Varadkar afraid that a Referendum will be about Septic Tanks

meglome

Faustino wrote: »

I have doubts it will even make it to refferendum. Europe have learnt from initial mistakes when it comes to letting us vote on their policies.

What they will be doing right now is grouping together some clever lawyers and will be wording a new piece of legislation that manages to get around our constitution but still set out what it means to do.

Scumbags.

No... either a referendum is needed as per or constitution or it's not. End off.

Just out of curiosity did you think the Lisbon debate was something to aspire to?

Sponge Bob

No protocol..no Lisbon. We voted on both together.

Bullseye1

Podge_irl wrote: »

What on earth do Septic tanks have to do with a referendum on European budgetary rules?

I'm sure some of the political elite will find a way LOL.

Faustino

VinLieger wrote: »

Its not Europes choice on whether they allow us to vote or not, it is unfortunately down to how the treaty affects our constitution.

I think you're missing my point. Enda doesn't want a refferendum, Europe doesn't want a refferendum. The Irish citizens however, want a refferendum, but this choice will never be afforded to us.

They will cleverly word the new treaty in such a way that the Attorney General won't be able to make sense of it.

"But surely our government would never do something like that" some might say....

Bullseye1

I have not seen any people looking for a referendum? Where are you getting this from?

Faustino

meglome wrote: »

No... either a referendum is needed as per or constitution or it's not. End off.

Just out of curiosity did you think the Lisbon debate was something to aspire to?

I think they got a convincing answer of no from us, and predictably they scaremongered us into voting yes a second time. Pretty much every negative situation they said would happen if we voted no a second time happened anyway.

It left us in a weakened position politically, this new treaty will be even worse.

Scofflaw

Faustino wrote: »

I think you're missing my point. Enda doesn't want a refferendum, Europe doesn't want a refferendum. The Irish citizens however, want a refferendum, but this choice will never be afforded to us.

They will cleverly word the new treaty in such a way that the Attorney General won't be able to make sense of it.

"But surely our government would never do something like that" some might say....

They wouldn't do that, to be fair, because it would be self-defeating - nor would they even have the power to do it, because a treaty is negotiated, not written by the Irish government for the benefit of the AG.

What they would do is try to negotiate the treaty so that it did not infringe on our Constitution in any way, and did not, therefore, require a referendum.

And the result of a successful negotiation there would be a treaty that respected the Irish Constitution and did not infringe on it. Which is apparently a bad thing, or so you've just said.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Sponge Bob

Enda is about to approve a new EU treaty today...so we will have to have a referendum. This made Leo think of septic tanks for the first time ever.

Faustino

Scofflaw wrote: »

They wouldn't do that, to be fair, because it would be self-defeating - nor would they even have the power to do it, because a treaty is negotiated, not written by the Irish government for the benefit of the AG.

What they would do is try to negotiate the treaty so that it did not infringe on our Constitution in any way, and did not, therefore, require a referendum.

And the result of a successful negotiation there would be a treaty that respected the Irish Constitution and did not infringe on it. Which is apparently a bad thing, or so you've just said.

cordially,
Scofflaw

I respect your opinion but i think it's quite naive to think Europe respects the Irish Constitution.

Bullseye1

Not necessarily. But someone will probably ask the Supreme Court to look at it.

Scofflaw

Faustino wrote: »

I respect your opinion but i think it's quite naive to think Europe respects the Irish Constitution.

The Irish Constitution is a legal constraint on the Irish government - "Europe" has no choice but to respect it, where it applies. And the limits of its application are also set by the Constitution, not by "Europe".

cordially,
Scofflaw

Scofflaw

Bullseye1 wrote: »

Enda is about to approve a new EU treaty today...so we will have to have a referendum. This made Leo think of septic tanks for the first time ever.

Not necessarily. But someone will probably ask the Supreme Court to look at it.

Bullseye is quite correct - EU treaties (and this isn't actually one) don't require a referendum simply because they're EU treaties. They require them only if they don't respect the Constitution in themselves, because then the government must ask the people to allow the Constitution to be changed to make room for them.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Faustino

Was.. (Is) everyone here in favour of the Lisbon treaty?

Sponge Bob

Lisbon + Protocol together. Yes.

Chuck Stone

Faustino wrote: »

Is everyone here in favour of the Lisbon treaty?

I really don't think we've much of a choice but to integrate further with the EU at this stage.

Also, I personally would like to see the EU with a better defined security stance instead of the sickening gutlessness and kowtowing to the US we currently witness.

