Does the EU have a secret deal with our government?

Torakx

King Mob wrote: »

So what you're saying is that I shouldn't base my decision on this treaty on solid verifiable facts but rather on the fear that there might be a vast global conspiracy?

How is this not scaremongering exactly?

well all i can say is its scary stuff that is happening.
if telling the truth as i see it is scary then im sorry.
As i see it comes from watching the political process in america and europe.
america is alot easier to follow because its basically more exsposed and in the media.

for example.
take a look at the monetary system and how it was set up in america around the same time lincon i think it was,had been trying to bring out an independant currency called the greenback iirc.

this info is easy to see and they way the monetary system works has been exsposed recently.
if you want to help gain more votes for lisbon i emplore you to show me these other ones are fake.like zietgeists explanation for the monetary system.or even the one in the recent thread on this forums.

because it these things that show me how the governments of this world really work.
do you not think ireland and europe might also be like this?
or is it just america that has a corrupt monetary system?
i tried to find out how the central bank of europe works but my research was not very good and i had trouble finding the rright info to show me exactly how it works in ireland and europe.

helping us here understand how it works might help your cause should you have one.

4gun

King Mob wrote: »

Except the main reasons people voted no have been addressed.
This was the negotiation part.

that your intreptation or the reason for a second referendum?... or the government! no
were we not always thaught that no, means NO!!

And in the length of this thread and others no one has been able to actually point out anything bad in the Lisbon Treaty.
the end of our own constitution
Dail demoted to nothing more than a regional council
our laws coming direct from Brussels
In 1916 people fought for our Independance from what was then a superstate, aka the Brittish Empire and now we just sign it away at the stroke of a pen

meglome

4gun wrote: »

the end of our own constitution
Dail demoted to nothing more than a regional council
our laws coming direct from Brussels
In 1916 people fought for our Independance from what was then a superstate, aka the Brittish Empire and now we just sign it away at the stroke of a pen

Now as we keep saying Lisbon is a legal document, which personally I've taken the time to read (the condensed version anyway). As it's a legal document all these things you say should be in it, but I can't find them. So for all I know you are some right wing British or American nutbag who wants to wreck the EU as you hate democracy. Now I'm not saying you are but the easy way to show everyone you are genuine is to show the parts of this legal document that contain what you are saying. Now I'm assuming since you appear to be so sure showing us should be simple, right?

samson09

Have any of ye seen this by any chance?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djQVNHru9LU&feature=related

Marta Andreasen speaks on the Lisbon Treaty, and her experience as chief accountant in the EU. She was suspended for whistleblowing and suggesting reforms.

K-9

4gun wrote: »

our laws coming direct from Brussels

Already happens, care to point out ones we didn't agree to?

meglome

samson09 wrote: »

Have any of ye seen this by any chance?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djQVNHru9LU&feature=related

Marta Andreasen speaks on the Lisbon Treaty, and her experience as chief accountant in the EU. She was suspended for whistleblowing and suggesting reforms.

I don't know the lady, maybe a lot of what she says is true, I have no idea. However she is a member of the UK independence party, UKIP and I've never known myself to agree with them on anything.

Black Uhlan

King Mob wrote: »

So what you're saying is that I shouldn't base my decision on this treaty on solid verifiable facts but rather on the fear that there might be a vast global conspiracy?

How is this not scaremongering exactly?

Seems to me that you would have gone along with Hitler's enabling act too if you had of been around in 1933. It was used as a jumping board by corrupt people.

4gun

meglome wrote: »

Now as we keep saying Lisbon is a legal document, which personally I've taken the time to read (the condensed version anyway). As it's a legal document all these things you say should be in it, but I can't find them. So for all I know you are some right wing British or American nutbag who wants to wreck the EU as you hate democracy. Now I'm not saying you are but the easy way to show everyone you are genuine is to show the parts of this legal document that contain what you are saying. Now I'm assuming since you appear to be so sure showing us should be simple, right?

Ok I'll tell you what give me the link that contains the threaty in its entirety, i''l promise that I'll read it through and through and if what you say is true well i'll vote yes
by the way I'm all for democracy and believe it or not I voted yes to both Masstricht and Nice

Black Uhlan

meglome wrote: »

I don't know the lady, maybe a lot of what she says is true, I have no idea. However she is a member of the UK independence party, UKIP and I've never known myself to agree with them on anything.

