Lisbon 2 The Return!

AckwelFoley

hardcore wrote: »

I'm going to vote No again, maybe I mightnt vote actually as I voted already and we shouldnt be bullied like this into a second referendum.

we're not being bullied.

You are entitled to vote no again.

davyjose

snyper wrote: »

Ill put it this way to you..

If we knew nothing about the treaty at all, i think the fact that the ONLY political party that are against it is those communist/terrorist cruds Sinn Fein / IRA should be the hint that YES is a positive move.

What a stupid, opinionated, misguided comment.

I voted no the last time, I'll be voting yes this time. I know for a fact severeal multinationals are getting twitchy about staying here, with the possibility of another no vote.

I respect anyone with principles, but I also know that principles won't save this country. I regret voting no the first time.

RandomName2

snyper wrote: »

Well, that is the net effect of a global recession. However my point still stands, we are better off being part of a massive ship in rough waters than being on our own in an inflaitable life raft

Oh true. But that's seperate from Lisbon (unless we get chucked out of Europe for arrogantly rejecting Lisbon a second time )

AckwelFoley

davyjose wrote: »

What a stupid, opinionated, misguided comment.

.

Exactly what part of my comment was misguided or stupid?

They were the only party supporting a no vote.

RandomName2

hardcore wrote: »

I'm going to vote No again, maybe I mightnt vote actually as I voted already and we shouldnt be bullied like this into a second referendum.

We aren't being bullied. Can you not hear the people crying 'Second Vote, Second vote'? Oh sorry, no they're calling for a general election, my mistake...

AckwelFoley

RandomName2 wrote: »

Oh true. But that's seperate from Lisbon (unless we get chucked out of Europe for arrogantly rejecting Lisbon a second time )

Essentially, its not separate from Lisbon, we are not going to get "chucked out" but we wont hold out status if we choose not to be part of tomorrows europe.

Going back to my analogy.. we will be in rough water in the inflaitable raft..but we'll have a tow rope attached to the big ship rather than being on it..

utick

so if lisbon 2 gets rejected how long will it take for them to come out with lisbon 3 for us

AckwelFoley

utick wrote: »

so if lisbon 2 gets rejected how long will it take for them to come out with lisbon 3 for us

They wont

RandomName2

snyper wrote: »

Essentially, its not separate from Lisbon, we are not going to get "chucked out" but we wont hold out status if we choose not to be part of tomorrows europe.

Going back to my analogy.. we will be in rough water in the inflaitable raft..but we'll have a tow rope attached to the big ship rather than being on it..

Our status? Our status? How does rubber-stamping corelate to status? To be afraid of making an decision independent of the EU leaders?

Let's see ourselves, for a moment, as powerful as the US or China. Why should we feel our decision is predicated upon the material strength of our country. Since when has that been a barometer of what is right or wrong?

The EU has benefitted the Irish economy. This is an inalieanble fact. It's true. Fine. But there is only so many ways that this aspect of our membership can be dressed up without its repitition becomming staid and, what's more, a tangent to the discussion at hand. Which it is fast becomming.

What has the economy got to do with Lisbon Two? Everything, and nothing. It is another chimera. Lisbon is pure politics, and voting based upon the economy is to assume petty grudges on the part of the Commission and Consilium. I for one am not going to base my vote purely in the hope of some sort of appeasment of Berlusconi, Merkle, or Brown.

We are told that the people who voted No didn't read the treaty (we aren't told much about those who voted Yes as they aren't the problem). That's true, most of those who voted No didn't read the treaty.

But the Treaty is simple. The issue is simple: Do you want to make the EU more powerful? (More streamlined, faster at producing laws, less vetoes, greater authority, all the rest).

If you are afraid of voting No now, why in God's name would you enact a Constitutional Ammendment granting more authority to the Commission, Consilium and EU Parliament?

Tomorrow's europe? Tomorrow is tomorrow when the Sun rises in the east. I need no new law to make me a European tomorrow.

twinytwo

MaGrOtTeN wrote: »

That's a poor reason IMO, it wasn't required that all the people of the EU vote. I have explained why already in this thread.

Why don't you vote for what's really best for Ireland?
And what has been best for decades?

Voting Yes in Lisbon allows the EU to streamline it's decision making process and function more efficiently without the wheels of Europe grinding to a halt every time an amendment is needed.

Maybe the EU should carry on regardless if this is the reaction, and Ireland should be given an option to vote on leaving the EU. Oh dear.....

And we no the reasons as to why this was done... and also why we must have the vote done and dusted before the general elections in england... If people here actually think the EU would give too ****s if we went belly up tomorrow.. then you need your head examined.

twinytwo

snyper wrote: »

They wont

there wont be a third vote because the labour party will be gone in england... if the vote is passed this time it will be because of peoples fear of the recession... Even though voting yes to lisbon will done nothing for this country.. The EU misled people over Nice as they did with this... The fact that a democratic vote was disregarded is enough to vote no again

Dinner

twinytwo wrote: »

And we no the reasons as to why this was done...

