Why will the Govt not hold an "Irexit" referendum?

dxhound2005

Irish Kings wrote: »

In theory only. No country is going to attempt to leave again, after watching the bullying of Britain's democratic decision. If you think that's good for the EU, then think again.

Not theory. Any country can leave.

Annasopra

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

The 'Irexit Freedom' party claims it is a 'patriotic', ‘pro-natalist’ group

I thought they might have meant Natal as in a province of South Africa because we're sure to get a trade deal with them, and we might not even have to pay €5 Bn for the privilege like the UK did :rolleyes:

But no, they are going for the Pro-Birth meaning because somehow that's related to Brexit ??



Their other beliefs could even be cynically summed up as
Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.*
- Samuel Johnson , April 7, 1775

* Boswell assures us that Johnson was not indicting patriotism in general, only false patriotism.

Yep - they have a number of strong anti choice members

Hermann Kelly - Former editor of Irish Catholic

Paddy Manning - campaigned strongly against marriage equality and repealing 8th

Kate Lawlor (formerly Bopp) - campaigned strongly against marriage equality and repealing 8th - extreme anti feminist

https://twitter.com/berniequinn/status/1038686424902578176?s=19

ArchXStanton

Cabaal wrote: »

ah yeah those regulations that we don#'t benefit from :rolleyes:
..like EU roaming, cleaner water/air, better protection for wildlife, better safety standards with food, toys etc. You know, all the things Ireland is incapable of doing on its own in a decent way.

It's all fine claiming Ireland will do stuff on its own, but the reality shows that without the EU we'd still have most of the rivers in Ireland with raw sewage still being pumped into them. As it is the EU is forcing to clean up our act on this sewage because subsequent governments don't take it seriously.

If we can't clean up some rivers how do you honestly think we are capable of doing bigger stuff?

Meh,there's also the downside to some of their draconian regulations,my own business has gone downhill since they introduced regulations on what I sell last year,I'll probably be closed by Christmas... But sure if it keeps some overpaid bureaucrat in a job

dxhound2005

ArchXStanton wrote: »

Meh,there's also the downside to some of their draconian regulations,my own business has gone downhill since they introduced regulations on what I sell last year,I'll probably be closed by Christmas... But sure if it keeps some overpaid bureaucrat in a job

You need to change your location.

Irish Kings

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Not theory. Any country can leave.

A bit like claiming anyone can leave the IRA.
In practice they can't after seeing what treatment awaits them.

dxhound2005

Irish Kings wrote: »

A bit like claiming anyone can leave the IRA.
In practice they can't after seeing what treatment awaits them.

In practice any country can leave. But in practice more countries have joined and more want to join.

Cabaal

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

This party has its fair share of crackpots with their anti choice anti women anti lgbt agendas. Paddy Manning, Hermann Kelly, Kate Bopp etc

The same Paddy Manning involved in the NO side during the 2015 ref?
If so then he's the gay man who wanted gay people to have less rights

Didn't he run in the elections after that and crash and burned badly vote wise?

Irish Kings

dxhound2005 wrote: »

In practice any country can leave. But in practice more countries have joined and more want to join.

Yeah, leaving was made real smooth by the EU for Britain.

Cabaal

Irish Kings wrote: »

In theory only. In practice, no country is going to attempt to leave again, (even if they wanted / needed to), after watching the bullying of Britain's democratic decision.
(whether we agree with it or not (and I don't agree with Britain's decision to leave) if we don't respect and facilitate genuine democratic decisions, then democracy has just become a sham)
If you think that's good for the EU, then think again.

Seriously,
How many times does it need to be explained?

Nobody is bullying the UK,
They just can't have their cake and eat it too. They want the benefits of being in the EU without being in the EU, you can't have it both ways.

The EU isn't bullying them, the EU is simply telling them as it is.
Reality is upsetting for some people

dxhound2005

Irish Kings wrote: »

Yeah, leaving was made real smooth by the EU for Britain.

Exactly. It was even built into the regulations. Anti democracy would be forcing everyone to stay indefinitely. Every country joined willingly, any country can choose to leave at any time.

Capt'n Midnight

Strazdas wrote: »

A David Cameron style political stunt of a referendum wouldn't even be possible under the Irish Constitution.

