Eamon Ryan answers Boards.ie questions about the Lisbon Treaty

Darragh

Following the interview I did with Joe Costello from the Labour Party, I got the chance to sit down with Minister Eamon Ryan from the Green Party to ask him about the Lisbon Treaty. This was done at short notice with no time to come to you and ask for questions, but I hope it's useful nonetheless.

I used most of the same (applicable) questions as I did in the last Q&A for consistency.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Zxco-czjOE

Thanks

Darragh

Dinner

Can't get it to play, something about needing to accept a friend request first?


EDIT: never mind, worked the second time. Thanks!

free-man

Darragh wrote: »

Following the interview I did with Joe Costello from the Labour Party, I got the chance to sit down with Minister Eamon Ryan from the Green Party to ask him about the Lisbon Treaty. This was done at short notice with no time to come to you and ask for questions, but I hope it's useful nonetheless.

I used most of the same (applicable) questions as I did in the last Q&A for consistency.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Zxco-czjOE

Thanks

Darragh

"I think it will help us get out of the economic troubles we're in"

- More rubbish and lies

AARRRGH

So far his answers are the typical politician answers - vague statements rather than specifics, e.g. "voting yes will help us get out of the recession". That statement means nothing to me - I'd like to know how voting yes will help get us out of the recession.

Rb

And I would love to see one valid reason based on the Treaty to vote No.

Good job Darragh, particularly well done at short notice although it certainly hasn't changed my opinion of the greens

KELTICKNIGHTT

still no clear information on this renamed treaty,general answers,on both yes and no side,

Euro_Kraut

free-man wrote: »

"I think it will help us get out of the economic troubles we're in"

- More rubbish and lies

How can his opinion be lie?

ei.sdraob

damn i cant believe im agreeing with the Greens but he was spot on about the Irish energy dependence

KELTICKNIGHTT wrote: »

still no clear information on this renamed treaty,general answers,on both yes and no side,

If you watched the video, near the end he talked about the Common Energy Policy in Lisbon, which would affect this country in huge positive manner

is there anything else about Lisbon you want to know about?

checkout my signature for more info and links (first one is from the independent and impartial refcom site)

...

Scofflaw

KELTICKNIGHTT wrote: »

still no clear information on this renamed treaty,general answers,on both yes and no side,

Relying on the political campaigns for 'clear information' is hardly a good idea...

cordially,
Scofflaw

ei.sdraob

Euro_Kraut wrote: »

How can his opinion be lie?

He is not Declan Ganley, only Declans opinion is sacred and true

:mad:

free-man

Euro_Kraut wrote: »

How can his opinion be lie?

We'll be able to verify it 6 months from now.

Until then, yes its just his opinion which will mislead people.

free-man

ei.sdraob wrote: »

He is not Declan Ganley, only Declans opinion is sacred and true

:mad:

Do you really think every No voter votes a certain way because of Declan Ganley?

I think people will make their own mind up but its good to see some balance in the debate recently.

ei.sdraob

free-man wrote: »

Do you really think every No voter votes a certain way because of Declan Ganley?

reading some of the posts in this forum, its hard not to reach a conclusion that certain members to think so

/

KELTICKNIGHTT

Scofflaw wrote: »

Relying on the political campaigns for 'clear information' is hardly a good idea...

cordially,
Scofflaw

people need beeter info about the pros and cons,its common sense,all you have is small info from yes side and same from no side,

ei.sdraob

KELTICKNIGHTT wrote: »

people need beeter info about the pros and cons,its common sense,all you have is small info from yes side and same from no side,

there is plenty of info

start here

/

Euro_Kraut

free-man wrote: »

We'll be able to verify it 6 months from now.

Until then, yes its just his opinion which will mislead people.

Do you understand the difference between the following 2 sentences:

1. A yes vote will help our economy

2. I think a Yes vote will help our economy

Seriously it is not a very difficult concept. One is fact the other opinion. Opinions by their definition cannot be lies as you are not making a statement of fact.

getcover

Did you ask him why he and the others Greens could so quickly do a 180 degree turn on many "core" Green principles to get into goverment?
Co-location of hospitals?
Education policy?
Incinerator in poolbeg?
Why they all flew off to Planet bertie?

