Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

UK Independence Party to become involved in the No campaign

Options
1235

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    bill_ashmount
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,047 ✭✭✭bill_ashmount


    PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »
    It's more than that.

    Irish subsidiaries of MNC's are actually Irish companies, so you have Intel Ireland Ltd. which is a separate, Irish registered company, from Intel (for instance).

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Ireland

    So we in effect, have the GM of an Irish Corporation, speaking out on what he believes will allow him to increase or sustain inward investment into Ireland, which in turn directly creates high quality Irish jobs.

    A bit different to a foreign political party attempting to directly impact the result of an Irish-only matter (i.e. does Ireland approve the Lisbon treaty), for domestic gain (i.e. Britain's position, and UKIP's position within Britain).

    Maybe I am wrong but I didn't think the money was coming from the GM, I thought it was coming from Intel. Can you link me to where the GM is spending his own money on this?


  • Options
    #123
    bill_ashmount
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,047 ✭✭✭bill_ashmount


    Martin 2 wrote: »
    As you know Jim O'Hara is the GM of Intel Ireland but he has also been active with EI and SFI in promoting start-up businesses, science & engineering in education and the ICT sector in general, those are not the actions of someone purely interested in increasing Intel's bottom line. It was even said a few years ago that Intel's presence here had been so successful in attracting further multinationals that the demand for engineers and technicians was creating shortages for Intel itself.

    Intel are in Ireland to make profit. That is the only reason they are here.


  • Options
    #124
    PopeBuckfastXVI
    Registered Users Posts: 5,155 ✭✭✭PopeBuckfastXVI


    bill_ashmount wrote: »
    Intel are in Ireland to make profit. That is the only reason they are here.

    Nothing in his post contradicts that.


  • Options
    #125
    PopeBuckfastXVI
    Registered Users Posts: 5,155 ✭✭✭PopeBuckfastXVI


    bill_ashmount wrote: »
    Maybe I am wrong but I didn't think the money was coming from the GM, I thought it was coming from Intel. Can you link me to where the GM is spending his own money on this?

    How much money, and where is it going?

    Can you link me where this money is coming from Intel, as opposed to Intel Ireland Ltd?


  • Options
    #126
    bill_ashmount
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,047 ✭✭✭bill_ashmount


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    You're certainly free to simply ignore my reasons. However, it has been the Irish personnel of the MNCs who have come out to speak pro-Lisbon. That suggests that far from it being a matter of shareholder profits, it's a matter of Irish people who work for those MNCs being concerned.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw

    I am not ignoring your reasons, I said I didn't understand the way it was written. Your second sentence here seems to suggest it is the employees who are paying for the ads, I believe Intel are paying for the ads? Perhaps I am wrong. I would like to see a link though if one is available.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    bill_ashmount
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,047 ✭✭✭bill_ashmount


    PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »
    How much money, and where is it going?

    Can you link me where this money is coming from Intel, as opposed to Intel Ireland Ltd?

    The money is coming from the American MNC Intel.


  • Options
    #128
    bill_ashmount
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,047 ✭✭✭bill_ashmount


    PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »
    Nothing in his post contradicts that.

    I never said it did.


  • Options
    #129
    PopeBuckfastXVI
    Registered Users Posts: 5,155 ✭✭✭PopeBuckfastXVI


    bill_ashmount wrote: »
    The money is coming from the American MNC Intel.

    How much money, and where is it going, and can you prove your assertion that Intel Ltd. as opposed to Intel Ireland Ltd. is providing this money of which you speak?


  • Options
    #130
    PopeBuckfastXVI
    Registered Users Posts: 5,155 ✭✭✭PopeBuckfastXVI


    bill_ashmount wrote: »
    I never said it did.

    Why did you quote his post if you weren't addressing it then, and instead just making random statements?


  • Options
    #131
    Martin 2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 268 ✭✭Martin 2


    bill_ashmount wrote: »
    Intel are in Ireland to make profit. That is the only reason they are here.
    Of course they are but making a profit and helping Ireland are not mutually exclusive activities in fact I'd say they are strongly related. Remember most of Intel Ireland's employees and executives are Irish so it is not unreasonable that they would act in Ireland's as well as Intel's best interests.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    bill_ashmount
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,047 ✭✭✭bill_ashmount


    PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »
    Why did you quote his post if you weren't addressing it then, and instead just making random statements?

    You seem to just want to nit-pick over every post.

    He stated that the GM was interested in more than Intels bottom line, I stated that Intel were here for profit and no other reason. These statements do not contradict each other. They explain the motives behind two entitys.


