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

The Lisbon Treaty for Dummies

Options
12467

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    sdonn wrote: »
    Here's a question for the yes side: do you really believe that the EU will eject us from the union, or form a new one around us as the rules may require, just because we reject this? COurse they won't. Will EU business be afraid to invest in Ireland or be otherwise dissuaded from doing so, and if so, why?

    People seem to think that a no vote is a vote against the EU and a vote for us to leave it. In some ways I don't think that's a half bad idea, but the truth is that we would be in the dark without it. The truth is also though, that we are still going to be in the union if we vote no. My question is, do people reckon that'll last? Will we really be ousted eventually?

    No, but I do think that the attempt by No proponents to boil it down to a binary question of whether we're in the EU or not is pretty tiresome. It's like claiming that you're either married or you're not, so as long as your wife won't divorce you, you might as well have affairs, because you'll still be married, right?

    Voting Yes, entirely aside from the Treaty, continues a good working relationship with Europe. Voting No doesn't. That's what all that "heart of Europe" stuff is about.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Options
    #93
    ei.sdraob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭ei.sdraob


    mangaroosh wrote: »
    how does it actually do this?

    are you suggesting that leaving the EU is a positive thing, or something we should be aiming for? Lets try and remain practical

    Thats exactly what Sinn Fein and UKIP are aiming for

    oh and they are on the NO side btw


    /


  • Options
    #94
    IrelandSpirit
    Registered Users Posts: 831 ✭✭✭IrelandSpirit


    MarkK wrote: »
    Ok, and if Ireland and his 26 friends spend 8 years and lots of money coming up with a new plan, which Ireland has a major contributor to and agrees to.
    Then Ireland suddenly says, I don't think I'll bother with the plan and I am going to block all of you from going forward with it too.
    Then Ireland needs to ask his 26 friends for a favour to help with it's economic recovery, how disposed are they going to be to go overboard in helping out?

    Hmmm, 26 friends? Wouldn’t count on it – friendship and business seldom mix, and as for an economic recovery plan? Sounds good, will admit, and I wish it were true that Ireland or any nation involved had that much control. I can’t see how giving more legislative powers to the EU is gonna give us more control over our own affairs, and I definitely can’t see how being taxed into the ground to pay off Frankfurt is gonna be conducive to our prosperity as a nation.

    And even if Treaty did equal money, how long would it last? We’re in debt up to our necks in a monetary system intrinsically designed to keep us in debt. But if just for once we have something they want, I would think it wise to hold that position and make damn sure we get a good return.

    As much as that’s possible…

    The sad fact of the matter is that ‘our’ banking system is centralised in the EU - they control our money supply, they have us by the balls – it’s not our bank or any other nation’s: we’re talking about private corporations out for themselves, profit, nothing else. AIB, BOI etc, etc? Private, for profit, companies. Smoke and mirrors, my friend. Just ‘cos they have ‘Irish’ in their company names doesn’t mean they are Irish or have Ireland’s interest at heart. Think about it. Who in their right mind would lend themselves money at interest?


  • Options
    #95
    ferngully
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7 ✭ferngully


    Good point on the banks,yep cause it says its Alied Irish Bank,doesnt mean its Irish....
    Same as the main Irish company Guinness now owned by Diagio.....
    Diagio have made loads of people redundant.......


  • Options
    #96
    IrelandSpirit
    Registered Users Posts: 831 ✭✭✭IrelandSpirit


    ferngully wrote: »
    Good point on the banks,yep cause it says its Alied Irish Bank,doesnt mean its Irish....
    Same as the main Irish company Guinness now owned by Diagio.....
    Diagio have made loads of people redundant.......