So rather than tackle the question of the incompetence of the dearly beloved EU (Just to make it clear she was doing her job properly, she raised valid concerns, for your sake, my sake and everyone elses sake and then was fired) what you choose to focus on is her political allegiances which is of no relevance and if you agree with her on, which is of even less relevance.

These are some of the better articles I found if anyone care to read them.
The eugenic-inspired militarization of the EU is a threat to aspirations for world peace
http://www.agoracosmopolitan.com/home/Frontpage/2008/03/29/02307.html


Against the Lisbon Treaty
There is an idea abroad, especially in North America, that the European Union represents a progressive alternative to U.S.-sponsored neoliberalism. This argument can be found in numerous books and has even been echoed in numerous left-leaning journals. However, according to this expert in international relations and diplomacy, nothing could be further from the truth and he tells us why.
http://www.voltairenet.org/article161415.html

A broad range of campaigns and coalitions in many member states of the EU
http://www.irish-friends-vote-no-for-me.org/index.php?set_language=en&cccpage=criticism

New laws psychopaths would be proud of
http://www.wiseupjournal.com/?p=984


13 Critical Lisbon Treaty Facts - Must Read *

http://www.wiseupjournal.com/?p=991

http://www.betterthanlisbon.org/index.html

4gun

meglome wrote: »

If this was the only reason to vote Yes to Lisbon you'd have a point. But nearly all of our political parties, academics, unions, media, business leaders all want a Yes to Lisbon. Plus we can all go and read it so there's no need to believe anyone. Why don't you go read it?

Our Political system is badly set up who believes that we really have an opposition
Which acedemics
From what i've seen the Unions that are pro lisbon usually have large quantities of civil servants in their ranks and woul of course support a super bureaucracy
the media are supposed to be impartial I thought
Business Leaders well they will just get richer big business anyway
They have indeed. Who did you vote for?
Any one that speaks their own mind



I'm sorry but voting against the EU(Lisbon) because we don't like our government is really stupid and pointless. The EU have given us €41 billion and not once has it tired to make us do anything we didn't want. Why are you so against them?

I vote no last time because lisbon is just a step too far too soon there are just too many grey areas to it too many evaded questions

K-9

Black Uhlan wrote: »

13 Critical Lisbon Treaty Facts - Must Read *

http://www.wiseupjournal.com/?p=991

Already been debated on the actual EU Forum. Most are lies or misrepresentations.

COIR, the Catholic fundamentalists use the same points.

PS. Do a little research on Mr. Coughlan to see what he is about.

4gun

K-9 wrote: »

Already been debated on the actual EU Forum. Most are lies or misrepresentations.
According to you but then you would say that
you try and imply that there is something wrong with any one opposed to lisbon
if Lisbon had real justification you would not need to do that.. would you?

samson09

Ok, I'm tired so maybe I'm not looking at this properly, but what the f**k did Mary McAlese and Mary Harney do back in November last year. Maybe I wasnt paying attention to the news but I cant remember reading about this:

http://www.imt.ie/news/2008/10/emergency_law_tonight_on_psych.html

They basically passed a bill where they can tell someone they're crazy, lock them away and there's F.A. you can do about it. Am I right? Seriously, wtf?!

And there's that other piece of "GANGLAND LEGISLATION" that allows a group of 3 or more people to be treated as a gang and fleeced of basic rights, such as the right to privacy and the right to a trial by jury.

We should be keeping an eye closer to home, I know Lisbon and everything in the bigger picture is important but we cant ignore whats going on in our own back gardens.:eek:

bustertherat

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

I fully support a Europe of Independent Democratic Co-Operating Nation States as what the Common Market started out to be when we joined in 1973.

I totally oppose an orwellian superstate with its own battle group which is exactly what lisbon is setting up the EU to be.