If an individual or party lays out principles and tells everybody those principles are not for changing, they must expect a severe backlash when they ditch those principles at the first whiff of power.

KELTICKNIGHTT

ei.sdraob wrote: »

there is plenty of info

start here

/

but not enough compared to other campagins when people are asked to vote,why is it left to last 48 hours too repeat same things that was sais in last treaty,any thing said is vage at best,yes info but doesnt go into great detail in the pros and cons,that why it fail last time, anyone i ask said ,ask ask why and thats the pros and cons,theres also alot of miss info out there,even now this very second rte taking on 6 0 clock news , with cowan,anything his saying is small info and vage

ei.sdraob

KELTICKNIGHTT wrote: »

but not enough compared to other campagins when people are asked to vote,why is it left to last 48 hours too repeat same things that was sais in last treaty,any thing said is vage at best,yes info but doesnt go into great detail in the pros and cons,that why it fail last time, anyone i ask said ,ask ask why and thats the pros and cons,theres also alot of miss info out there,even now this very second rte taking on 6 0 clock news , with cowan,anything his saying is small info and vage

thats because our politicians are a failure

and the campaign this time around is barely better than last time


but there definately is no shortage of info (see my signature) out there

and there are quite alot of debates, in the media and here on boards.ie

free-man

Euro_Kraut wrote: »

Do you understand the difference between the following 2 sentences:

1. A yes vote will help our economy

2. I think a Yes vote will help our economy

Seriously it is not a very difficult concept. One is fact the other opinion. Opinions by their definition cannot be lies as you are not making a statement of fact.

He said #2 in a matter of fact manner.

I believe this is misleading and the fact is we'll find out soon enough.

Edit: Oh and thanks for the condescending tone. Gotta love that.

KELTICKNIGHTT

rte 6 0 clock news now explained better than all sides what it means that people would have alot more understanding,simply down to explaining the pros and cons of treaty,rte didnt give awhole lot of detail but explained it laymans terms in how it affects ireland in all ways

Euro_Kraut

free-man wrote: »

He said #2 in a matter of fact manner.

He expressed his opinion. Now perhaps you disagree with his opinion, but that is a world away from calling a person a liar.

free-man

Euro_Kraut wrote: »

He expressed his opinion. Now perhaps you disagree with his opinion, but that is a world away from calling a person a liar.

I've been called a liar by boards members by expressing my opinion.

I retract calling him a liar per say but I think you know he is being incredibly misleading, you might admit to that?

sceptre

free-man wrote: »

I've been called a liar by boards members by expressing my opinion.

Report those posts like everyone else does. I know for a fact the procedure is clear because it's all laid out in the charter. The requirements for calling someone a liar are clearly laid out in the charter. I am very particular and swift to act on the back of entirely justifiable complaints about such things. Assuming that you've read the charter, you need to follow it and can have a reasonable expectation that others will do likewise and that the moderation team will take action against those who don't.

Just report the posts instead of rambling on about it without links. Thank you, come again.

PS: The charter makes an interesting read. Advisable for all who post.

free-man

sceptre wrote: »

Report those posts like everyone else does. I know for a fact the procedure is clear because it's all laid out in the charter. The requirements for calling someone a liar are clearly laid out in the charter. I am very particular and swift to act on the back of entirely justifiable complaints about such things. Assuming that you've read the charter, you need to follow it and can have a reasonable expectation that others will do likewise and that the moderation team will take action against those who don't.

Just report the posts instead of rambling on about it without links. Thank you, come again.

PS: The charter makes an interesting read. Advisable for all who post.

Come again?

What makes you think I have or haven't reported them?

sceptre

free-man wrote: »

Come again?

What makes you think I have or haven't reported them?

If you take a quick glance to your left...
<

---

Politics moderator. I get all reported posts in this forum forwarded to me so that action can be taken promptly where appropriate.

<

---

Site administrator. I can see any and all reported posts since it was first possible to report posts.

