What Happens if No Wins again?

Hagar

turgon wrote: »

You have failed to come up with a reason for this.

You only claim was that is disrespected the wishes of the people, which is untrue because the second referendum will directly represent the wishes of the people.

How do you make that out?

Didn't the last referendum directly represent the wishes of the people? They said NO, what part of NO was unclear or ambiguous?

PopeBuckfastXVI

Hagar wrote: »

How do you make that out?

Didn't the last referendum directly represent the wishes of the people? They said NO, what part of NO was unclear or ambiguous?

What part of 'the treaty was not ratified' is unclear or ambiguous?

Martin 2

Hagar wrote: »

If you think Intel will stay because there was a YES vote you are mistaken. They, and others like them, have no loyalty to Ireland. Cheap Eastern European labour is all they are interested in.

Give us some credit for god's sake, nobody has said that Intel will stay if there is a Yes vote, there are many other things that need to be in place also such as improved competitivness etc... read the articles that I referenced. However Intel and others have said that a No "will affect how Ireland continues to be perceived internationally" and that Ireland would be "cutting itself adrift from Europe". These are perceptions but in business perception is often reality.
So on the balance sheet of whether to stay in Ireland or to leave a Yes goes firmly on the stay side along with CT and market access and a No on the leave side along with excessive costs.

marco_polo

Hagar wrote: »

How do you make that out?

Didn't the last referendum directly represent the wishes of the people? They said NO, what part of NO was unclear or ambiguous?

And so will the next one.

Hagar

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

What part of 'the treaty was not ratified' is unclear or ambiguous?

The part where the Govt said "You gave the wrong answer, now vote again so we can ratify it".

The people said NO, the Govt wants a YES so there is another referendum. That's about it.

I can't go on typing that one fact all day so I'm withdrawing from this thread. Thanks for your time and input.

Sam Vimes

Hagar wrote: »

How do you make that out?

Didn't the last referendum directly represent the wishes of the people? They said NO, what part of NO was unclear or ambiguous?

The part where they said no to common taxation, abortion, loss of neutrality, the future denial of referendums, en EU super state etc. None of those things were in the treaty so it's not quite clear why they were used as reasons to reject it

PopeBuckfastXVI

Hagar wrote: »

The part where the Govt said "You gave the wrong answer, now vote again so we can ratify it".

The people said NO, the Govt wants a YES so there is another referendum. That's about it.

I can't go on typing that one fact all day so I'm withdrawing from this thread. Thanks for your time and input.

You're welcome, and thanks for yours.

KINGVictor

Hagar wrote: »

The truth was never hidden. I said I don't care about the outcome, and that is the simple truth. It will have no effect whatsoever on me or my life. I just don't agree with the Govt asking the electorate twice. I didn't vote NO last time, in fact I didn't vote at all, I'm a French resident. I just abhor the arrogance of the Irish Govt treating the Irish people like children.

The fact is people are scared ****less and there will be an overwhelming landslide for YES this time around. If you think Intel will stay because there was a YES vote you are mistaken. They, and others like them, have no loyalty to Ireland. Cheap Eastern European labour is all they are interested in.

I second that.

It would be absolutely false to assume that there would be a correlation between our voting Yes and Continued FDI's in Ireland....that is just scaremongering.
Are folks honestly suggesting that Intel or Microsoft do care about the Lisbon treaty...NO.
They want a condusive climate for doing business ie low tax,skilled workforce,cheap wages for those skilled workers etc.Like I pointed out earlier...Businesses are transfering operations to countries where they would maximize thier profits and minimise thier costs...The Lisbon treaty cannnot and would not help them achieve those objectives.

What would make them stay in Ireland is for the Govt to stop making nonsensical statements about how the Yes vote would determine the future of Ireland and get on with the Job for which they were elected .

miju

KerranJast wrote: »

The word Ireland is tippexed off the Treaty and its re-ratified by each Parliament quickly?

they can't do this under the Nice Treaty as under that if all countries fail to ratify a treaty then that treaty doesnt come to be.