Faustino

Sponge Bob wrote: »

Lisbon + Protocol together. Yes.

Explain what you mean by protocol, and can you give me an example of how Lisbon has worked for us in a positive way?

Sponge Bob

See my link above. We voted on that.

Manach

Perhaps all side need to take stock and reflect that the AG has not yet determined if a referendum is needed, and will likely take a fair bit of time to construct a considered opinion on the matter to check if it falls within the Crotty judgement criteria.

Liam Byrne

How about a referendum to immediately fire TDs who had the neck to apply for increases beyond the agreed limits ?

That would be passed, Leo, because that's actually something the people want.

But of course, that wouldn't suit your personal agenda.

meglome

Faustino wrote: »

Was.. (Is) everyone here in favour of the Lisbon treaty?

I read it, most of it anyway and yes I am. Do you think it's caused a problem for us? And if so care to explain what that is?

drunkmonkey

Can someone explain to me why if we vote yes this time we won't ever have to vote again. Is that not a bit odd and a bad idea?

Trampas

who does leo talk about every other area bar his own department?

will he be cut on the first shuffle?

meglome

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Can someone explain to me why if we vote yes this time we won't ever have to vote again. Is that not a bit odd and a bad idea?

Well we could vote on it again. All we'd need to do it vote in a government who supported that. There's nothing in the constitution (as far as I know) that sets any limit on how many times we can vote on any referenda.

Going Forward

Podge_irl wrote: »

What on earth do Septic tanks have to do with a referendum on European budgetary rules?

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

twinytwo

what i would be more worried about is the 40 pc of people who said they would vote yes in a ref...


VOTE YES.... WHEN THEY DONT EVEN KNOW WHAT THEY WOULD BE VOTING YES FOR.........


thats how demented this country is.

meglome

twinytwo wrote: »

what i would be more worried about is the 40 pc of people who said they would vote yes in a ref...


VOTE YES.... WHEN THEY DONT EVEN KNOW WHAT THEY WOULD BE VOTING YES FOR.........


thats how demented this country is.

And the 37% (as I recall) who would vote no without seeing it. The EU has been good for and to this country so I can understand the yes vote, the no vote is more scary.

Scofflaw

twinytwo wrote: »

what i would be more worried about is the 40 pc of people who said they would vote yes in a ref...


VOTE YES.... WHEN THEY DONT EVEN KNOW WHAT THEY WOULD BE VOTING YES FOR.........


thats how demented this country is.

Is it odder than voting No to something you haven't seen? The only sensible response to that poll was "Don't Know".

meglome wrote:

Well we could vote on it again. All we'd need to do it vote in a government who supported that. There's nothing in the constitution (as far as I know) that sets any limit on how many times we can vote on any referenda.

It was tested at Lisbon 2 - a case was taken to the Supreme Court opposing the re-run of the referendum. The judgement returned was that the government could, if it wanted to, re-run exactly the same question as many times as it liked as often as it liked.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Sand

meglome wrote: »

And the 37% (as I recall) who would vote no without seeing it. The EU has been good for and to this country so I can understand the yes vote, the no vote is more scary.

Overall EU membership has been good. Euro membership, well, lets say the jury is still out if tying ourselves in a suicide pact with a demented Merkel will have a happy ending.

Either way - people saying Yes or No without having seen any final agreement are equally dumb. The government and Merkel will do everything they can to deny the Irish people any vote or decision until the "facts on the ground" are already determined. If there is a referendum, it may be the last time the Irish people are allowed to protect Irish sovereignty in a meaningful sense. It ought to be weighed up extremely carefully.

Going Forward

Sand wrote: »

Overall EU membership has been good. Euro membership, well, lets say the jury is still out if tying ourselves in a suicide pact with a demented Merkel will have a happy ending.

Either way - people saying Yes or No without having seen any final agreement are equally dumb. The government and Merkel will do everything they can to deny the Irish people any vote or decision until the "facts on the ground" are already determined. If there is a referendum, it may be the last time the Irish people are allowed to protect Irish sovereignty in a meaningful sense. It ought to be weighed up extremely carefully.

I cannot see any reason to vote yes in any EU referendum unless something tangible is offered to Ireland in return.

If it goes to a referendum, how could any sane Irish person, or government minister advocate a yes vote without first securing some concession on the terms and conditions of the ongoing austerity package bailout agreement?

Chucky the tree

Going Forward wrote: »

I cannot see any reason to vote yes in any EU referendum unless something tangible is offered to Ireland in return.

