have nothing to do with treaty, we swear and these EU heads agree and they swear too....what's the difference

they are just going down the same route as far as i can see. No attempt to really explain the treaty or discuss issues..lets just get rid of issues people seemed to be concerned about last time

Have you looked into the qualified majority voting system that this treaty will implement? that alone IMO justifies a no vote. we are essentially having the volume tuned down on our voice in the European union.

The impression I get from the people in favor of a yes vote is that we should be a good little country and dance to the EU's tune.

I wont dance, I don't like this song.

P. Breathnach

askitnice wrote: »

More alarmist crap, the funding we recieve from EU is only dependent on us being members and having qualified infrastructure projects same as any other EU member. Not that we're seen as good europeans, what a childish argument, be a good country or else.. or else what? We can not be removed we still have veto powers etc...

That's not much of an answer; it's merely abuse and grotesque extrapolation of what I said in order to suggest things that I didn't say..

You allude to funding being cut or us removed from EU, how exactly are the EU going to punish us, they cannot remove us, they cannot specifically target Ireland with cuts in funding unless its across the board throughout the EU.

I made no such allusion. And yes, the EU can be influenced by national interests in the way it constructs its schemes.

Our refusal of this treaty did not and will not make us bad Europeans as you say, just democratic ones.

I said nothing one way or the other about us being good Europeans. I did comment on how we are seen in Europe.

You sound very alarmist "what happens when turf runs out" blah blah blah... Turf!! what year do you think it is 1909.

I see that you are as familiar with irony as you are with truth.

So much for condemning the bull**** put out by the yes camp.