Because it is done in accordance with their constitutions. In some countries like Holland and Germany binding referenda are illegal so it has to be done through their parliment. No conspiracies there. But I'm sure you'll carry on believing that it was te faceless elites trying to suppress democracy.

granite man

The EU helped get us in this mess in the first place by creating interest rates that suited the German economy, not ours, the Greeks, Spanish etc. If you actually worked out what this 'crisis' has cost us compared to the amount the EU has put in you might see the european model might not be quite as beneficial to us as a lot of people make out it is. We also loose a lot of voting rights while the larger countries gain more power.
If the Irish people actually gave a crap about whats going on, they'd stop complaining and start changing things. To busy being sheep I suppose.

twinytwo

Dinner wrote: »

Because it is done in accordance with their constitutions. In some countries like Holland and Germany binding referenda are illegal so it has to be done through their parliment. No conspiracies there. But I'm sure you'll carry on believing that it was te faceless elites trying to suppress democracy.

ah but it lies in the fact that the lisbon treaty is referred to as a treaty and not a constituation.. which rules every country except us out of having a vote... forcing them to go through their governments who would vote yes even if their people wanted no...coincidence?.. i think not As we saw in 2005? the french people voted no to the EU constituation.. this time the EU made sure they could bypass the people does this goes against the whole point of the EU?. The EU is controlled by money thus the money powerhouses control the show... the treaty in the long run benefits them not us.

We voted no so its easy for EU to disregard our no vote... had the french,engilsh or italians voted no(which they would have had they been given the chance) it would not have been so easy to throw aside.. which is like i said exactly the reason why EU had to have our vote done before the general elections in England.

as for your last comment what part of this whole farce do you consider to be democratic?

Absolute power corrupts.....?

granite man

Another point I'd like to make is the one of 'culture'. Every European nation has its own way of doing things,they still have their grieviances between one another and find it difficult to talk to each other never mind come to an agreement. How is all this streamlining etc going to affect this? Will more laws that primarily benefit the likes of Britain, Germany and France be impossed on us as were the crazy interest rates?
Not one piece of informative literature has come through any postbox in Ireland to define what this 'document' means apart from a lovely postcard telling you to vote yes. I don't trust them. Whether you do or not is your perogitive.

Dinner

twinytwo wrote: »

ah but it lies in the fact that the lisbon treaty is referred to as a treaty and not a constituation.. which rules every country except us out of having a vote... forcing them to go through their governments who would vote yes even if their people wanted no...coincidence?.. i think not.

It doesn't matter what you call it. Binding referenda are illegal by Dutch law. So in the case of the EU Constitution the Dutch govt. decided to have a non-binding referendum, where it would be a guage of opinion and the decision would still rest with parliment. But after the vote the Dutch courts ruled that the referendum was, in fact, binding. That meant that any subsequent referendum would also be binding and, therefore, illegal.

twinytwo wrote: »

as for your last comment what part of this whole farce do you consider to be democratic?

France and the Netherlands reject the EU Constitution, the governments ask why. The findings are that there were objections with the contents of the EU Constitution. Note- The problems were actually in the document.

Therefore the constitution was scrapped, the bits Lisbon. Do you see anything undemocratic thus far?

So Lisbon was put to vote in Ireland and rejected. The government, through surveys such as the Millward Brown survey, ask why. The findings were that 42% of no voters didn't understand the treaty. This is largely failings in the yes camp but people also need to put in the effort temselves. 26% voted no for issues such as neutrality, abortion, taxation and other issues.

The government went back to Europe with the these issues. Despite that fact that many of the concerns had nothing to do with the treaty, the EU decided to draw up some legally binding guarantees (which hold the same weight as the guarantees given to Denmark after they rejected Maastrict and also the Good Friday Agreement). They drew up these protocols to satisfy the concerns that they had discovered through the surveys.

With these concerns dealt with, the next logical step was to hold a second referendum. Which bit is undemocratic? The bit where te EU sorts out some of our concerns even though they don't have anything to do with the treaty? Or the bit where the public are been given a chance to change their mind since some of their concerns have been satisified?

PrettyInPunk

Ooh my vote just evened it to 121:121 votes both side. I actually will be unable to vote as i will be in Canada, but if i were able to i would vote Yes again.

I think it may be passed this time and i hope it does, i think we will look foolish in the eyes of the EU if it isnt

twinytwo

Dinner wrote: »

It doesn't matter what you call it. Binding referenda are illegal by Dutch law. So in the case of the EU Constitution the Dutch govt. decided to have a non-binding referendum, where it would be a guage of opinion and the decision would still rest with parliment. But after the vote the Dutch courts ruled that the referendum was, in fact, binding. That meant that any subsequent referendum would also be binding and, therefore, illegal.