If it goes to a referendum, how could any sane Irish person, or government minister advocate a yes vote without first securing some concession on the terms and conditions of the ongoing austerity package bailout agreement?

If it's to the benefit of Ireland then a yes vote is a pretty clear and obvious choice even without any concessions.

Sponge Bob

The Fiskal Kompact is explained here. Notably it contains a reference to a requirement in another deal last year which older document contains no requirement or something like that.

It had Vincent Browme 'headwrecked' earlier. He simply called it a lie.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505245_162-57368512/a-quick-look-at-the-eu-fiscal-compact/

DEBT BRAKES

— All euro countries introduce balanced-budget rules into their constitutions or primary law, which cap annual structural deficits — when a government spends more than it receives in taxes — at 0.5 percent of gross domestic product. That limit can only be broken during a deep recession or exceptional circumstances that hit a government's finances.

— If the limit is broken, an automatic correction mechanism is triggered, which ensures that the deficit is brought back in line.

— The debt brakes give more teeth to existing EU rules, which limit annual deficits at 3 percent of GDP.

THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE

— If one country's debt brake is suspected of being too soft, it can be taken to Europe's central court. The ECJ can then impose a fine of up to 0.1 percent of GDP against the country. The fine will be paid into the eurozone's new bailout fund, the euro500 billion European Stability Mechanism.

— Contrary to initial demands from Germany, the ECJ will not be involved in punishing countries whose actual deficits run too high.

TIGHTER SANCTIONS

— Eurozone countries will commit to always support financial sanctions for deficit sinners proposed by the Commission, unless a qualified majority of them vote to stop the sanctions. Until now, a qualified majority was needed to impose sanctions, which meant that no state was ever punished for breaking the deficit cap.

CLOSER COORDINATION

— All eurozone states promise to inform their partners about significant economic reforms in advance.

WHEN WILL IT INTO FORCE?

— The new treaty will come into force once it has been passed by the parliaments of at least 12 countries that use the euro. To make sure that happens quickly, only states that have ratified the treaty can get help from the new bailout fund, the ESM. That is seen as a provision targeted especially at debt-ridden Ireland, where a referendum may be necessary to adopt the accord.

Except that our bailout deal was done BEFORE this thing was agreed and cannot be undone by this thing. They cannot apply retroactive conditions on top of the already onerous conditions.

Were we to require Bailout Number 2 that would be a different situation, of course.

No wonder Varadkar has taken a sudden interest in septic tanks eh!! He can understand the complexities of those complexities.

meglome

Sand wrote: »

Overall EU membership has been good. Euro membership, well, lets say the jury is still out if tying ourselves in a suicide pact with a demented Merkel will have a happy ending.

Sure the Euro is still in crisis but it's not over yet by any means.

Sand wrote: »

Either way - people saying Yes or No without having seen any final agreement are equally dumb. The government and Merkel will do everything they can to deny the Irish people any vote or decision until the "facts on the ground" are already determined. If there is a referendum, it may be the last time the Irish people are allowed to protect Irish sovereignty in a meaningful sense. It ought to be weighed up extremely carefully.

To be fair I personally wouldn't vote yes or no without reading it but on balance I'd still give the EU the benefit of the doubt. Some people value this 'sovereignty' of ours more than others, personally I've never known us to use it wisely so would the loss of some of it actually be an issue. And honestly it's just hyperbole to suggest that it's gone forever anyway, we can decide at any time to leave the EU if that's what we want.

Scofflaw

Sand wrote: »

Overall EU membership has been good. Euro membership, well, lets say the jury is still out if tying ourselves in a suicide pact with a demented Merkel will have a happy ending.

Either way - people saying Yes or No without having seen any final agreement are equally dumb. The government and Merkel will do everything they can to deny the Irish people any vote or decision until the "facts on the ground" are already determined. If there is a referendum, it may be the last time the Irish people are allowed to protect Irish sovereignty in a meaningful sense. It ought to be weighed up extremely carefully.

