Bullet Point Lisbon

nouveau_4.0

All the threads in Lisbon seem to go the same way, and this will be no different I'd imagine. I've read about twenty pages and I'm struggling to find a handful of clear reasons for voting either way. There seems to be some very vague reasons for voting from both sides. In this thread can we please keep it simple, specific and true. If you have a valid reason for whichever side you are voting can you please do so in the following format:

• YES/NO - Reason for voting

Please keep it to one point per post, and make it clear and specific.

PopeBuckfastXVI

Yes - EU Competency will be increased to a common energy policy, which should hopefully result in cheaper fuels/electricity.

O'Morris

No - loss of national sovereignty. I want to be governed from Ireland's capital not Belgium's.

turgon

Yes - More power to the democratically elected European Parliament.

PopeBuckfastXVI

Yes - Ireland's and Europe's voices will be stronger on the world stage, with the consolidation of the external relations aspects of the Union, giving us the ability to share our values of respect for Human Rights, and abhorrence of Despots and Dictators, and giving us the ability to stand up to any country that would pursue an illegal war of conquest for financial gain, under false pretences.

BlitzKrieg

Yes -More national influence on legalisation process, Irish Dail (and other pariaments) gain early access to influence new legalisation

turgon

Yes - The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union will be enshrined in the law.

conchubhar1

no - loss of veto in certain cases (regardless of how often we have sed it in the past) although none of these areas are defence, tax or the key areas

conchubhar1

yes - making the eu more democratic - giving the parliment more power and making it more accountable (council meeting in open in certain cases) and more effecient (should that need law?)

along with the human righst charter - should already be in effect

Mark200

Yes - It will make the running of the EU more efficient

Hitman Actual

YES- Subsidiarity Improvement 1- Time for national Parliaments to review legislation increased from 6 weeks to 8 weeks. (Protocol 1, Role of National Parliaments, Lisbon Consolidated)

Hitman Actual

YES- Subsidiarity Improvement 2- Improved control mechanism for national Parliaments where proposed legislation can be foiled if 55% of member states and/or a majority of MEP's believe it violates the subsidiarity principle. (Protocol 2, Subsidiarity and Proportionality Principle, Article 7 (3b) Lisbon Consolidated)

Hitman Actual

YES- Subsidiarity Improvement 3- Committee of the Regions can bring a case to the ECJ if it believes that legislation is in violation of the subsidiarity principle. (Article 263 Lisbon Lisbon Consolidated)

Hitman Actual

YES- Future Treaty amendments can be carried out on an individual "piece-wise" basis without loss of member state ratification procedures- Will lead to less confusion and misinformation for Treaty changes. (Article 48 1-6, Lisbon Consolidated)

Hitman Actual

NO- Retention of the bloated Commission in Lisbon II.

Iwasfrozen

Yes-More power to the elected European Parliament.

Hitman Actual

YES- First ever exit procedure contained in the Treaties (Article 50 Lisbon Consolidated)

Hitman Actual

YES-The role of President of the EU (European Council President) is changed to a 2.5 year term, which will provide continuity in progressing the work of the EU.

Hitman Actual

YES- Co-Decision extended to some area's of Agriculture and the Common Fisheries Policy (various Articles).

Hitman Actual

YES- Ability to opt in/out of JHA (Freedom, Security and Justice) issues on a case-by-case basis (with some small exceptions) (Protocol No.21).

Hitman Actual

YES- Improved definitions of EU defence capabilities (Common Defence Clause, Solidarity Clause, Permanent Structured Cooperation), with unanimity still key. (Various Articles) [Depending on your views on EU defence issues, this may be a reason to vote No.]

Hitman Actual

YES- Greater emphasis on cross-border co-operation in Research & Development with the creation of a European research area (Article 179 Lisbon Consolidated)

Hitman Actual

YES- "Young"-European-based European Voluntary Humanitarian Aid Corps to be created (Article 214 Lisbon Consolidated).

molloyjh

Brigantes wrote: »

I appreciate I'm getting off-topic here, but how does Lisbon reduce Irish sovereignty?

The only thing I can think of is that we lose veto power in a number of areas (none of which when you factor in the opt-outs really amount to much).

Yes - the dynamic QMV system proposed in Lisbon maintains our voting strength but makes QMV more dynamic, enabling it to handle new member states without having to be revisited.

molloyjh

Yes - Citizens Initiative (surprised noones mentioned that yet).

molloyjh

Yes - single Foreign Affairs post leading to a single point of contact, not 2, which was a constant source of confusion.

turgon

YES - Lisbon makes it easier to handle more than 27 member states


KermitTheFrog, No siders are free to post here too, if they have valuable contributions to make. That is the nature of an Internet forum. So I dont know how there is any kind of "forcing" going on.

oscarBravo

I've moved posts which argue with bullet points out of this thread, as they defeat its purpose and will just turn it into yet another spiralling argument - we've plenty of those already.

tonycascarino

NO - Hand over to the EU the power to make laws binding on us in 32 new policy areas, such as public services, crime, justice and policing, immigration, energy, transport, tourism, sport, culture, public health and the EU budget. Member States would lose the national veto they have at present in the policy areas concerned, and their National Parliaments would no longer decide laws or policy for these areas.

tonycascarino

NO - Be a power-grab by the Big States, in particular Germany, for control of the EU. By basing EU law-making primarily on population size, the Lisbon Treaty would double Germany's voting weight on the EU Council of Ministers from its present 8% under the Nice Treaty to 17%. France's vote would go from 8% to 13%, Britain's and Italy's from their current 8% each to 12% each, while Ireland's voting weight would be halved from 2% to 0.8% (Art.16 TEU)

tonycascarino

NO - Abolish each State's present right to "propose" and decide who its national Commissioner is, by replacing it with a right to make"suggestions" only for the incoming Commission President to decide (Art.17.7 TEU). The Commission, which is appointed not elected, has the monopoly of proposing all European laws. Ireland's No vote last year secured a commitment to a permanent Commissioner for all. But what is the point of every EU State continuing to have its own Commissioner post-Lisbon when it can no longer decide who that Commissioner will be? Under the present Nice Treaty Member States would continue to decide that, and can continue too to have their own national Commissioner indefinitely as well.