Only half of the booklet, three pages, is devoted to some of the changes that would be made by the Lisbon Treaty, while the remaining three pages are given over to the Government’s “assurances”, even though they form no part of the Treaty (In otherwords padding)

The booklet makes absolutely no attempt to inform people how the Irish Constitution would be affected by the proposed Constitutional Amendment, as is required by the terms of the Referendum Act:
For example, that Lisbon would establish a constitutionally new European Union, with its own legal personality, which would be separate from and superior to its Member States for the first time, as is evident from the second and third sentences of the proposed Amendment above; that this post-Lisbon Union would replace the existing European Community which Ireland joined in 1973 and which would go out of legal existence; that this post-Lisbon EU would make well over half our laws each year, would sign Treaties with other States in all areas of its powers, would have its own diplomatic service and voice at the United Nations and conduct itself as a State in the international community of States etc.

There is no attempt to tell people that they would be given a real “additional” citizenship of this Federal State-like entity, on top of their national citizenship, instead of the purely symbolical and notional EU “citizenship” of today, which is stated under the current Treaties to be “complementary” to national citizenship - a legally meaningless term. Being given an “additional” citizenship is no small matter, for one can only be a citizen of a State and all States must have citizens Š Or that this citizenship would entail EU citizens’ rights and duties vis-a-vis the post-Lisbon European Union, which would be superior to one’s rights and duties as an Irish citizen in any case of conflict between the two, with the many implications of such a major constitutional change.

http://www.nationalplatform.org/

Run to the hills, you sir are my favourite person on boards.ie!!!!

Would the Irish people please wake up....Lisbon is the finally step towards totalitarianism!!!!

would you also believe the pro lisbon mods banned me from the EU forum for expressing my anti lisbon opinion!!!how does that not surprise me!!!

K-9

4gun wrote: »

Already been debated on the actual EU Forum. Most are lies or misrepresentations.
According to you but then you would say that
you try and imply that there is something wrong with any one opposed to lisbon
if Lisbon had real justification you would not need to do that.. would you?

No, read the specific quote again.

Stop putting words in my mouth.

To use your debating tactic, why assume my motives are wrong?

What I would do is enter the 13 points in Google and see why people argue against them. See if the 13 points are true or not!

Fair?

Why assume the wiseupjournal or Mr. Coughlan is correct because they agree with my world view?

meglome

4gun wrote: »

Ok I'll tell you what give me the link that contains the threaty in its entirety, i''l promise that I'll read it through and through and if what you say is true well i'll vote yes
by the way I'm all for democracy and believe it or not I voted yes to both Masstricht and Nice

Fair play to you. It's very easy for a lot of people in here to say what they want as they don't have to prove it. In Lisbon there's no doubt that we share more powers with the EU. But personally I'm of the opinion that the EU have not steered us wrong and have never pushed anything on us. Run to da hills for all his talk has failed to come up with one thing, not one thing, since 1975 that the EU have even attempted to make us do.

And considering what a balls our own government have made of things you'd have to wonder if this supposed 'loss of sovereignty' would really be a problem.

http://www.lisbontreaty.ie/guide/lisbon-treaty-guide-english.pdf

Or for a more in-depth read.
http://www.lisbontreaty.ie/documents/WhitePaper_English.pdf

Or the consolidated treaty
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cmsUpload/st06655-re01.en08.pdf
Or in Irish
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cmsUpload/st06655-re01.ga08.pdf

And I've attached a direct response (not sure who wrote it) to these 13 reasons to vote No to Lisbon liked about. It uses the sections from the treaty to explain.

Not exactly light reading, but then what legal documents are.

meglome

bustertherat wrote: »

Would the Irish people please wake up....Lisbon is the finally step towards totalitarianism!!!!

Yawn... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

I read up on Lisbon and if I even suspected this was true I'd be the first in the door to vote No but since it's crap I'll still be voting Yes.

bustertherat wrote: »

would you also believe the pro lisbon mods banned me from the EU forum for expressing my anti lisbon opinion!!!how does that not surprise me!!!

They banned you for saying things you couldn't supply any evidence for. I think we call it making stuff up round my way.

meglome

Black Uhlan wrote: »

Seems to me that you would have gone along with Hitler's enabling act too if you had of been around in 1933. It was used as a jumping board by corrupt people.

Of course because we see nothing wrong with a treaty that you haven't bothered to read we're obviously Nazis. Sweet Jesus.