    Good point yerself on the Guinness! Are ye sure you won’t consider changing your vote? Lol! only messing… Guinness though, fluoridated, I stopped drinking the stuff back in 2001… I dunno, I mean we’re here discussing the EU and Ireland, Ireland, Ireland and what is Ireland? Dunno about you but jeez, I dunno what it is anymore… I mean, we have thousands of years of culture and heritage behind us – our own language, justice system, spirituality, literature and arts, what happened? Then again, I suppose whichever way we vote, all will be well; they’ll still let us sing Fairytale of New York in the pub at Christmas, and sell giant leprechaun hats on Paddy’s Day too. It’s great craic and good for tourism…

    Depressed, I’m going out…


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    scaredoflisbon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12 ✭scaredoflisbon


    yeah we should'nt have to vote again at all on this thing. makes you wonder how the voting works in the EU. if they don#t get the right answer they just keep asking the question till they get the answer they want.
    So much for our 'guarantees' and what not. I mean can you honestly trust these people with anything when they show such contempt for the pesky little people ???????


  • Options
    #98
    IrelandSpirit
    Registered Users Posts: 831 ✭✭✭IrelandSpirit


    scaredoflisbon wrote: »
    yeah we should'nt have to vote again at all on this thing. makes you wonder how the voting works in the EU. if they don#t get the right answer they just keep asking the question till they get the answer they want.
    So much for our 'guarantees' and what not. I mean can you honestly trust these people with anything when they show such contempt for the pesky little people ???????

    Pesky big people more like - there's a hell of a lot more of us than them! ;)


  • Options
    #99
    Daftendirekt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,312 ✭✭✭Daftendirekt


    scaredoflisbon wrote: »
    yeah we should'nt have to vote again at all on this thing. makes you wonder how the voting works in the EU. if they don#t get the right answer they just keep asking the question till they get the answer they want.
    So much for our 'guarantees' and what not. I mean can you honestly trust these people with anything when they show such contempt for the pesky little people ???????

    Not really. Since most of the member states don't generally use national referenda, there isn't much demand for a second vote on anything.


  • Options
    #100
    MarkK
    Registered Users Posts: 721 ✭✭✭MarkK


    IrelandSpirit wrote: »
    Hmmm, 26 friends? Wouldn’t count on it – friendship and business seldom mix, and as for an economic recovery plan? Sounds good, will admit, and I wish it were true that Ireland or any nation involved had that much control. I can’t see how giving more legislative powers to the EU is gonna give us more control over our own affairs, and I definitely can’t see how being taxed into the ground to pay off Frankfurt is gonna be conducive to our prosperity as a nation.

    And even if Treaty did equal money, how long would it last? We’re in debt up to our necks in a monetary system intrinsically designed to keep us in debt. But if just for once we have something they want, I would think it wise to hold that position and make damn sure we get a good return.

    As much as that’s possible…

    The sad fact of the matter is that ‘our’ banking system is centralised in the EU - they control our money supply, they have us by the balls – it’s not our bank or any other nation’s: we’re talking about private corporations out for themselves, profit, nothing else. AIB, BOI etc, etc? Private, for profit, companies. Smoke and mirrors, my friend. Just ‘cos they have ‘Irish’ in their company names doesn’t mean they are Irish or have Ireland’s interest at heart. Think about it. Who in their right mind would lend themselves money at interest?

    It was the Irish government who was responsible for how much debt our banks and IFSC residents got themselves into, they were meant to be regulating them.

    Was there another option other than taking a loan from our ECB?


  • Options
    #101
    moogester
    Registered Users Posts: 103 ✭✭moogester


    Quotes from the EUABC

    WHO will appoint the Commission?
    Today each member state government decides WHO shall be on the Commission in Brussels. The Lisbon Treaty will change the word propose to suggest.

    Then the new Commission President will decide WHO shall be in the Commission - together with a qualified majority of prime ministers.

    Read about the rules under the word Commission and Voting in the Council and see Art. 17.7 TEU in the Lisbon Treaty.
    Can migrant workers be paid less?
    According to the treaties the EU has no say on salaries. But the EU Court in Luxembourg has decided that migrant workers can work for much less than the normal pay.