The government would have to decide to leave the EU and put that decision to the electorate for ratification.

In the UK it was a simple Yes/No opinion poll that carried no legal meaning, and even if it did Parliament is sovereign so could overrule it regardless. Cameron didn't even bother trying, could have easily asked "grand, now what sort of leave do you want?"

Here they'd have to frame the question with the EXACT WORDS for the Law that neither the Dáil nor the Supreme Court could change as only another referendum could do that. Also it goes to an independent referendum commission and there's the whole pros and cons documents , and that's only after the dust has settled over the wording.

super_furry

Cabaal wrote: »

The same Paddy Manning involved in the NO side during the 2015 ref?
If so then he's the gay man who wanted gay people to have less rights

Didn't he run in the elections after that and crash and burned badly vote wise?

It's the exact same crowd of malcontents, lunatics and extremists that always attack themselves to such nonsense.

It's only a matter of time before Justin Barrett rocks up.

Oddly enough these people are always on the losing side and if you asked the average person in the street who they were, they wouldn't have a notion.

Irish Kings

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Every country joined willingly, any country can choose to leave at any time.

And the EU it seem will now make it as economically difficult as possible, and try to thwart their democratic decision at every turn.

Cabaal

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Sorry, Brejoining, Breunion - no point getting hung up on words Its the issue that is important here. And no, this is not turning back the clock - such examples are as deceitful, provocative and as unhelpful to a proper discussion as the £350M bus, Turkey joining the EU, etc.
There is a lot to be said for the monarchy though - its not that the present presidential system in the republic is such a essential pillar of its democracy. The next election is shaping up to be no more than a once in seven year bonus prize for the media peacocks wanting to try their hand at a state sponsored celebrity post.

No, no there isn't.

It's funny, here you are making digs at our system when the UK has a system of because of the family you are born to you automatically no questions asked get a position of power and money from the tax payer.

:rolleyes:

The Rape of Lucretia

Irish Kings wrote: »

Yeah, leaving was made real smooth by the EU for Britain.

Quite the contrary. The UK can just settle its outstanding bill and leave, if they wish. It is they who do not want to do that. They want to keep elements of their EU membership even after they have left, realise what they are losing by not keeping them, and are miffed that the EU wont let them keep partial membership so that they have the best of both worlds: an advantage over the EU where it is strong, and the support of EU benefits where it is weak. Yet, paint it like the EU is the bad guy for not signing such a deal.

dxhound2005

Irish Kings wrote: »

And the EU it seem will now make it as economically difficult as possible, and try to thwart their democratic decision at every turn.

It is the countries of the EU which agree any course of action. Not the "EU".

weldoninhio

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

There is no 'will' among the people to leave the EU

Without a vote you can’t say that.

super_furry

weldoninhio wrote: »

Without a vote you can’t say that.

Sure you can, just like there's no desire for Ireland to rejoin the UK. We don't need a vote to say that either.

irishgeo

Cabaal wrote: »

Seriously,
How many times does it need to be explained?

Nobody is bullying the UK,
They just can't have their cake and eat it too. They want the benefits of being in the EU without being in the EU, you can't have it both ways.

The EU isn't bullying them, the EU is simply telling them as it is.
Reality is upsetting for some people

they want to be in the EU but dont to pay to be in it or have pesky foreigners coming to Britain.

ArchXStanton

dxhound2005 wrote: »

It is the countries of the EU which agree any course of action. Not the "EU".

Why weren't the rest of the EU countries invited to this summit after the brexit vote?

https://m.dw.com/en/founding-eu-members-talk-brexit-in-berlin/a-19356401

And why does Merkel and Macron seem to set the agenda for the future of the EU?

noodler

weldoninhio wrote: »

Without a vote you can’t say that.

And risk ignorant people voting based on whatever lies they read in social media and be in the same situation as the UK find itself?

Uncertain business climate, political paralysis and loss of investment and a for what?

They'd go back if they could.

The only benefit our populace would have with a vote here is that there would be no "empire nostalgia" motivation.

dxhound2005

ArchXStanton wrote: »

Why weren't the rest of the EU countries invited to this summit after the brexit vote?

https://m.dw.com/en/founding-eu-members-talk-brexit-in-berlin/a-19356401

And why does Merkel and Macron seem to set the agenda for the future of the EU?