  • Options
    #133
    PopeBuckfastXVI
    Registered Users Posts: 5,155 ✭✭✭PopeBuckfastXVI


    bill_ashmount wrote: »
    You seem to just want to nit-pick over every post.

    He stated that the GM was interested in more than Intels bottom line, I stated that Intel were here for profit and no other reason. These statements do not contradict each other. They explain the motives behind two entitys.

    Well it appeared you were attempting to refute his post, as opposed to opening a different topic. You might want to avoid that confusion in future, by not quoting posts to which your statement's don't apply.


  • Options
    #134
    bill_ashmount
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,047 ✭✭✭bill_ashmount


    PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »
    Well it appeared you were attempting to refute his post, as opposed to opening a different topic. You might want to avoid that confusion in future, by not quoting posts to which your statement's don't apply.

    Keep on nit-picking.


  • Options
    #135
    bill_ashmount
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,047 ✭✭✭bill_ashmount


    PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »
    How much money, and where is it going, and can you prove your assertion that Intel Ltd. as opposed to Intel Ireland Ltd. is providing this money of which you speak?

    Now you are basing your argument on the fact that they are different companies? Everyone knows they are the same company, even if their Ireland division has a local name.


  • Options
    #136
    bill_ashmount
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,047 ✭✭✭bill_ashmount


    Martin 2 wrote: »
    Of course they are but making a profit and helping Ireland are not mutually exclusive activities in fact I'd say they are strongly related. Remember most of Intel Ireland's employees and executives are Irish so it is not unreasonable that they would act in Ireland's as well as Intel's best interests.

    My original argument was if people, parties, companies outside Ireland can help the YES campaign then why can't the NO campaign receive help.
    I believe if a MNC was helping the NO campaign instead of the YES campaign, all the YES campaigners would be going beserk.

    If Intel are helping their Irish employees then I put it to you that UKIP are helping people of British extraction living in Ireland to make their minds up. Therefore what they are doing is fine.


  • Options
    #137
    PopeBuckfastXVI
    Registered Users Posts: 5,155 ✭✭✭PopeBuckfastXVI


    bill_ashmount wrote: »
    Now you are basing your argument on the fact that they are different companies? Everyone knows they are the same company, even if their Ireland division has a local name.

    You obviously don't understand how MNC's work in Ireland, especially the different budgetary powers they have, as well as their continued need to justify investment from the parent company.

    Which explains your position, I guess.


  • Options
    #138
    bill_ashmount
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,047 ✭✭✭bill_ashmount


    PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »
    You obviously don't understand how MNC's work in Ireland, especially the different budgetary powers they have, as well as their continued need to justify investment from the parent company.

    Which explains your position, I guess.

    I understand fully how they work, my position stands.

    What does "their continued need to justify investment from the parent company" have to do with supporting a YEs campaign?


  • Options
    #139
    PopeBuckfastXVI
    Registered Users Posts: 5,155 ✭✭✭PopeBuckfastXVI


    bill_ashmount wrote: »
    What does "their continued need to justify investment from the parent company" have to do with supporting a YEs campaign?

    One would presume that it's easier to win investment in a parent company with subsidiaries worldwide, were the country one is operating in not the one that (rightly or wrongly) has been seen to 'rock the boat' of the European project, and which a decision maker in the US or elsewhere might view as not being as stable a member of the EU as another location.

    It's all about perception, and whether you agree with the perception or not is not all that important to me as I doubt you are either in a position to funnel millions of foreign dollars into employing Irish people, or in the position of negotiating with a person who is.


  • Options
    #140
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    bill_ashmount wrote: »
    My original argument was if people, parties, companies outside Ireland can help the YES campaign then why can't the NO campaign receive help.
    I believe if a MNC was helping the NO campaign instead of the YES campaign, all the YES campaigners would be going beserk.

    If Intel are helping their Irish employees then I put it to you that UKIP are helping people of British extraction living in Ireland to make their minds up. Therefore what they are doing is fine.

    No, because the point remains exactly as it did at the beginning. Whatever downside consequences there may be for Ireland, UKIP will not be affected by them. Intel Ireland will be.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Options
    #141
    bill_ashmount
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,047 ✭✭✭bill_ashmount


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    No, because the point remains exactly as it did at the beginning. Whatever downside consequences there may be for Ireland, UKIP will not be affected by them. Intel Ireland will be.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


    The YES campaigners have been arguing that a NO vote will be bad for Europe, I put it then, therefore it will be be bad for UKIP because they are in Europe. This is the exact same as your reasoning above.

