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

Irish referendum irrelevant?

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    ShooterSF
    Registered Users Posts: 8,824 ✭✭✭ShooterSF


    PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »
    It's for the Czechs to run their country. It leaves us in the exact same position as a week ago: preparing to decide Ireland's stance on the Lisbon treaty.

    Damn right. After all who are we to tell other countries how to run themselves.


  • Options
    #33
    prinz
    Registered Users Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »
    It's for the Czechs to run their country. It leaves us in the exact same position as a week ago: preparing to decide Ireland's stance on the Lisbon treaty.

    It could be argued that the Czechs have agreed to Lisbon through the upper and lower houses of parliament there, just a quirk of Czech national law that means the president has to sign off on it. So it's less of a case of the Czechs deciding, and more of one man using his personal opinion to dictate to the entire EU. Of course that's their system and they're entitled to it, but part of the reason the EU exists was to stop that kind of thing.


  • Options
    #34
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    RandomName2 wrote: »
    Ah, you see it's their own fault (apparently).

    They elected a government that promised to give a referendum, but backed out because it realised that the public couldn't be trusted (after all, their being elected was testament to the public's poor judgement).

    Let's see how that sits with the people who worship representative democracy and claim that once you hand over the governance of your country for five years you have no right to any input at all on it until the next election. This government promised a referendum and is now refusing to give one.

    Shouldn't this be completely banned and illegal if representative democracy is to work? Shouldn't it be absolutely mandatory that lies during election campaigns are simply not allowed?


  • Options
    #35
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    Shouldn't it be absolutely mandatory that lies during election campaigns are simply not allowed?
    Now there would be a seismic shift in the very nature of representative democracy...


  • Options
    #36
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Now there would be a seismic shift in the very nature of representative democracy...

    And would it be a bad thing? It would actually put the democracy back into the phrase "representative democracy". you know - the people vote for the policies they want and the government put them into action. Unlike the present system of "The people vote for the policies they want and have a 10% chance of the government actually pursuing them instead of their own agenda", which isn't really very democratic at all...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    And would it be a bad thing?
    Not per se, no. But it's idealistic enough to be impractical.


  • Options
    #38
    Mozart1986
    Closed Accounts Posts: 191 ✭✭Mozart1986


    prinz wrote: »
    FYP.

    Given that it's written by a euroseptic... smells funny to me.


    You smell funny. Must be that stuff comin' out your mouth. The Czechs are MASSIVELY pro-American. They would vote NO quicker than we would, had they a referendum.


  • Options
    #39
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Not per se, no. But it's idealistic enough to be impractical.

    So you freely admit then that representative democracy is not at all democratic? The people should get what they vote for, surely that's the whole point... It would just mean that political parties couldn't make promises they can't keep. I fail to see how that's impractical.


  • Options
    #40
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    So you freely admit then that representative democracy is not at all democratic?
    No, I don't. Representative democracy is a flawed way to run a country. Direct democracy is also a flawed way to run a country, as we can clearly see with this referendum campaign.
    The people should get what they vote for, surely that's the whole point... It would just mean that political parties couldn't make promises they can't keep. I fail to see how that's impractical.
    It's impractical because it fails to take into account the fact that circumstances may change between an election campaign and the time that policies come to be implemented. It gives the campaigner a stark choice between implementing policies that are disastrously flawed, simply because they were campaign promises, or not being able to promise anything at all, for fear of the repercussions should circumstances change.


  • Options
    #41
    marco_polo
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 10,079 Mod ✭✭✭✭marco_polo


    Mozart1986 wrote: »
    You smell funny. Must be that stuff comin' out your mouth. The Czechs are MASSIVELY pro-American. They would vote NO quicker than we would, had they a referendum.

    Seems like it would have had at least a reasonable chance of being passed last year. Presumeably 1,341 Czechs are a better gauge than your opinion?

    http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/lisbon_treaty_backed_in_czech_republic/


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Elmo
    Registered Users Posts: 23,641 ✭✭✭✭Elmo


    PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »
    It's for the Czechs to run their country. It leaves us in the exact same position as a week ago: preparing to decide Ireland's stance on the Lisbon treaty.

    Did we decide that a few months ago?


  • Options
    #43
    PopeBuckfastXVI
    Registered Users Posts: 5,155 ✭✭✭PopeBuckfastXVI


    Elmo wrote: »
    Did we decide that a few months ago?

    Hmm you could be right, how about 'preparing to confirm or change Ireland's stance on the Lisbon treaty'?

    The main point was that regardless of other countries, or other peoples, views, we should give our own.


