What do we really want from the EU

Penrose

What do we really want from the EU, money, integration, the last no vote really has me asking this question. Are we really just scabby, do we not want to make sacrifices to help others?

Debate people!

the_dark_side

Penrose wrote: »

What do we really want from the EU, money, integration, the last no vote really has me asking this question. Are we really just scabby, do we not want to make sacrifices to help others?

Debate people!

What sacrifices would we be making?

Back to your question....What do we really want from the EU? Clarity and transparency for now, would be well recieved.

oscarBravo

the_dark_side wrote: »

What do we really want from the EU? Clarity and transparency for now, would be well recieved.

I live in hope for the day when our own government demonstrates a fraction of the clarity and transparency currently demonstrated by the EU.

Iwasfrozen

A lot of people are against the idea of a United Federation of Europe but I quite like the prospect. So I suppose I will put down greater integration and less labour restrictions.

carveone

Penrose wrote: »

What do we really want from the EU, money, integration, the last no vote really has me asking this question. Are we really just scabby, do we not want to make sacrifices to help others?

Debate people!

Hmmm. Without close ties with the EU, we would not have the Intel, Oracle, and Microsoft etc bases here, that's for sure. They are here because we provide a neat point of entry to the EMEA market place. Both companies expressed deep concern over the No result and I believe our politicians had to do some firefighting on that front (that's not pertinent to your question though and I'll try to avoid Lisbon mentions!).

I believe we also want and need the political and monetory stability the EU brings. We also need the shielding that the EU gives. I personally believe that the energy situation is going to get very unpleasant over the next 10 years and we do not really want to be sitting out here on our own trying to get Russia to turn the gas back on.

I'm not sure if we're scabby or not, but we are (were?) quite insular. When I arrived back from Africa in 1982, it was like landing on Mars. It was really quite surprising to me how noone knew anything about the world outside and noone really cared. I think we've come a long way since then, especially since the days of 1993/1994 when divorce, contraception, freedom of information and being allowed to leave the country were suddenly allowed. In 1993 most young graduates left, by 1995 most stayed.

I think the country needs a good boot up the arse every so often. :P The government needed a continuous kicking from the EU before it stopped dumping sewage into Dublin bay for example. It was the EU Commission that hammered on the Irish government in the 70s to force them to adopt work equality for women. Staggeringly enough, it was FF's Patrick Hillary that was the Commissioner for Social Affairs at the time and it was him that was complaining. Funny how he didn't get reappointed to the Commission in '76...

storinius

I think that we can also be a bit more optimistic about what we want from the EU. I see that most of the posts here are about what we get in material, or concrete terms, but I think we get a lot more in other ways.

I think that the EU offers Ireland the chance to be a part of an elite club, that is offering global leadership in a lot of ways. Take for example climate change. The EU bullied the Chinese to get their act together, and it also bullied the US to do the same.

So I think that we get a lot from the EU, but I think most importantly we get more influence over a larger amount of truly important issues on a global stage. And that is what I want from membership.

PopeBuckfastXVI

Pretty much agree Storinius, the EU does good in the world, it is my opinion that it would continue to do good without us, but not as much good.

I think we have a strong input in terms of our anti-colonial, anti-poverty, anti-injustice and generally charitable world view. I'd like to see us continue to influence and colour EU policy, which, ultimately, benefits us all.

netron

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

Pretty much agree Storinius, the EU does good in the world, it is my opinion that it would continue to do good without us, but not as much good.

I think we have a strong input in terms of our anti-colonial, anti-poverty, anti-injustice and generally charitable world view. I'd like to see us continue to influence and colour EU policy, which, ultimately, benefits us all.

the EU does good in the world? how have you come to that conclusion, considering that the EU funds Hamas with "aid"? and turns a blind eye to human rights abuses in Iran?

and how the EU imposes tariffs on the third world and blocks access to our markets? (ever notice the amount of african immigrants to our shores - there's a hint)

you're off your rocker.

this is the same EU is that is giving us a second chance to vote the CORRECT way.

and you think its "good"? christ - what brainwashing factory did you step out of? The Sea Org?

FutureTaoiseach

What I want is for an end to the expansion of Qualified Majority Voting at the expense of the national-veto. I also prefer the existing voting-system to the one proposed under Lisbon, and the retention of the rotating Presidency of the European Council. I am not opposed to EU membership, but I refuse to take lectures from EU govts on us blocking '500 million people' over Lisbon, considering we were the only one to put it to a referendum. As such, they are not comparing like with like. Politicians can be induced by the gravy-train and patronage in a way that isn't possible with electorates as a whole. I also oppose the Charter of Fundamental Rights as it will be the task of the European Court of Justice to interpret it and that means taking a big risk that they will not do so in an overly integrationist way. The fact that Ireland was supported last August by a number of large member states including the UK, France and Germany in the Metock case suggests to me that even in the eyes of member states that agree relevant EU measures at the time (such as the Freedom of Movement Directive pertinant to that case), the ECJ is guilty of overstepping the mark in terms of respecting the principle subsidiarity.

Whilst opposing the further transfer of sovereignty to EU institutions, I favour increasing the input of national-parliaments and the citizen e.g. through a citizens-petition in EU decisionmaking. While acknowledging the Protocol on the Role of National Parliaments and the Citizenship Petition are positive steps in this direction, their purely advisory character leaves me disappointed and dissatisfied in terms of how it causes me to regard the Lisbon Treaty as a whole. This was a missed opportunity to return real power to the member states and their legislatures. Instead, the democratic-deficit has been used as a pretext to further centralise power in the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers through co-decision and expansion of Qualified Majority Voting. A lot of people don't realise that while expansion of co-decision will allow the European Parliament to veto an amend more EU legislation during its passage, that it also involves removal of the corresponding national-vetoes on the Council of Ministers. The voting-system of QMV means that 4 states with over 35% of the EU's population between them will have a blocking-minority. Using that mechanism to choose the President of the European Council effectively means that 4 Big States can block all candidates that displease them. This replaces the existing equal rotation of the Presidency between all member states, without which Ireland would likely would not have had an opportunity to Preside over EU business in the past.