    My point is 100% right


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    PopeBuckfastXVI
    Registered Users Posts: 5,155 ✭✭✭PopeBuckfastXVI


    bill_ashmount wrote: »
    The YES campaigners have been arguing that a NO vote will be bad for Europe, I put it then, therefore it will be be bad for UKIP because they are in Europe. This is the exact same as your reasoning above.

    My point is 100% right

    If UKIP believed that a Yes was good for Europe, and by extension Britain, I personally would still object to them campaigning for a Yes in Ireland.


  • Options
    #143
    bill_ashmount
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,047 ✭✭✭bill_ashmount


    PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »
    If UKIP believed that a Yes was good for Europe, and by extension Britain, I personally would still object to them campaigning for a Yes in Ireland.

    Ok.

    I believe if MNCs are getting involved, then others should be allowed to as well. Lets leave it at that. :)


  • Options
    #144
    PopeBuckfastXVI
    Registered Users Posts: 5,155 ✭✭✭PopeBuckfastXVI


    bill_ashmount wrote: »
    Ok.

    I believe if MNCs are getting involved, then others should be allowed to as well. Lets leave it at that. :)

    I still don't see what it has to do with MNC's, you can argue and defend your position without reference to them.

    But ok :)


  • Options
    #145
    ixtlan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,213 ✭✭✭ixtlan


    bill_ashmount wrote: »
    My original argument was if people, parties, companies outside Ireland can help the YES campaign then why can't the NO campaign receive help.
    I believe if a MNC was helping the NO campaign instead of the YES campaign, all the YES campaigners would be going beserk.

    If Intel are helping their Irish employees then I put it to you that UKIP are helping people of British extraction living in Ireland to make their minds up. Therefore what they are doing is fine.

    While absolutely not liking it I would not ban them, but I would like people to understand what's going.

    If a MNC was helping the NO campaign, I don't think the Yes people would be going berserk, I think we would be struck speechless.

    I think it is very instructive to explain to people who is promoting each side.

    Intel is interested because it thinks a Yes will boost the European and global economy or perhaps more accurately a No would damage it. I'm not talking about disaster... maybe the difference would be 0.5% or 0.25% or 0.1%, no one knows, but Intel obvioulsy feel it's better with a yes. And obviously any fraction of a percent improvement in growth helps Irish employment and economic prospects.

    So why is UKIP interested? Because their goal is to withdraw Britain from the EU and they see this as a way of damaging the Eu and hastening their own countries departure. This is their stated policy.

    You analogy is false. Intel is helping itself, but we can see that a benefit to it will be a benefit to us. UKIP is helping itself, but is damaging the EU and trying to split it up of benefit to us?

    Ix.


  • Options
    #146
    PJS
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1 ✭PJS


    Typical No rant- don't let the facts get in the way of a bit of hysteria- use your wiki machine next time you have the urge to make something up. FYI Dun Laoghaire voted Yes to Lisbon in 08 and elected a Sinn Fein MP in 1918

    free to prosper wrote: »
    Yesmen are quite happy for all and sundry from self aggrandising EU institutions to come and get involved in an Irish referendum.

    Ukip as a party is not get directly involved in anything in Ireland. As is normal, an EU parliamentary group - Freedom and Independence group will fund any activity in Ireland.
    THis is normal practice - many EU parliament groups are funding Lisbon referendum activities in Ireland.
    Given that the Yes side is outspending the No side at least 10 to 1, I'm personally quite happy to see some No side funding come in.

    The Yes side know that Lisbon has no benefits for Ireland so they can only move forward by slandering everybody on the no side and dishonestly spouting about membership of the EU - when it is not in doubt in any way.

    Its also interesting that the parts of the Republic which voted UNionist in the 1918? election also has the highest Yes to Lisbon in the last referendum.
    A comparative map of vote in both elections would be enlightening.

    Places like Dun Laoghaire which were UK Unionist are now Euro Unionist.

    Grovelling Yesmen love to work for an empire - any empire will do.


  • Options
    #147
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    bill_ashmount wrote: »
    The YES campaigners have been arguing that a NO vote will be bad for Europe, I put it then, therefore it will be be bad for UKIP because they are in Europe. This is the exact same as your reasoning above.

    My point is 100% right

    I'm happy you're happy with it, but I can't agree. We're talking about Ireland here, and an Irish vote. if UKIP believe the Treaty is bad for Europe, they can campaign in the UK. That way, if there are any negative consequences for the UK specifically, UKIP will get to live with the consequences of their campaign, and people who voted for UKIP can hold them to account, or not.