Why is every country not on the UN Security Council?

noodler

Irish Kings wrote: »

And the EU it seem will now make it as economically difficult as possible, and try to thwart their democratic decision at every turn.

Bull****.

You want out of the club, you lose the benefits.

Takes some bizarre mental gymnastics to blame the EU for that.

Cabaal

Irish Kings wrote: »

Yeah, leaving was made real smooth by the EU for Britain.

Again, the UK can leave
But the problem stems from the UK ignoring prior agreements (good Friday) and wanting to have EU benefits without being in EU.

if you were a member of a members only gym and you left would you expect to be able to use the gym and its equipment afterwards?

Irish Kings

noodler wrote: »

Bull****.

You want out of the club, you lose the benefits.

Takes some bizarre mental gymnastics to blame the EU for that.

So if the Irish people in the future developed genuine concerns about the EU and voted to leave, in practice, how would that work out economically for Ireland ?

dxhound2005

Irish Kings wrote: »

So if the Irish people in the future developed genuine concerns about the EU and voted to leave, in practice, how would that work out economically for Ireland ?

What do you mean by genuine concerns?

Cabaal

irishgeo wrote: »

they want to be in the EU but dont to pay to be in it or have pesky foreigners coming to Britain.

Even though the vast majority of those pesky foreigners coming to Britain that they hate aren't anything to do with the EU :pac:

super_furry

Irish Kings wrote: »

So if the Irish people in the future developed genuine concerns about the EU and voted to leave, in practice, how would that work out economically for Ireland ?

Probably about as well as if the Irish people in the future developed genuine concerns about their feet and decided to chop them off.

noodler

Irish Kings wrote: »

So if the Irish people in the future developed genuine concerns about the EU and voted to leave, in practice, how would that work out economically for Ireland ?

They wouldn't be able to have the benefits of being in the EU?

What's your point? How is that unfair?

Why don't we give India the benefits of EU membership without being in the EU?

Capt'n Midnight

Irish Kings wrote: »

Yeah, leaving was made real smooth by the EU for Britain.

You do know who wrote Article 50 ?
Go on, take a wild guess ...

Or who pushed hard for the original Common Market ?
This is why Labour are split down the middle over the EU,
otherwise they'd tear the Tories a new one over this debacle.

Or who was trying hard to get Turkey into the EU ?
Which brought out the anti-immigration vote.

Or who insisted that special access to the Galileo GPS system was to be restricted to EU members only ?
This one item will cost them the same as a year's EU membership.


Oh yeah , real smooth.

dxhound2005

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

You do know who wrote Article 50 ?
Go on, take a wild guess ...

Or who pushed hard for the original Common Market ?
This is why Labour are split down the middle over the EU,
otherwise they'd tear the Tories a new one over this debacle.

Or who was trying hard to get Turkey into the EU ?
Which brought out the anti-immigration vote.

Or who insisted that special access to the Galileo GPS system was to be restricted to EU members only ?
This one item will cost them the same as a year's EU membership.


Oh yeah , real smooth.

There needs to be a People's Vote in the UK to decide on the final deal. They were not given the detail about the GPS system first time round.

Cabaal

Irish Kings wrote: »

So if the Irish people in the future developed genuine concerns about the EU and voted to leave, in practice, how would that work out economically for Ireland ?

Considering it would involve:
- Loss of trade agreements
- Scrapping of prev agreed regulations that cover everything from clean air to employment and mobile roaming
- Scrapping of energy inter connector agreements, telecoms agreements

It would end in a manner that would negatively effect Ireland, but by us leaving it would be our decision to scrap all these things and by doing so it would have a negative impact on our economy, jobs, investment etc

But of course, you continue to blame the EU....after all thats what you are doing with Brexit
:rolleyes:

The Rape of Lucretia

dxhound2005 wrote: »

There needs to be a People's Vote in the UK to decide on the final deal. They were not given the detail about the GPS system first time round.