So to answer the OP. the REALITY is that if Ireland says no again then Lisbon is dead and the EU decision making process continues to operate under the articles of the Nice Treaty

sparklepants

KINGVictor wrote: »

Like I pointed out earlier...Businesses are transfering operations to countries where they would maximize thier profits and minimise thier costs...The Lisbon treaty cannnot and would not help them achieve those objectives.

Then how do you explain why they spend so much of their valuable time encouraging us to vote yes?

turgon

Hagar wrote: »

The people said NO, the Govt wants a YES so there is another referendum. That's about it.

Yep, and if the will of the people is No as you say then it will be another No. Dont worry Hager, the people will speak in the end

PopeBuckfastXVI

KINGVictor wrote: »

Are folks honestly suggesting that Intel or Microsoft do care about the Lisbon treaty...NO.

Intel is claiming that, and they would know.
Source from this very thread:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61254754&postcount=87

Paul Rellis, Managing Director of Microsoft Ireland and President of the American Chamber of Commerce is also claiming that, and he would also know.
Source, from a link by Martin2, again in this very thread:
http://www.oireachtas.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=10157&&CatID=36

P. Breathnach

KINGVictor wrote: »

... Are folks honestly suggesting that Intel or Microsoft do care about the Lisbon treaty...NO.

I have no authority to speak for Microsoft or Intel and neither, I suspect, do you. The American Chamber of Commerce in Ireland, which represents most US companies in Ireland, does care about Lisbon, and wants us to vote yes.

They want a condusive climate for doing business ie low tax,skilled workforce,cheap wages for those skilled workers etc.Like I pointed out earlier...Businesses are transfering operations to countries where they would maximize thier profits and minimise thier costs...The Lisbon treaty cannnot and would not help them achieve those objectives.

They also want to have a foothold in the EU. If we marginalise ourselves in the Union, we are a bit less attractive as a destination for FDI.

What would make them stay in Ireland is for the Govt to stop making nonsensical statements about how the Yes vote would determine the future of Ireland and get on with the Job for which they were elected .

One of the jobs for which the government was appointed is to try to ensure our future. Do you have the moral authority to tell the government that, if they believe a yes to Lisbon is the right thing for us, they should not say so?

Martin 2

KINGVictor wrote: »

Are folks honestly suggesting that Intel or Microsoft do care about the Lisbon treaty...NO.
.

Yes they do and if you had read my two previous posts(with sources) within the last 2 hours on this thread you would see that you are wrong on this point and on your other points. So here you have it from the horse's mouth:

Intel
http://siliconrepublic.com/news/arti...win-investment
http://www.businessandleadership.com...all-for-action

Microsoft
Paul Rellis, Managing Director of Microsoft Ireland & President of AMCHAM
http://www.oireachtas.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=10157&&CatID=36
http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/press/document254.pdf

NatKingColeslaw

Lisbon is a side issue in relation to our current economic downfall. At some stage the country will have to be rescued. It is very handy for the yes campaign to have some underlying threat about our economic future and the consequences of another No vote but even with a Yes or a No the country is a sinking ship and we cannot pull ourselves out of the hole. Either the IMF will step in or the threat of that happening will spur others into action.

Hagar I would be of a similar mind to yourself on the matter but my position on Lisbon is I will be voting no this time because I was lied to during the last campaign.

We were told there was no second chance.

Now that there is I can only assume I was being lied to and if that is the case then there is a good chance I am being lied to again.

Sam Vimes

NatKingColeslaw wrote: »

Hagar I would be of a similar mind to yourself on the matter but my position on Lisbon is I will be voting no this time because I was lied to during the last campaign.

We were told there was no second chance.

Now that there is I can only assume I was being lied to and if that is the case then there is a good chance I am being lied to again.

The yes side lied to you so you're voting no. But the no side also lied to you Sinn Fein's posters all had the slogan "We can get a better deal" but I see no better deal.

And why should you punish the EU's 500 million citizens by denying them this treaty because FF lied?