  • Options
    #44
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    No, I don't. Representative democracy is a flawed way to run a country. Direct democracy is also a flawed way to run a country, as we can clearly see with this referendum campaign. It's impractical because it fails to take into account the fact that circumstances may change between an election campaign and the time that policies come to be implemented. It gives the campaigner a stark choice between implementing policies that are disastrously flawed, simply because they were campaign promises, or not being able to promise anything at all, for fear of the repercussions should circumstances change.

    And what circumstantial change per se has resulted in an excuse not to hold a referendum where one was promised? Do you really believe they ever intended to?


  • Options
    #45
    Elmo
    Registered Users Posts: 23,641 ✭✭✭✭Elmo


    PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »
    Hmm you could be right, how about 'preparing to confirm or change Ireland's stance on the Lisbon treaty'?

    The main point was that regardless of other countries, or other peoples, views, we should give our own.

    And if we say NO do we do it again and have money spent on asking why people vote NO?

    Why didn't they do this to the French or the Dutch? It is total undemocratic to bring the same treaty to the people without as much effort up into re-negotiating the treaty, regardless of the superficial "guarantees".

    Lisbon will be changed in about a year, the governments of Europe know that their will be another Irish ref in 2012 for another treaty. Why rush this one through? Lets look at the next one, lets inform ourselves now, lets openly negotiate with all of the people of Europe.

    This is a ridiculous vote from anyones stand point. Weather your a federalist or weather you think governments should take responsibility for their own mistakes.


  • Options
    #46
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    And what circumstantial change per se has resulted in an excuse not to hold a referendum where one was promised? Do you really believe they ever intended to?
    I was arguing the general case, not the specific. I hope I never have to try to explain why an Irish (let alone a Czech) government failed to live up to an election promise.

    Politicians promise things, and don't deliver them. That's the nature of politicians. If you want to make that illegal, you'll have to make it illegal for politicians to promise things.

    It would make for calmer elections, I'll grant you that.


  • Options
    #47
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Elmo wrote: »
    And if we say NO do we do it again and have money spent on asking why people vote NO?

    Why didn't they do this to the French or the Dutch? It is total undemocratic to bring the same treaty to the people without as much effort up into re-negotiating the treaty, regardless of the superficial "guarantees".

    Lisbon will be changed in about a year, the governments of Europe know that their will be another Irish ref in 2012 for another treaty. Why rush this one through? Lets look at the next one, lets inform ourselves now, lets openly negotiate with all of the people of Europe.

    I confess to cynicism in the face of this noble ideal. The thing is, you see, that it's really quite possible to get involved in European consultations - you can even do it online. It was also possible to get involved in the process that led through the Constitution to the Lisbon Treaty. Yet, outside the circles of the despised 'elites', who bothered?

    cynically,
    Scofflaw


  • Options
    #48
    Elmo
    Registered Users Posts: 23,641 ✭✭✭✭Elmo


    Scofflaw wrote: »
    I confess to cynicism in the face of this noble ideal. The thing is, you see, that it's really quite possible to get involved in European consultations - you can even do it online. It was also possible to get involved in the process that led through the Constitution to the Lisbon Treaty. Yet, outside the circles of the despised 'elites', who bothered?

    cynically,
    Scofflaw

    People go out and vote, they take an interest in these so called "elites" they vote for them they ask them to take care of Europe. And then you suggest that it is better that these so called "elites" send people like Peter Mandelson and Charlie McCreevy off to be commissioners god only knows who the Italians want to get rid off.

    I am sorry but we are interest. Perhaps the "elites" who know best start to act interest in people rather than money.


  • Options
    #49
    utick
    Closed Accounts Posts: 562 ✭✭✭utick


    so the brits may get a 2nd chance at democracy just like ireland, sure why not just ask every coubntry to vote twice to seen as 2 votes is more democratic than 1


  • Options
    #50
    Elmo
    Registered Users Posts: 23,641 ✭✭✭✭Elmo


    utick wrote: »
    so the brits may get a 2nd chance at democracy just like ireland, sure why not just ask every coubntry to vote twice to seen as 2 votes is more democratic than 1

    Let them say NO first before giving them a second go.


  • Options
    #51
    utick
    Closed Accounts Posts: 562 ✭✭✭utick


    Elmo wrote: »
    Let them say NO first before giving them a second go.

    well didnt there elected representitves already vote in favour of it? if ireland is allowed to change its mind on the treaty so should other countries


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    Elmo
    Registered Users Posts: 23,641 ✭✭✭✭Elmo


    utick wrote: »
    well didnt there elected representitves already vote in favour of it? if ireland is allowed to change its mind on the treaty so should other countries

    Yeah but you know what Elected Representatives are like, give them a free meal and 1st class air tickets and they will vote for anything.


Advertisement