    Read about the rulings in the euabc under Laval, Rüffert, Viking and Luxembourg.
    Can the EU decide new taxes?
    Taxes can only be harmonised when all member states agree. But the Lisbon Treaty introduces a new clause in Art. 113 TFEU permitting the EU to outlaw tax competition in the Internal Market.

    Art. 311 TFEU permits the EU to establish new taxes to finance the EU itself.

    Read more under Taxes.
    Is there a national veto on the WTO?
    David O`Sullivan, the Director-General of trade in the EU Commission, says Yes in his comment under World Trade Organisation.

    Jens-Peter Bonde, MEP from 1979-2008, says mostly No in his comment. Read the different comments and decide on your own. See also Art. 218.8 TFEU in the Lisbon Treaty
    Can the EU decide on abortion?
    The EU has already decided on abortion. In 1991 the EU Court decided that abortion is an economic service which can be sold freely. The Advocate-General wanted to outlaw the Irish rules on abortion. The EU Court decided to allow them "on balance". Read more under Abortion.
    80,000 pieces of law voters can't change
    The EU is composed of 27 member states all with parliamentary democracies. Voters may participate in elections, leading to a new majority and then new laws.

    We have managed to establish the existence of more than 80,000 pieces of law in the EU where this fundamental principle of democracy does not apply.

    Firstly, we have 26,560 pieces of valid law decided in the European institutions. They can only be amended after a decision by the non-elected members of the Commission. The Council of Ministers must approve important changes by a qualified majority.

    The European Parliament can change nothing itself, even if all members of the parliament were to unanimously agree.

    Then we have 4,112 international agreements binding citizens and companies in the same way as law. There are also 10,337 verdicts from the EU Court in Luxembourg which can only be amended by new verdicts from the judges or by a new treaty.

    Finally we have 44,838 harmonised standards which can normally be amended by the Commission or/and a qualified majority among member states. Again, even a unanimous parliament cannot change them at all after new elections.

    European voters are set aside in relation to maybe more than 80,000 rules of laws and harmonisations. We cannot change the content by putting our vote in the ballot box.

    Why not insist on the principle of democracy which would say: All laws must be approved by a majority in a national or European Parliament. This does not mean that all 85,832 pieces of hard and soft law must actually be approved by members of parliaments.Those elected by the voters may delegate the more technical decisions to specialised organs.

    We would still have democracy if those powers that had been delegated to the common level were able to be brought back by a simple majority in Parliament if necessary. The fact that this is no longer possible means that there is no democracy for the change of these 80,000 hard and soft laws.

    Look under "Number of laws" to find the full table of hard and soft laws in the EU. Look under "Democracy" to learn     about the decision making process in the EU.
    The Lisbon Treaty - The Readable Version, with its 3000-word alphabetical Index


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    moogester wrote: »
    Quotes from the EUABC




    The Lisbon Treaty - The Readable Version, with its 3000-word alphabetical Index

    http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=62291625&postcount=27

    EUABC is the work of the eurosceptic ex-MEP and ex-Libertas Jens-Peter Bonde.


  • Options
    #103
    IrelandSpirit
    Registered Users Posts: 831 ✭✭✭IrelandSpirit


    MarkK wrote: »
    It was the Irish government who was responsible for how much debt our banks and IFSC residents got themselves into, they were meant to be regulating them.

    Was there another option other than taking a loan from our ECB?


    It’s about time then that we all ask ourselves who our government really represents, and where their interests really lie. They were neither responsible nor are they liable – they are all on highly-paid jobs regardless – we as a nation are liable for their ‘mistakes’, as it us who they represent.

    There was always a choice. I didn’t know meself until I answered this first, Who in their right mind would lend themselves money at interest?

    Get the answer to that, and the choice will jump right back at ya ;)


  • Options
    #104
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    IrelandSpirit wrote: »
    Who in their right mind would lend themselves money at interest?

    Who did that? Are you talking about NAMA?