KINGVictor

sparklepants wrote: »

Then how do you explain why they spend so much of their valuable time encouraging us to vote yes?

I am going with the facts.
>Ireland votes NO...End of Lisbon treaty.
>Ireland still remains a member of the EU
>There would be disaffection from some member countries but Institutionally..pretty much the same...unless there is a change in the EU as we know it today.
>We would still be able to access funds as usual within the existing framework.
>Investors would still come to Ireland (from their perspective nothing has changed...Lisbon is an internal matter within a bloc)...if there are enabling economic /social factors.
In summary...all those suggesting that it would restrict FDIs because of a No vote are quite wrong.Investors go where they would make a profit.China has a woeful record with human rights ...yet there are full of investors.India does not have an efficient Infrastructural base...yet investors go there....same with Mexico,Brazil,South Africa.As long we carve a nitche for ourselves and offer investors something they would hardly find elsewhere....they would come to us irrespective of a whether we vote NO or Yes.

Tony EH

Sam Vimes wrote: »

And why should you punish the EU's 500 million citizens by denying them this treaty because FF lied?

Who's "punishing" the "EU's 500 million citizens" ?

It's only their governments that have ratified Lisbon, not the people of the EU.

Furious-Dave

I agree Sam. Lisbon and the FF issues should be dealt with separately, otherwise we could end up just shooting ourselves in the feet. FF should be dealt with after we get Lisbon out of the way.

Tony EH wrote: »

Who's "punishing" the "EU's 500 million citizens" ?

It's only their governments that have ratified Lisbon, not the people of the EU.

Scrapping the treaty will still effect all of them. Besides, it's the governments' job to ratify treaty, not the peoples'.

Sam Vimes

KINGVictor wrote: »

I am going with the facts.
>Ireland votes NO...End of Lisbon treaty.
>Ireland still remains a member of the EU
>There would be disaffection from some member countries but Institutionally..pretty much the same...unless there is a change in the EU as we know it today.
>We would still be able to access funds as usual within the existing framework.
>Investors would still come to Ireland (from their perspective nothing has changed...Lisbon is an internal matter within a bloc)...if there are enabling economic /social factors.
In summary...all those suggesting that it would restrict FDIs because of a No vote are quite wrong.Investors go where they would make a profit.China has a woeful record with human rights ...yet there are full of investors.India does not have an efficient Infrastructural base...yet investors go there....same with Mexico,Brazil,South Africa.As long we carve a nitche for ourselves and offer investors something they would hardly find elsewhere....they would come to us irrespective of a whether we vote NO or Yes.

Technically yes. But technically doesn't take account of people's prejudices. Currently we get an awful lot of money from the EU, money that could go to other causes if we use up all of the good will people have for the country.

If you were in a job I'm sure you could see the benefit of keeping your boss happy. Technically he can't do anything to you if he hates you but the reality is very different

Sam Vimes

Tony EH wrote: »

Who's "punishing" the "EU's 500 million citizens" ?

It's only their governments that have ratified Lisbon, not the people of the EU.

We're punishing them. The EU did not spend 5 years and millions putting the treaty together for the craic. It's meant to make the EU run better and more efficiently and does a host of things that make the union better. The people of the EU are being denied these improvements because you don't like Brian Cowen

PopeBuckfastXVI

KINGVictor wrote: »

I am going with the facts.
>Ireland votes NO...End of Lisbon treaty.
>Ireland still remains a member of the EU
>There would be disaffection from some member countries but Institutionally..pretty much the same...unless there is a change in the EU as we know it today.
>We would still be able to access funds as usual within the existing framework.
>Investors would still come to Ireland (from their perspective nothing has changed...Lisbon is an internal matter within a bloc)...if there are enabling economic /social factors.
In summary...all those suggesting that it would restrict FDIs because of a No vote are quite wrong.Investors go where they would make a profit.China has a woeful record with human rights ...yet there are full of investors.India does not have an efficient Infrastructural base...yet investors go there....same with Mexico,Brazil,South Africa.As long we carve a nitche for ourselves and offer investors something they would hardly find elsewhere....they would come to us irrespective of a whether we vote NO or Yes.