The Irish government and Merkel are pulling in different directions on a referendum - the Germans want a constitutional debt brake, which would mean a referendum.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Sponge Bob

I think the Germans fancy a referendum even less. So a statute it shall probably be like the NTMA Emergency Powers Act 2012...or something like that.

ednwireland

considering the septic tank charges are imposed by the eu, the austerity is forced by the eu, the houshold charge is because the rest of the eu (sorry for the paraphrase but its sort of what i hear in soundbytes from various gov spokespeople)

the why wouldnt the people think that a referendum on eu fiscal policy is a referendum on all those other things the eu has 'forced' on us.

the gov seems to want it both ways (as ever ) blame europe when it suits them and then claim its not relevent when it doesnt

anyway wasnt lisbon supposed to do away with the need for referenda

JustinDee

ednwireland wrote: »

considering the septic tank charges are imposed by the eu, the austerity is forced by the eu, the houshold charge is because the rest of the eu (sorry for the paraphrase but its sort of what i hear in soundbytes from various gov spokespeople)

the why wouldnt the people think that a referendum on eu fiscal policy is a referendum on all those other things the eu has 'forced' on us.

How very "Irish" if thats how you summise the situation.

ednwireland

JustinDee wrote: »

How very "Irish" if thats how you summise the situation.

and i'm not even irish just how i feel (all) goverments look for scapegoats when implemeting policy, rather than just saying we need to do this. then wonder why it comes back to bite them in the ass.

anyway i dont get a vote

meglome

ednwireland wrote: »

considering the septic tank charges are imposed by the eu, the austerity is forced by the eu, the houshold charge is because the rest of the eu (sorry for the paraphrase but its sort of what i hear in soundbytes from various gov spokespeople)

the why wouldnt the people think that a referendum on eu fiscal policy is a referendum on all those other things the eu has 'forced' on us.

the gov seems to want it both ways (as ever ) blame europe when it suits them and then claim its not relevent when it doesnt

And then it comes time for a referendum and it all comes home to roost. Our lot are not as bad as the UK politicians for taking the credit for EU initiatives and blaming them when something goes wrong but we're not great at times.

ednwireland wrote: »

anyway wasnt lisbon supposed to do away with the need for referenda

Don't worry the No side have completely forgotten about this and will be trotting out the same lies all over again.

JustinDee

ednwireland wrote: »

and i'm not even irish just how i feel (all) goverments look for scapegoats when implemeting policy, rather than just saying we need to do this. then wonder why it comes back to bite them in the ass.

anyway i dont get a vote

Nah, its "Irish". The blame-game is worse on the electoral ground.

twinytwo

meglome wrote: »

And the 37% (as I recall) who would vote no without seeing it. The EU has been good for and to this country so I can understand the yes vote, the no vote is more scary.

Yes no doubt the being in the EU has benefited the country... however the EU is changing... it is debatable if these changes are good for us in the long run.

The primary reason I have a problem with the EU as a whole, is they are slowly eroding the say of the people. Surly one of the original building blocks of the EU. Now one can also argue that benefits of referendums and the fact that goverments are elected etc etc....But the its the same old story germany says jump, the rest of europe jumps and cameron/britian is the only one who finally told them to F off... history repeating itself much??

Our own government cannot make the correct decisions about basic everyday stuff in running the country, they cant and/or wont make the correct decisions in europe and i doubt the well being of this country is very high on the list of any other countries agenda.

bmaxi

Why not have a referendum to abolish the constitution altogether? Obviously the politicians are pissed at the very idea that Joe Soap should have any say in the future of the country, how dare the Citizenry complain about loss of sovereignty.
I have absolutely no doubt that if it is decided that a referendum is not needed and the case is taken to the Supreme Court, it will be lost. That's how much confidence I have in the independence of the Judiciary and of the ability of this little backwater putting the kybosh on any plans of Frau Merkel

Scofflaw

twinytwo wrote: »

Yes no doubt the being in the EU has benefited the country... however the EU is changing... it is debatable if these changes are good for us in the long run.

The primary reason I have a problem with the EU as a whole, is they are slowly eroding the say of the people. Surly one of the original building blocks of the EU. Now one can also argue that benefits of referendums and the fact that goverments are elected etc etc....But the its the same old story germany says jump, the rest of europe jumps and cameron/britian is the only one who finally told them to F off... history repeating itself much??

Our own government cannot make the correct decisions about basic everyday stuff in running the country, they cant and/or wont make the correct decisions in europe and i doubt the well being of this country is very high on the list of any other countries agenda.

There's a danger - and it's one that Cameron highlighted, albeit in very selfish terms - that the current eurozone crisis will produce what is effectively a separate intergovernmental system for the eurozone. As a small country, we don't want that, because intergovernmental systems are invariably dominated by the largest states. That is why Ireland has traditionally supported the Commission and the 'community method' of the EU, because they blunt the force of the large states.