I don't think you haven't reported a post ever. I know you haven't. But feel free to where you feel you've been mistreated by another poster in the future - it's the little warning triangle icon at the bottom-left of each post. At the core of the Politics forum charter is that people shouldn't be insulted or abused by other members. That applies to all members of the site. If you've been called a liar you deserve to have justice done. It's easier for me if you report it rather than me going through the replies to all of your 192 posts on boards.ie. It's part of what we do on a moderation level, help people to post their opinions in a reasonable way without personal abuse. Calling someone a liar without proof is personal abuse. I'll be happy to look sternly into any occasions where you've been subjected to this. Pointless calling people out on thread about it though (and that's why it's mentioned in the charter) - the moderators have the power to sanction and stop this behaviour from anyone who has subjected you to abuse. Neither you nor anyone else deserves to be subjected to that and none of us want that kind of behaviour on the site. Again, it's part of what we do.

Please don't be slow to send any more questions that don't go on this thread (in other words queries that don't relate to Eamon Ryan answering boards.ie's questions about the Lisbon Treaty) to me by PM. I always get back to people with queries as soon as possible.

free-man

sceptre wrote: »

If you take a quick glance to your left...
<

---

Politics moderator. I get all reported posts in this forum forwarded to me so that action can be taken promptly where appropriate.

<

---

Site administrator. I can see any and all reported posts since it was first possible to report posts.

I don't think you haven't reported a post ever. I know you haven't. But feel free to where you feel you've been mistreated by another poster in the future - it's the little warning triangle icon at the bottom-left of each post. At the core of the Politics forum charter is that people shouldn't be insulted or abused by other members. That applies to all members of the site. If you've been called a liar you deserve to have justice done. It's easier for me if you report it rather than me going through the replies to all of your 192 posts on boards.ie. It's part of what we do on a moderation level, help people to post their opinions in a reasonable way without personal abuse. Calling someone a liar without proof is personal abuse. I'll be happy to look sternly into any occasions where you've been subjected to this. Pointless calling people out on thread about it though (and that's why it's mentioned in the charter) - the moderators have the power to sanction and stop this behaviour from anyone who has subjected you to abuse. Neither you nor anyone else deserves to be subjected to that and none of us want that kind of behaviour on the site. Again, it's part of what we do.

Please don't be slow to send any more questions that don't go on this thread (in other words queries that don't relate to Eamon Ryan answering boards.ie's questions about the Lisbon Treaty) to me by PM. I always get back to people with queries as soon as possible.

Thanks for the detailed response. If I see it happening again I will most definitely report it.

Hank Scorpio

Dont trust him, he made a mockery of the broadband forum when he asked for peoples opinions and went on to sign three ireland as the main provider for people without broadband in ireland( a totally unusable service ) and after this was done he just ignored the forum.

Long Onion

KELTICKNIGHTT wrote: »

rte 6 0 clock news now explained better than all sides what it means that people would have alot more understanding,simply down to explaining the pros and cons of treaty,rte didnt give awhole lot of detail but explained it laymans terms in how it affects ireland in all ways

I think the main issue is that it is not entirely possible to explain the treaty in laymans terms. The EU, its mandates, traeties and structures are sprawling and hard to get a true handle on without an awful lot of time spent studying them. Joe Higgins has gaps in his knowledge as does Eamonn Ryan as does Barosso etc. etc.

To fully understand the impact of Lisbon, you would need to be fully au fait with all areas of the EU - the ECJ, The Commission, the Parliament, all their competencies, their mandates, their fondness for semantics and so on and so forth.

To fully understand the issue of the minimum wage you would have to analyse in-depth, not just Laval but a number of other lengthy cases which precede, inform and compliment it. To try and explain this in laymens terms would be difficult, if you do not carry out this exercise yourself, you will be relying on the interpretation of another, this will always lead to the trust/distrust debate.

It could be argued that a decision of this complexity is not suitable material for a referendum of the people, as few, if any truly understand it's full implications. The alternative would mean ignoring the Crotty case and letting the government decide whether it should be accepted or rejected. The problem here is that can we be sure that the government themselves fully understand the treaty, or can we trust them to make the right decisions?

If the answer to the two questions above is no, I think we may have bigger issues to debate than Lisbon.