  • Options
    #105
    ei.sdraob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭ei.sdraob


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=62291625&postcount=27

    EUABC is the work of the eurosceptic ex-MEP and ex-Libertas Jens-Peter Bonde.


    i even have a whole thread about them here

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=62248143


    1. he aint irish

    2. hes connected to Ganley


  • Options
    #106
    MarkK
    Registered Users Posts: 721 ✭✭✭MarkK


    IrelandSpirit wrote: »
    Who in their right mind would lend themselves money at interest?
    An offset mortgage is essentially lending yourself money with interest, I think they are quite a good Idea, what's your point?


  • Options
    #107
    moogester
    Registered Users Posts: 103 ✭✭moogester


    ei.sdraob wrote: »
    i even have a whole thread about them here

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=62248143


    1. he aint irish

    2. hes connected to Ganley

    Doesnt mean what they're saying is wrong does it?


  • Options
    #108
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    moogester wrote: »
    Doesnt mean what they're saying is wrong does it?

    No the fact that what they're saying is wrong makes them wrong. The fact that they're connected to Ganley puts his website in the correct context as having a very strong no bias where it tries to appear as if it's neutral


  • Options
    #109
    ei.sdraob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭ei.sdraob


    moogester wrote: »
    Doesnt mean what they're saying is wrong does it?

    it means were being lied to and manipulated by European "elites" in order to vote NO :D


    if you read the links in my signature

    you would see that everything on that euabc site is a lie :(


    cheers

    /


  • Options
    #110
    rumour
    Closed Accounts Posts: 836 ✭✭✭rumour


    I've posted many times arguing mostly the cons of this treaty before it descended into the most embarassing unhonourable and intellectually base polarisation of any debate I have ever seen in my life. Trully this experience is a first.

    The whole scenario is a national embarassment void of any integrity. I now believe this speaks volumes of our so called nation. A nation who spent ten years borrowing from everyone on the planet they could get money of to indulge themselves. Nationally we never stopped to think how to pay this money back. This is the behaviour of a drunk. It may not be common knowledge to the younger audiences here or those who have never travelled but that is a foreign perception of the Irish and true to form we have delivered.

    Our debate regarding the Lisbon treaty is on a par with drunks arguing in the pub. It is centered by both sides by hypothetical promises of doom no matter what way you vote.

    Unfortunately I have to admit with shame that this is the Ireland of today, we are now beggars debating where tomorrows meal comes from. That is what will decide Lisbon. How sad is that?

    To vote NO at this stage is to bite the hand that feeds, there is no other way around this. Ireland as a nation would cease to function tomorrow if it were not for the ECB. Our goodwill with this bank is now vital, not just for tomorrow but for the next ten years at least (my opinion) and this is with or without Lisbon. Obviously 'No' will affect this relationship, but that is a personal choice for everyone.

    Our ability to get out of this problem in ten years will I believe be hampered by the subsequent treaties following Lisbon, arguably they may not need to have a new treaty but who cares, the future of Europe will have to consolidate its financial position to exert any clout internationally. This it must do for the benefit of EU citizens or the minumum wage will collapse to Chinese levels. Some people may not like this but I think it is absolutely necessary going forward. Tax havens such as Dublins IFSC will only exist with some sort of special dispensation. Tax harmonisation is already on the agenda in France and Germany, for those who detest this perspective, you should have thought about these things before we racked up billions of debt. I do not want to centre blame on the bankers or government because it is the people of this country who voted for the government and the people of this country who went into the bank and asked for the loans.

    Again with shame the Irish have fulfilled their national characature and been found out as not being capable of running their own country. Faced with that logic and being rational, it is probably best that we vote for Lisbon unless there are some radical plans for how this country can be restructured to function. But sadly none of these are on the horizon from any angle.

    So the idea of an educated debate where we the Irish may participate as peers in Europe is nothing more than an indulgence. We had a country but now we must sign it over because we can't pay the bills. I don't think I'll vote at all now I see no point in deluding myself that there is a choice


  • Options
    #111
    moogester
    Registered Users Posts: 103 ✭✭moogester


    ei.sdraob wrote: »
    it means were being lied to and manipulated by European "elites" in order to vote NO :D

    /

    As opposed to the YES vote being bought & paid for ;)
    That quote could equally be applied to the YES side, ok maybe not from that site but others.