4gun

Just started reading your doc. havent got through much of it yet, but the first point that stands out is about these guarantees that have been sought since the last referendum...there is only a promise that after the referendum has been passed that these issues will be addressed, there is no legal document as such in existance at the moment
So for the moment we have a "promise from politicians" that that this blank document will be legally binding after the next treaty due in 2011 or so.
why can't this be drafted before the vote
Nothing has been writen down other wise Brian Clowen would be waving it all over the news
anyway on with the reading..

4gun

article 16
the 15 states that want to form a blocking "party "(for want of a better word) will have to have a population greater than or equall to 65% of the total EU population
Will the 15 smaller states be able to achieve this if the event arises so babed on this it would be easier for the larger countries to pass legislation based on their majority of population and sometimes whats good for larger states is not necessarily good for smaller ones

I couldn't see anything wrong with article 79
Ireland has a fairly open immagration policy anyway nothing wrong with that
back to reading..

4gun

article 311
Is this putting a "federal" tax on us
if we are taxed anymore in Ireland workers will demand higher wages.. etc bla bla uncompetitive economy .. you get the drift ...no more taxes
now if it proposed a standard total percentage across the whole union our taxes will decrease because the germans and french etc. will refuse to pay a whole pile more than what they pay now but it doesn't appear to say that, so Id say it's a federal tax and not good for Ireland

4gun

article 206
will Ireland have a permanant seat on the European Council if they have, then OK and this will stay at 27 members or increase as the EU expands

Black Uhlan

meglome wrote: »

. Run to da hills for all his talk has failed to come up with one thing, not one thing, since 1975 that the EU have even attempted to make us do.

There are too many things to mention.
"Thus Community law (EU LAW) takes precedence over all national laws including the Constitution. "
http://ec.europa.eu/civiljustice/legal_order/legal_order_ire_en.htm

meglome wrote: »

you'd have to wonder if this supposed 'loss of sovereignty' would really be a problem.

Says it all right there as far as I am concerned.

Black Uhlan

meglome wrote: »

Of course because we see nothing wrong with a treaty that you haven't bothered to read we're obviously Nazis. Sweet Jesus.

Typically patronising comment. If you could PLEASE try to see past your own prejudices for just a minute could you please tell me why you assume that I haven't read it?

Is it because unlike some I don't start every ****ing post "having read the treaty..."

PLEASE; PLEASE tell me why you make the baseless assumption that I haven't read it. Is it because I fall on the no side? Because if it was it shows your prejudice.

As for the enabling act comment I never suggested you were Nazis, so please don't put words in my mouth. What I was suggesting was that the Enabling act was passed through "democratically" in Germany and the document itself did not mention the setting up of a racist, totalaterran dictatorship that would result in millions and millions of lives lost. But it was used/abused to facilitate all of this much like any power in the hands of the corrupt can.

6th

Black Uhlan wrote: »

Seems to me that you would have gone along with Hitler's enabling act too if you had of been around in 1933. It was used as a jumping board by corrupt people.

Grow up.

bustertherat wrote: »

Run to the hills, you sir are my favourite person on boards.ie!!!!

Would the Irish people please wake up....Lisbon is the finally step towards totalitarianism!!!!

would you also believe the pro lisbon mods banned me from the EU forum for expressing my anti lisbon opinion!!!how does that not surprise me!!!

Bring in issues from other forums again and you'll be banned from this one too. Please respect this forum.

meglome wrote: »

Yawn... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

I read up on Lisbon and if I even suspected this was true I'd be the first in the door to vote No but since it's crap I'll still be voting Yes.



They banned you for saying things you couldn't supply any evidence for. I think we call it making stuff up round my way.

Cop on and stop baiting.
_______________________

Seriously folks I see more maturity when dealing with my kids.

Black Uhlan

4gun wrote: »

Just started reading your doc. havent got through much of it yet, but the first point that stands out is about these guarantees that have been sought since the last referendum...there is only a promise that after the referendum has been passed that these issues will be addressed, there is no legal document as such in existance at the moment
So for the moment we have a "promise from politicians" that that this blank document will be legally binding after the next treaty due in 2011 or so.
why can't this be drafted before the vote
Nothing has been writen down other wise Brian Clowen would be waving it all over the news
anyway on with the reading..

As far as I know any or all of these promises can be overuled by the ECJ anyway.

constance tench

samson09 wrote: »

Have any of ye seen this by any chance?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djQVNHru9LU&feature=related

Marta Andreasen speaks on the Lisbon Treaty, and her experience as chief accountant in the EU. She was suspended for whistleblowing and suggesting reforms.