    UKIP do not have to live with any negative consequences for Ireland, and Irish people cannot hold them to account in any way. The same is not true for the Irish-based MNCs.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Options
    #148
    free to prosper
    Closed Accounts Posts: 106 ✭✭free to prosper


    Nigel Farage the leader of the EUrope of Freedom and Democracy Group in the EU Parliament. It is this group which is funding a Lisbon information leaflet .

    UKIP is one of a number of parties which is helping fund the leaflet.

    Incidently, he is NO longer leader of UKIP - he stood down on Saturday to concentrate on his political work in the EU Parliament.

    But the Freedom and Democracy group is making a humble effort and I certainly hope that its information leaflet on Lisbon will be helpful.

    The leaflet I am sure doesn't tell people how to vote, it simply imparts important information of Lisbon, people should know before they vote.

    IBEC, Intel, and Ryanair have lined out beside the government, most of the media, and the EC Commission to convince us that we should change the Irish Constitution and hand over more political power to EU institutions.

    In terms of finance, it really is a case of the people versus the political class. In this David versus Goliath contest, the Europe of Freedom and Democracy group have said they are willing to reach out a helping hand to the Irish people.

    I welcome their help on the No side.


  • Options
    #149
    free to prosper
    Closed Accounts Posts: 106 ✭✭free to prosper


    I detest the blatant racism of the Yesmen scraping the barrel with their talk of 'anglo-saxon' this and that.

    They really have no arguments in favour of Lisbon and so must play the racist card. If someone dropped the same references to race about a Pole or Nigerian there would rightfully be uproar.

    Funnily,
    it is the West Brits who voted unionist in 1918 - South Dublin, Dun Laoghaire

    which are the same areas last time which voted in favour of lisbon.

    British unionists have just become Euro unionists.

    Grovelling Yesmen just want to work for an empire.

    They obviously need be be told what to do.

    Ok then, I tell them here, do yourself and your country a favour,

    Vote No to Lisbon.


  • Options
    #150
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    free to prosper wrote: »
    I detest the blatant racism of the Yesmen scraping the barrel with their talk of 'anglo-saxon' this and that.

    They really have no arguments in favour of Lisbon and so must play the racist card. If someone dropped the same references to race about a Pole or Nigerian there would rightfully be uproar.

    Funnily,
    it is the West Brits who voted unionist in 1918 - South Dublin, Dun Laoghaire

    which are the same areas last time which voted in favour of lisbon.

    British unionists have just become Euro unionists.

    Grovelling Yesmen just want to work for an empire.

    They obviously need be be told what to do.

    Ok then, I tell them here, do yourself and your country a favour,

    Vote No to Lisbon.

    I feel you're insulting me but I just can't seem to really figure out what the hell you're talking about. Did it make sense in your head?

    I'll bet people love you at parties.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    meglome
    Registered Users Posts: 7,980 ✭✭✭meglome


    free to prosper wrote: »
    Nigel Farage the leader of the EUrope of Freedom and Democracy Group in the EU Parliament. It is this group which is funding a Lisbon information leaflet .

    UKIP is one of a number of parties which is helping fund the leaflet.

    Ah okay so it's just a group of organisations that are not from Ireland interfering in our elections. Well that's much better then.

    What is it about organisations that have freedom and truth in their names that usually means they are not interested in any such things.
    free to prosper wrote: »
    Incidently, he is longer leader of UKIP - he stood down on Saturday to concentrate on my political work in the EU Parliament.

    A whole three days, well that's okay then. (Interesting use of 'my' instead of 'his' in that sentence.)
    free to prosper wrote: »
    But the Freedom and Democracy group is making a humble effort and I certainly hope that its information leaflet on Lisbon will be helpful.

    Given the right wing anti-EU views many of these people hold I won't hold my breath.
    free to prosper wrote: »
    The leaflet I am sure doesn't tell people how to vote, it simply imparts important information of Lisbon, people should know before they vote.

    We have an independent referendum commission for that.
    free to prosper wrote: »
    IBEC, Intel, and Ryanair have lined out beside the government, most of the media, and the EC Commission to convince us that we should change the Irish Constitution and hand over more political power to EU institutions.

    And lined out beside most of our unions, labour organisations, most of the rest of our politicians and most of our academics. I'm sure it was easy to 'forget' that. I don't suppose they're all for it, I dunno, because it's a good idea.
    free to prosper wrote: »
    In terms of finance, it really is a case of the people versus the political class. In this David versus Goliath contest, the Europe of Freedom and Democracy group have said they are willing to reach out a helping hand to the Irish people.

    Yeah those EU bastards out to get the working man by bringing in 80% of our workers rights legislation. I mean how dare they protect our workers in such a way.


Advertisement