    I sincerely hope i'm wrong about the Lisbon Treaty & its implications for all of us but i fear the worst if its ratified.......there will be no going back.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    ei.sdraob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭ei.sdraob


    moogester wrote: »
    As opposed to the YES vote being bought & paid for ;)
    That quote could equally be applied to the YES side, ok maybe not from that site but others.

    I sincerely hope i'm wrong about the Lisbon Treaty & its implications for all of us but i fear the worst if its ratified.......there will be no going back.

    show us anyone one the YES side who is making money from selling weapons

    /


  • Options
    #113
    rumour
    Closed Accounts Posts: 836 ✭✭✭rumour


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=62291625&postcount=27

    EUABC is the work of the eurosceptic ex-MEP and ex-Libertas Jens-Peter Bonde.

    Does that make it wrong?


  • Options
    #114
    ei.sdraob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭ei.sdraob


    rumour wrote: »
    Does that make it wrong?

    an unelected European elite telling us what to do

    springs to mind NO?

    read the linked thread and checkout the wording on his advert

    :cool:


  • Options
    #115
    marco_polo
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 10,079 Mod ✭✭✭✭marco_polo


    rumour wrote: »
    Does that make it wrong?

    No in fairness it is mainly the content that makes it wrong.


  • Options
    #116
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    rumour wrote: »
    Does that make it wrong?

    No, but I'd say if you a did a search of this forum on his individual points, you'd get more correct information!

    To me, it's like quoting an ardent Federalist on the Treaty. I wouldn't rely on either.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Options
    #117
    rumour
    Closed Accounts Posts: 836 ✭✭✭rumour


    ei.sdraob wrote: »
    an unelected European elite telling us what to do

    springs to mind NO?

    read the linked thread and checkout the wording on his advert

    :cool:

    Cutely avoiding the question, cute wh**s everwhere:(


  • Options
    #118
    IrelandSpirit
    Registered Users Posts: 831 ✭✭✭IrelandSpirit


    K-9 wrote: »
    No, but I'd say if you a did a search of this forum on his individual points, you'd get more correct information!

    To me, it's like quoting an ardent Federalist on the Treaty. I wouldn't rely on either.

    hmmm, well here's a good one:

    “The aim of the Constitutional Treaty was to be more readable; the aim of this treaty is to be unreadable … The Constitution aimed to be clear, whereas this treaty had to be unclear. It is a success.”

    - Karel de Gucht, Belgian Foreign Minister, Flandreinfo, 23 June 2007


  • Options
    #119
    ei.sdraob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭ei.sdraob


    rumour wrote: »
    Cutely avoiding the question, cute wh**s everwhere:(

    im just pointing out yet another hypocrisy of the No side

    sorry but it has to be done

    ;)


  • Options
    #120
    aftermn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 138 ✭✭aftermn


    I received my 'polling information card' this morning, it makes interesting reading.

    This is the actual wording of the proposed amendment

    (a) 6 ; 'No provision of this constitution invalidates laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the State, before, on or after the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, that are necessitated by the obligations of membership of the European Union referred to in subsection 5, or prevents laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the said European Union... from having the force of law in the State.'

    Whatever about what the treaty says, this appears to subordinate our constitution to any laws, acts or measures adopted by the new EU.

    Enjoy your referendum vote, it will be your last.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    marco_polo
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 10,079 Mod ✭✭✭✭marco_polo


    IrelandSpirit wrote: »
    hmmm, well here's a good one:

    “The aim of the Constitutional Treaty was to be more readable; the aim of this treaty is to be unreadable … The Constitution aimed to be clear, whereas this treaty had to be unclear. It is a success.”

    - Karel de Gucht, Belgian Foreign Minister, Flandreinfo, 23 June 2007

    I can and have read it, as have many, many other people. So I guess that refutes that one nicely.


Advertisement