[/]
this certainly confirms my suspicions, no separation of powers=no democracy

Run_to_da_hills

meglome wrote: »

Name just one thing the EU has forced anyone in the EU to do?

More light bulbs being banned across the EU this time spotter and downlight. This is pointless unless they can come up with a good alternitive to these deadly devices. This move is another example of European bureaucracy interfering in the lives of ordinary people.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandconsumer/6142118/Spotlight-and-downlighter-bulbs-next-to-be-banned-by-EU.html

4gun

6th wrote: »

Grow up.



Bring in issues from other forums again and you'll be banned from this one too. Please respect this forum.



some chap posted a comment on another forum that I subscribe to relating to a topic that I posted on this form mods there didn't do much about it
I wouldn't mind so much but the other forum in question isn't even political
But I suppose we all take sides:D

meglome

4gun wrote: »

Just started reading your doc. havent got through much of it yet, but the first point that stands out is about these guarantees that have been sought since the last referendum...there is only a promise that after the referendum has been passed that these issues will be addressed, there is no legal document as such in existance at the moment
So for the moment we have a "promise from politicians" that that this blank document will be legally binding after the next treaty due in 2011 or so.
why can't this be drafted before the vote
Nothing has been writen down other wise Brian Clowen would be waving it all over the news
anyway on with the reading..

That's a fair point. The EU spent the best part of 10 years negotiating the Lisbon treaty so to make unnecessary changes to it would be a big job and might takes years. And in fairness most of the guarantees are saying that our issues are not things that even exist in treaty in the first place. So they've created these legally binding guarantees that will be lodged with the UN and will be added to any future treaty. Many No campaigners will say these guarantees are not binding but what I'd point out is the EU has never gone back on a deal since we joined in 1973. Actions speak louder than words if you ask me.

meglome

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

More light bulbs being banned across the EU this time spotter and downlight. This is pointless unless they can come up with a good alternitive. This move is another example of European bureaucracy interfering in the lives of ordinary people.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandconsumer/6142118/Spotlight-and-downlighter-bulbs-next-to-be-banned-by-EU.html

Is does get old repeating myself but the EU did force any country to get rid of these bulbs. These last years longer and use less power.

And what is that rubbish that you have in your signature. How could Spain voting Yes to the old EU constitution that was never brought into law cause unemployment? That really really makes no sense. Care to explain?

meglome

Black Uhlan wrote: »

Typically patronising comment. If you could PLEASE try to see past your own prejudices for just a minute could you please tell me why you assume that I haven't read it?

Is it because unlike some I don't start every ****ing post "having read the treaty..."

PLEASE; PLEASE tell me why you make the baseless assumption that I haven't read it. Is it because I fall on the no side? Because if it was it shows your prejudice.

You're absolutely right I made assumptions. So just give me the parts of the treaty you don't like.

Black Uhlan wrote: »

As for the enabling act comment I never suggested you were Nazis, so please don't put words in my mouth. What I was suggesting was that the Enabling act was passed through "democratically" in Germany and the document itself did not mention the setting up of a racist, totalaterran dictatorship that would result in millions and millions of lives lost. But it was used/abused to facilitate all of this much like any power in the hands of the corrupt can.

You implied I was a Nazi and then you say I'm patronising. Why don't you show us the sections of the treaty that would do any of this?

4gun

meglome wrote: »

That's a fair point. The EU spent the best part of 10 years negotiating the Lisbon treaty so to make unnecessary changes to it would be a big job and might takes years. And in fairness most of the guarantees are saying that our issues are not things that even exist in treaty in the first place. So they've created these legally binding guarantees that will be lodged with the UN and will be added to any future treaty. Many No campaigners will say these guarantees are not binding but what I'd point out is the EU has never gone back on a deal since we joined in 1973. Actions speak louder than words if you ask me.

yes but I think this lodgement is to take place the treaty has been ratified so at the moment we have only got pre-referendum promises from politicians and can you seriously tell me that you trust politicans when they promis something before the vote
again it comes down to trust, and I think Irish people are no longer willing to trust our leaders so the harder they push on it the greater the resistance

Black Uhlan

meglome wrote: »

You're absolutely right I made assumptions. So just give me the parts of the treaty you don't like.