KV, why do you insist, against testimony from Intel and the ACCI, that FDI will not be affected, when the very companies that provide that FDI, say it *will* affect their future decisions.

You're a reasonable person, rather than denying the facts from the people who make the decisions, why don't you at least try to argue that losing some FDI won't affect us, or that while it might affect us, ratifying Lisbon would affect us in a worse way?

brianthebard

Martin 2 wrote: »

Give us some credit for god's sake, nobody has said that Intel will stay if there is a Yes vote, there are many other things that need to be in place also such as improved competitivness etc...

Eh that's exactly what the Yes side has been saying, they might not have name Intel but they've said over and over again that the MNC's will leave if we vote no, the economy will go further down the hole, Ireland will be isolated and lose business, etc, etc.

NatKingColeslaw

Sam Vimes wrote: »

The yes side lied to you so you're voting no. But the no side also lied to you Sinn Fein's posters all had the slogan "We can get a better deal" but I see no better deal.

And why should you punish the EU's 500 million citizens by denying them this treaty because FF lied?

Respectfully I didn't mention any party, just the Yes campaign. I took them at their word against the No campaign.

It is my prerogative to choose how I use my vote and even if it is for a simple stance, well I am a simple person and we are allowed to have our say too

brianthebard

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Technically yes. But technically doesn't take account of people's prejudices. Currently we get an awful lot of money from the EU, money that could go to other causes if we use up all of the good will people have for the country.

If you were in a job I'm sure you could see the benefit of keeping your boss happy. Technically he can't do anything to you if he hates you but the reality is very different

Effectively what you're saying there is that because the EU gave Ireland money we're no longer allowed an opinion that doesn't go with what the EU wants. Is that really what you believe?

Sam Vimes

NatKingColeslaw wrote: »

Respectfully I didn't mention any party, just the Yes campaign. I took them at their word against the No campaign.

That doesn't change the fact that you are voting no because the yes side lied, even though the no side lied a hundred times more. It doesn't make any sense.

And anyway, who told what lie when is completely irrelevant. You are voting on the Lisbon treaty, not on your approval or lack thereof of certain people.

PopeBuckfastXVI

brianthebard wrote: »

Effectively what you're saying there is that because the EU gave Ireland money we're no longer allowed an opinion that doesn't go with what the EU wants. Is that really what you believe?

I think what he's saying is that if we choose to differ on opinion, they won't feel obligated to furnish us with money, which is a bit different than claiming we're not allowed to have an opinion.

Maybe it's more that we're not allowed to have an opinion *and* the money.

Which I personally think is a bit simplistic, but is probably closer to what he meant.

Sam Vimes

brianthebard wrote: »

Effectively what you're saying there is that because the EU gave Ireland money we're no longer allowed an opinion that doesn't go with what the EU wants. Is that really what you believe?

No, what I'm saying is that the EU has been very good for Ireland and if we want to stop them doing something that they say is necessary, we better have a damn good reason, partly because of where they've brought us to today and partly because they don't have to continue in future.

As it stands, we don't have a damn good reason, all people are saying is "yeah I voted because I believed a pack of lies but how dare you ask me to reconsider now that I know they were lies!!!!!"

marco_polo

brianthebard wrote: »

Effectively what you're saying there is that because the EU gave Ireland money we're no longer allowed an opinion that doesn't go with what the EU wants. Is that really what you believe?

The provision of money to a large degree depends on the goodwill of our fellow member states, who by and large are strongly in favour of the treaty.

Which version of Ireland do you think they be more inclined to approve funding for?

Furious-Dave

It's not that we're not allowed to differ in opinion, there will always be difference in opinion in the EU. That's why it takes years of negotiation to come up with the treaties instead of months. What will piss the EU off is not that we disagree with the treaty, one that the Irish government was influential in forming (was it not), but that the things the people disagree with are completely irrelevant to the treaty.