France and the Netherlands reject the EU Constitution, the governments ask why. The findings are that there were objections with the contents of the EU Constitution. Note- The problems were actually in the document.

Therefore the constitution was scrapped, the bits Lisbon. Do you see anything undemocratic thus far?

So Lisbon was put to vote in Ireland and rejected. The government, through surveys such as the Millward Brown survey, ask why. The findings were that 42% of no voters didn't understand the treaty. This is largely failings in the yes camp but people also need to put in the effort temselves. 26% voted no for issues such as neutrality, abortion, taxation and other issues.

The government went back to Europe with the these issues. Despite that fact that many of the concerns had nothing to do with the treaty, the EU decided to draw up some legally binding guarantees (which hold the same weight as the guarantees given to Denmark after they rejected Maastrict and also the Good Friday Agreement). They drew up these protocols to satisfy the concerns that they had discovered through the surveys.

With these concerns dealt with, the next logical step was to hold a second referendum. Which bit is undemocratic? The bit where te EU sorts out some of our concerns even though they don't have anything to do with the treaty? Or the bit where the public are been given a chance to change their mind since some of their concerns have been satisified?

Maybe the fact they made sure that the french people would not be able to vote this time around?... if they are so sure this is what the people want why would they prevent them from voting?

Dinner

twinytwo wrote: »

Maybe the fact they made sure that the french people would not be able to vote this time around?... if they are so sure this is what the people want why would they prevent them from voting?

'They' didn't make sure of anything. In the run up to the 2007 French General Election, Sarkozy made no secret of the fact that he would ratify Lisbon without a referendum. He was then elected. Now I know that people don't vote in a GE based solely on one issue, but since the election there has been no public outcry of people demanding a referendum, similarily, before the election there was no public outcry demanding one either.

BlitzKrieg

how bizarre that the yes vote is momentarily leading...

I was use to it always being 20 votes behind.

uprising

snyper wrote: »

Essentially, its not separate from Lisbon, we are not going to get "chucked out" but we wont hold out status if we choose not to be part of tomorrows europe.

Going back to my analogy.. we will be in rough water in the inflaitable raft..but we'll have a tow rope attached to the big ship rather than being on it..

We will be on the fukking mosney pedal boat being dragged by the mother ship on a poxxy ball of twine if we vote yes.

see lisbon treaty for dummies..
http://www.independent.ie/special-features/your-eu/the-lisbon-treaty-for-dummies-1376340.html

8. Redistribution of voting weights between member states

The changes mean that it will be easier to pass legislation, and more difficult to block it. Countries with smaller populations will have less chance of blocking legislation.

So where does that leave Ireland?, 4 million of us, wimpering as legislation is fukked on us that we have no say in, and you say we'll be fukked if its not passed.?
Think again

K-9

snyper wrote: »

There are many things i dont like about europe, such as their requests that we cease cutting or bogs, and restrictive agri policies however the pros insurmountibly out weigh the negatives of being part of europe.


The bottom line is Irlenad is up **** creek at the moment, and the only paddle we have is the one that being given to us by europe

Actually you can scrap the bogs issue to. A small percentage of our bogs are being set aside for preservation. It is nowhere near as big an issue as some make out. Same goes for eel fishing, the EU recommended a 20-40% cut, our Govt. brought in a 100% cut. Remember our Govt. blaming the EU for school water rate? Turned out to be crap!

RandomName2 wrote: »

From the looks of it Europe is f****d too. Besides which the 'handouts' had mostly stopped before the recession anyway (on the grounds that we should be PAYING BACK by now). Besides which there is eastern europe which investment will be focused upon.

Besides which we already made ourselves look 'bad' by voting no the first time - it's a bit too late to say 'woops! Please still like us.'

I support a union with Angola in the expectation of a large bail-out for the Irish economy.

Actually, it was expected to be 2012/13 before we'd be a net payer, God knows when that will be now. European countries who followed sensible economic policies are doing ok, better than most. Ireland, Spain and Latvia, countries who gambled on property speculation are up the s*its. They just had crappy Govts., unlike other some other EU countries.

RandomName2 wrote: »

We aren't being bullied. Can you not hear the people crying 'Second Vote, Second vote'? Oh sorry, no they're calling for a general election, my mistake...

Seems a few actually want a third vote! LOL

utick wrote: »

so if lisbon 2 gets rejected how long will it take for them to come out with lisbon 3 for us

A few on this thread actually want a 3rd vote after FF are booted out.

RandomName2 wrote: »

Tomorrow's europe? Tomorrow is tomorrow when the Sun rises in the east. I need no new law to make me a European tomorrow.