The problem, though, is that people simply perceive pretty much everything European as "EU stuff", which leads them to oppose the European system that Ireland has always benefited from - apparently in the mistaken belief that it would mean no longer having to put up with the "bullying" of Germany or France, which is completely mistaken. Europe is Europe, with or without the EU, and our neighbouring countries are our neighbouring countries, with or without the EU. Whether the EU exists or not, Ireland will still have to take account of the actions and preferences of the largest European nations, and Germany, France, the UK etc will continue to be those nations.

What we are seeing at the moment is not "the EU" in action - we are seeing, on the contrary, a resurgence of intergovernmentalism, because the mechanisms of the eurozone are primarily intergovernmental. And intergovernmental mechanisms are traditionally opaque and rather detached from the citizen - they're the province of foreign policy mandarins, backroom deals, and power relations between the states involved.

The sensible Irish reaction to this is not, as people seem to think, to react to the more naked force of Germany and France on an intergovernmental stage by becoming "less European" ourselves, and trying to play the same game - we will not win such a game, because we are very very much less powerful than the big countries. We only think we should be able to play on the same basis because the ordinary system of the EU for the last 20 years has been a system where the big states have voluntarily used only fractions of their power. What we need is to have the eurozone brought within that system, to move away from intergovernmentalism in Europe, not towards it, because it's a system in which the only real hope for a small state is to find a protective big state, and have only one set of demands to bow to.

Paradoxically, in order to have independence of action within Europe, we need the constraints the EU provides. We seem to be in danger of forgetting that, because the artificially level playing field the EU provides has been part of our thinking for so long that we've come to believe that Ireland is an equal player when all the constraints are removed. We're not, and we're seeing that at the moment.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Manach

bmaxi wrote: »

Why not have a referendum to abolish the constitution altogether? Obviously the politicians are pissed at the very idea that Joe Soap should have any say in the future of the country, how dare the Citizenry complain about loss of sovereignty.

OT
Awaiting with baited breath the planned constitutional convention which is to modernise the document. I'm sure Leo V. will have some great ideas.

Faustino

it says it all really...

mikom

Faustino wrote: »

it says it all really...

Jesus wept...

Scofflaw

Just a reminder that discussion uses words, not pictures or videos. A picture may be worth a thousand words, but the words it says are entirely at the discretion of the viewer.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Faustino

Scofflaw wrote: »

Just a reminder that discussion uses words, not pictures or videos. A picture may be worth a thousand words, but the words it says are entirely at the discretion of the viewer.

moderately,
Scofflaw

I agree, those photos of Enda should come with an 18 warning

[MOD]Congrats, that earns you the yellow card you narrowly avoided earlier. This is not AH.[/MOD]

Sand

Scofflaw wrote: »

The Irish government and Merkel are pulling in different directions on a referendum - the Germans want a constitutional debt brake, which would mean a referendum.

cordially,
Scofflaw

I dont think the Irish government has a direction - the Germans are clear on what they want. The Irish are merely trying to assist them achieve it without triggering the requirement for a referendum where the Irish people may get a voice. Classic local-elite keeping the natives under control in exchange for favour from the imperial core.

If there is no referendum hopefully we can put to bed once and for all the myth that the Irish citizen has any responsibility for the actions of the Irish government.

As for that picture...Jaysus. Thats our Taoiseach there. Thats our man in Europe...

Going Forward

Sand wrote: »

As for that picture...Jaysus. Thats our Taoiseach there. Thats our man in Europe...

I was going to try and be clever about Enda Kenny, but the longer I look at it the more I actually believe that he must feel quite humiliated to look so patronized by Sarkozy.

I dont think Kenny is up to the wiles of these guys.

I genuinely dont know if he's a decent guy now very nearly out of his depth trying desperately to ingratiate himself or just the wrong man in the wrong place.

Sand

Well, its clear Sarkozy is very deliberately dismissing Kenny with that gesture. The whole body language of Sarkozy cuffing him around the back of the head like he would a child without even looking at him, and Kenny cringing not sure how to react ( "Should I punch the President of France?") speaks volumes. Sarkozy knows the cameras are there. Kenny and Sarkozy are not friends, not even close.

Kenny is a probably a personally decent man - but then Cowen is also probably a personally decent man. We dont seem to have any shortage of personally decent politicians...decent politicians on the other hand we seem to be desperately short of. The only reason Kenny is Taoiseach today is the "Up Mayo" brigade swinging behind him in mid-late 2010. No one competent in his party had any confidence in him up to that point. The "Up Mayo" brigade are finding out that they are incompetent when it comes to handling our EU "partners". Unfortunately, we will suffer for it.