Thats a nonsense though. The 'People's Vote' is just a mask for a rerun of the referendum and should be called what it is. Whats the potentional outcome of thie People Vote ? An approval or not of the withdrawal deal ? And if turned down, it means the govt has to go back and renegotiate another one, then put that to a Second People's Vote? So, nonsense.
They voted to leave, so should leave whatever the deal. If there is the political leadership to admit, that yes, we have politically and as a nation made a complete shambles of this, we must stop the bus before it goes off the cliff, and we are proposing a new referendum that would potentially revise the decision of the first and cancel Brexit, then they should do so. If not passed, then Brexit goes ahead with whatever deal the team negotiates with the EU.

dxhound2005

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Thats a nonsense though. The 'People's Vote' is just a mask for a rerun of the referendum and should be called what it is. Whats the potentional outcome of thie People Vote ? An approval or not of the withdrawal deal ? And if turned down, it means the govt has to go back and renegotiate another one, then put that to a Second People's Vote? So, nonsense.
They voted to leave, so should leave whatever the deal. If there is the political leadership to admit, that yes, we have politically and as a nation made a complete shambles of this, we must stop the bus before it goes off the cliff, and we are proposing a new referendum that would potentially revise the decision of the first and cancel Brexit. If not passed, then Brexit goes ahead with whatever deal the team negotiates with the EU.

They could just stay. Best out of three. They voted to remain in the 1970's, but that democratic process never satisfied the likes of Farage.

The Rape of Lucretia

dxhound2005 wrote: »

They could just stay. Best out of three. They voted to remain in the 1970's, but that democratic process never satisfied the likes of Farage.

Thats what I mean. A Peoples Vote on the deal is a cod though - it only turns down the deal - which forces no-deal Brexit, not reversing Brexit.

BTW : who voted the last time, when The People, didnt get to vote ?

dxhound2005

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Thats what I mean. A Peoples Vote on the deal is a cod though - it only turns down the deal - which forces no-deal Brexit, not reversing Brexit.

BTW : who voted the last time, when The People, didnt get to vote ?

A lot of EU countries have stated that even now they want the UK to remain. It is not too late for the UK to find some way to reverse their decision.

Cabaal

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Thats what I mean. A Peoples Vote on the deal is a cod though - it only turns down the deal - which forces no-deal Brexit, not reversing Brexit.

Its very easy vote on the deal with two options

Accept Proposed Deal - Leave EU
Rejected the Proposed Deal - Seek to rejoin EU

BTW : who voted the last time, when The People, didnt get to vote ?

Yes they did, the people voted to remain
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_European_Communities_membership_referendum,_1975

So they can vote again if they so wish, they did it before to be fair

Billy86

Irish Kings wrote: »

And the EU it seem will now make it as economically difficult as possible, and try to thwart their democratic decision at every turn.

I'm moving next month, so I am cancelling my gym membership that I have here in Dublin.

When cancelling, I will be asking for some of my membership money back. And to be allowed to take a treadmill, some dumbbells, a cycling machine and the sauna with me. I will also be requesting to be allowed use the gym on occasion, but only when I see fit. I will want discounts that they offer on some classes, the pool and on physiotherapy because they offer these to their members and I will not be bullied into paying the full amount that non-members have to. I will be demanding my own personal locker but do not wish to pay the rental fees for it and will insist that nobody is allowed to use any lockers in a four-locker radius around and occasional security checks by staff on it it, as I will not be a member and so do not want to risk members trying to open my locker when I am not there.

Can you please get in touch with my gym for me, to demand they stop bullying me like this? As you can see I am clearly the victim in all of this.

RobertKK

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

The very link that you attached - highlighted - says...

'...one country cannot hold up progress...'

Yet you translated that as '...Irish concerns should be ignored...'

Who are you trying to kid ?

It's the same thing just phrased differently.
The one country referred to is Ireland and that is what Theresa May was basically asking for.

So answer to your question is no one.

fash

Irish Kings wrote: »

dxhound2005 wrote: »

That is very much democracy. There is nothing stopping Italy or Poland or Ireland leaving. The EU is a community of nations, not some entity that can override democracy.

In theory only. In practice, no country is going to attempt to leave again, (even if they wanted / needed to), after watching the bullying of Britain's democratic decision.
(whether we agree with it or not (and I don't agree with Britain's decision to leave) if we don't respect and facilitate genuine democratic decisions, then democracy has just become a sham)
If you think that's good for the EU, then think again.