Voting for or against Lisbon will not make you more or less of a European.

twinytwo wrote: »

And we no the reasons as to why this was done... and also why we must have the vote done and dusted before the general elections in england... If people here actually think the EU would give too ****s if we went belly up tomorrow.. then you need your head examined.

They do give a crap. It's a common currency, it would affect their currency, which so many would love seeing it fail.

twinytwo wrote: »

there wont be a third vote because the labour party will be gone in england... if the vote is passed this time it will be because of peoples fear of the recession... Even though voting yes to lisbon will done nothing for this country.. The EU misled people over Nice as they did with this... The fact that a democratic vote was disregarded is enough to vote no again

Lisbon is ratified in England. The Tories, if elected should do the honorable thing and call a referenda on the EU, not Lisbon. Clear the air for onnce and for all, not pussy foot around it.

granite man wrote: »

The EU helped get us in this mess in the first place by creating interest rates that suited the German economy, not ours, the Greeks, Spanish etc. If you actually worked out what this 'crisis' has cost us compared to the amount the EU has put in you might see the european model might not be quite as beneficial to us as a lot of people make out it is.

Did you work it out?

The EU did not put us in this mess. If FF had followed the experts and scrapped Mortgage Interest relief and property incentives, there would have been no Property bubble.

Interest rates went up in 06, the very thing some No campaigners say they should have done earlier. Guess what our Govt. did? Double Mortgage Interest Relief to boost the property market! Yes! Somebody paying 2k a month on a mortgage was entitled to tax relief!

granite man wrote:

We also loose a lot of voting rights while the larger countries gain more power.

Any figures on this one? I'll be disappointed if you pull the .8% fib!

twinytwo wrote: »

ah but it lies in the fact that the lisbon treaty is referred to as a treaty and not a constituation.. which rules every country except us out of having a vote...

Not true. The semantics of a Treaty or Constitution means nothing.

granite man wrote: »

Another point I'd like to make is the one of 'culture'. Every European nation has its own way of doing things,they still have their grieviances between one another and find it difficult to talk to each other never mind come to an agreement. How is all this streamlining etc going to affect this? Will more laws that primarily benefit the likes of Britain, Germany and France be impossed on us as were the crazy interest rates?

That makes no sense. In one line you say countries find it hard to agree, in another you say countries will impose on us!

twinytwo wrote: »

Maybe the fact they made sure that the french people would not be able to vote this time around?... if they are so sure this is what the people want why would they prevent them from voting?

Their constitution isn't altered. Jaysus the French can riot over plenty of things, but I've yet to see one over Lisbon!

Kev_ps3

I think it would be good if we could see who votes for what. I wouldnt be surprised if there was a few double accounts for the yes side

K-9

uprising wrote: »

8. Redistribution of voting weights between member states

The changes mean that it will be easier to pass legislation, and more difficult to block it. Countries with smaller populations will have less chance of blocking legislation.

So where does that leave Ireland?, 4 million of us, wimpering as legislation is fukked on us that we have no say in, and you say we'll be fukked if its not passed.?
Think again

You sure it is harder to block?

BlitzKrieg

Kev_ps3 wrote: »

I think it would be good if we could see who votes for what. I wouldnt be surprised if there was a few double accounts for the yes side

Why do you think that?

galwayrush

I'm doing the same as last time, not voting, because i still don't understand it.:(

Kev_ps3

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

Why do you think that?

sudden surge in the yes vote..with the anti-democratic nature of the yes side:pac:

uprising

K-9 wrote: »

You sure it is harder to block?

Read the article attached

Edit:

One of them yes votes is from me, I jumped too soon, on the poll I read: " I will be voting" thinking I will be voting?, yes I will, I'll be voting no, clicked yes before I saw "NOT VOTING" as an option and realised I'd fukked up.

Ibrahimovic91

Great to see

K-9

Kev_ps3 wrote: »

I think it would be good if we could see who votes for what. I wouldnt be surprised if there was a few double accounts for the yes side

Of course, No campaigners wouldn't pull that stunt!

galwayrush wrote: »

I'm doing the same as last time, not voting, because i still don't understand it.:(

I suppose it depends on how in depth you want to go. You can read the whole treaty, a consolidated version (mostly just the changes), the Dept. of Foreign Affairs version (arguably the Govt. version but still a good read on how the EU actually works, which very few actually are aware of, on both Yes and No sides), the Referendum Commissiion site, their small booklet on it etc.

If anything, there is too much info out there and it confuses the average voter who usually doesn't have the time or inclination to study it at length.

uprising wrote: »

Read the article attached

Edit:

One of them yes votes is from me, I jumped too soon, on the poll I read: " I will be voting" thinking I will be voting?, yes I will, I'll be voting no, clicked yes before I saw "NOT VOTING" as an option and realised I'd fukked up.

Ah, the Indo! I glanced at it this morning.