Your just repeating what I said. I know you made assumptions, I pointed this out to you. What I asked you and what you have failed to answer is what your assumption was based upon.

So I will ask you again. Why did you assume I did not ready the treaty? was it prejudice against no voters (which I may or may not be) or something else.

meglome wrote: »

You implied I was a Nazi and then you say I'm patronising. Why don't you show us the sections of the treaty that would do any of this?

1. I wasn't even speaking to you in the first instance, so you should retract that.

2. I never implied anyone was a Nazi. I compared the Enabling Act to the Lisbon Treaty. Unless you have some kind of private relationship with the treaty this should not cause you any offence.

Run_to_da_hills

meglome wrote: »

Is does get old repeating myself but the EU did force any country to get rid of these bulbs. These last years longer and use less power.

They are also far more dangerous to the environment, they give off a pathetic quality of light compared to an incandescent bulb of similar size and they can take a long time to stitch on. For very short durations such as bathrooms and apartment landings incandescent bulbs are more efficient.

meglome wrote: »

And what is that rubbish that you have in your signature. How could Spain voting Yes to the old EU constitution that was never brought into law cause unemployment? That really really makes no sense. Care to explain?

Its no different to the deceptive lies contained in the YES posters. Claiming Lisbon will help employment when in fact it will kill off employment. With the abolishment of Irish honeymoon capital tax incentives what foreign multinational will want to set up here? . It wall also flood the country with more cheap foreign labour than ever and allow contractors take in labour from abroad and pay them their home rates.


The only reason Ryanair and Intel are canvessing for a YES vote is to avail of more cheap foreign labour on an open market that will cut their running costs


Spain ratified the Lisbon Treaty in July 2008 unemployment has more than doubled since then and I am not telling lies about it. .

bonkey

Guys - I'm getting fed up telling you in thread after thread that this is not the politics forum.

Either discuss the conspiracy-related aspects the OP brought up, or leave the thread.

4gun

bonkey wrote: »

Guys - I'm getting fed up telling you in thread after thread that this is not the politics forum.

Either discuss the conspiracy-related aspects the OP brought up, or leave the thread.

politics and conspiracy theories are the same thing because all politicians conspire to decieve the electorate
say what it takes to get in to power, and say what it takes to stay in power,
this is the primary concern of any politician if it wasn't they'd soon be out of a job

Black Uhlan

Asking for the 3rd time here

meglome wrote: »

Of course because we see nothing wrong with a treaty that you haven't bothered to read we're obviously Nazis. Sweet Jesus.

Black Uhlan wrote: »

PLEASE; PLEASE tell me why you make the baseless assumption that I haven't read it. Is it because I fall on the no side? Because if it was it shows your prejudice.

Black Uhlan wrote: »

So I will ask you again. Why did you assume I did not ready the treaty? was it prejudice against no voters (which I may or may not be) or something else.

bonkey

I don't see the relevance of continued badgering to the discussion at hand.

You've made your point. If you want to discuss this point further with meglome, do so via PM.

squod

meglome wrote: »

I remember that too and if they want to they can vote No again. Isn't having more democratic votes more democratic.

You know you could have a point there, what if we vote yes next time. What'll it be, best out of three? Five in a row or bi-annual vote, just in case we change our minds?

The cost of all this nonsense is huge, and we're not in a position to afford it.
Voting again on Lisbon makes no sense to anyone, most people in Europe would probably vote no if they had the chance to.

meglome

squod wrote: »

You know you could have a point there, what if we vote yes next time. What'll it be, best out of three? Five in a row or bi-annual vote, just in case we change our minds?

The cost of all this nonsense is huge, and we're not in a position to afford it.
Voting again on Lisbon makes no sense to anyone, most people in Europe would probably vote no if they had the chance to.

I'd be happy to respond but this isn't the place for it. But feel free to post in the politics (European union) forum and I will.

The_Kew_Tour

In response to OP yes i do I think every Government has favours be gained from it

meglome

adrian280582 wrote: »

In response to OP yes i do I think every Government has favours be gained from it

I'd say that every country has favours to gain from it. I hate our government but the EU has been great for Ireland.