Please explain what "bullying" Europe has done? I've seen none - in fact the only bullying I've seen has all been from the UK- trying to use EU citizens as human shields, threatening not to make payments for commitments made (Farage's pension), the Irish border, threatening to destroy the Irish economy etc. The only element anyone could even indirectly accuse the EU of bullying on is the requirement for an open border - although the UK and all campaigners have always maintained that there would be no border and were happy to follow through on their own campaign promises in the negotiation. We can have an interesting discussion on whether using your counterpart's deliberate and calculated contradictions against itself- especially when it is happy to double down on those contradictions constitutes "bullying" if you would like.

I'd have them in the same bucket as the anti vaxxers. Uneducated or bots.

There's a party now for all these people to follow now anyway. We'll then see how many actual people follow this stuff.

Lefty Bicek

dxhound2005 wrote: »

There needs to be a People's Vote in the UK to decide on the final deal. They were not given the detail about the GPS system first time round.

Ah, indeed. 'The People's Vote'.

We didn't get the result we wanted the first time, let's give them another chance to vote correctly.

Where have we heard that before ?

Lefty Bicek

RobertKK wrote: »

It's the same thing just phrased differently.
The one country referred to is Ireland and that is what Theresa May was basically asking for.

So answer to your question is no one.

You translated what you read into something you could understand. Bertrand Russell comes to mind.

And it didn't need to be phrased differerently anyway. We can read the link ourselves.

Cabaal

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

Ah, indeed. 'The People's Vote'.

We didn't get the result we wanted the first time, let's give them another chance to vote correctly.

Where have we heard that before ?

We haven't from people that have a clue...we only hear it from people who try mispresent it to further their agenda for hatred of the EU.
Ireland voted on two things with the same name but they each had different conditions attached,
So we infact voted on different issues,

You don't think people should be allowed vote on different issues with different conditions and outcomes attached?

Lefty Bicek

noodler wrote: »

And risk ignorant people voting...

How very inconvenient that the great unwashed should have a vote.

Perhaps John Stuart Mill was right. Plural voting for people as smart as you think yourself to be.

Two cheers for democracy !

Coillte_Bhoy

weldoninhio wrote: »

Without a vote you can’t say that.

What ****ing planet are you on? Every bloody poll and even anecdotal evidence says so. There is no significant support for leaving, that may well change in the future and if it does there will be political gains for those that advocate it

Coillte_Bhoy

super_furry wrote: »

It's the exact same crowd of malcontents, lunatics and extremists that always attack themselves to such nonsense.

It's only a matter of time before Justin Barrett rocks up.

Oddly enough these people are always on the losing side and if you asked the average person in the street who they were, they wouldn't have a notion.

He has his own nasty little party, The National Party. Thankfully the far right in this country show no sign whatsoever of uniting to form any sort of cohesive movement

eagle eye

For those who don't want to leave, like Fine Gael, it'd be smart to have a vote on it now. I don't think there is any chance of a large vote for leaving.
Irish people don't like change for the most part.
Trump's visit might get things going on this front. I can just imagine him announcing something big with the UK just before he arrives and then telling us all that we would be way better off being involved in a deal with the UK and USA than the rest of Europe.

seamusk84

This is a stupid thread and question.
We were basically a third world country without the EU and it is the reason that a huge portion of us in the capital have jobs with multinationals. Never mind that all the farmers in the country would be bankrupt without the CAP/Single farm payment.

The only people who would want an Ire-Exit or whatever you are calling it would be the type who would vote for for the likes of Trump. Jaysus.....

Lefty Bicek

Cabaal wrote: »

We haven't
Ireland voted on two things with the same name but they each had different conditions attached,
So we infact voted on different issues,

Actually, the analysis published by the government after the first vote indicated that the people voted 'NO' because of lack of knowledge and understanding of the issues.

Concessions on neutrality, number of commissioners, tax etc that pushed the thing through on the second time of asking can probably described as 'different issues', but they aren't the issue.

The issue is that the 'right' result must always be secured. Otherwise, there would be no need to cajole people with slogans about 'Vote Lisbon For Jobs'.

That promise took an inconveniently long time to materialise, eh ?