The Lisbon vote

[television]

There is huge business and corporate influence on this treaty. European policy on Education is mmoving increasingly towards privitisation and this treaty allows for further privitisation of Health also. Im not a socialist but further privitisation of these key public services will benifit the rich and further marginalise the poor accross europe. this is the reason i am viting no

 

[Madangan]

If you seriously believe that the EU is "dominating" us then you should be opposed to our continued EU membership in general. The question I'd ask is how does the Lisbon treaty extend this domination or does it actually make it less likely with it's measures increasing the powers of the EU parliament over legislation and the EU budget.

If all EU member countries are equal then the "vote yes or we will be in trouble and the big boys wont invite us to the best parties" argument doesnt wash. If we are not equal then maybe that argument does wash but equally the term domination would also be correct. This doesnt mean we have to pull out altogether merely that we should not relinquish even more sovereignty than we already have under the original accession treaty ,maastricht, nice etc...

The "have you read every page of it" argument is misleading. The fairer question to ask the politicians advocating a yes vote is have they read the consolidated text of the EU treaties after they've been modified by Lisbon. If they read the whole Lisbon treaty they'd be far more likely to miss something than if they studied the consolidated text.

Agreed as to reading the consolidated text. However I take it as a given that any one reading the treaty would have all other treaties in front of them otherwise it would be akin to reading a Finance Act for 2007 which amended a multitude of other acts withou having those other acts before you.

Also I dont expect every Tom Dick and Harriet to read all of the above but seriously is it too much to ask that our Taoiseach and current EU commissioner(to name but two) would do so. Seriously I thought once Bertie had gone we might have a leader who showed us a modicum of respect!

Perhaps the key question is do EU governments share the vision of Arch Europeans like the out of touch Giscard D,Estaing to create a US of Europe. I think the answer is no as national sovereignty remains intact under Lisbon.

If I thought the answer to that was no then that would bring me a long long way towards the Yes camp. Its not just D,Estaing, Prodi was at it too a bit.

Having said all of that my 83 year old mother voted today in her nursing home and when I asked what she did she said " the two main parties were in favour and as Sinn Fein were against that decided it for me I voted YES" And she hasnt read anything other than the Indo and leaflets!

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

Why? Can the people not be trusted to make the right decision?

No, that is exactly my point. And even if we scrape a Yes we will have been dealt a salutary lesson on "referendum roulette". The other 26 countries see this clearly and avoided referenda but somehow we must always have Dev spinning the barrel at our heads.

The problem with the Yes campaign is that they dare not spell out their real case. For the real case is that "No will be a disaster" and to spell that out could be self fulfilling if there actually was a No. That's what Bertie said and a guy who can back horses like he can has to be respected. But seriously, there must at least be a fear that is a correct interpretation. The RC booklet simply states that No means we continue as is, that is a very optimistic and therefore misleading assessment.

Ireland has risen from being the poorest nation in the EU when we joined in 1973 to being the richest today. This is on the back of a "most favoured nation status" which politicians like Charles Haughey skilfully nurtured. No is in danger of condemning us to "least favoured nation status" at least with the political elite and it is they who count. Not much help to Ireland being the toast of of the British Nationalist Party.

 

[cole]

I must say that I'm quite shocked that you believe the best way forward is to ignore the people and trust in their elected representatives.

I agree that the other 26 countries have chosen not to allow their people a free vote as they are afraid of an overwhelming NO. What does this say about them?

Why will a No vote be a disaster? I don't believe that the rest of Europe will plough ahead and leave us behind politically or economically.

 

[diarmuidc]

not really scary..its just that irish people dont like being told how we should vote,we are capable of making up our own minds. if everyone told you to jump off a cliff would you still think it was good idea?

If ten doctors told you that you need to treat the mole on your arm, would you refuse to do so "because you don't like being told what to do"? Let's face it , the treaty is a legal document. Most people don't have the knowledge or expertise to understand the implications of such a legal document and have to rely on someone with expertise in the field to advise them. When they then advise you and you then refuse to listen to them, that doesn't sound like very rational behaviour..

 

[starlite68]

someone with expertise to advise them" by that do you mean our self serving government politicians who have openly admitted that they have not read fully themselvs!! thanks but i think i will make my own mind up.

 

[Nemesis]

I must say that I'm quite shocked that you believe the best way forward is to ignore the people and trust in their elected representatives.

Are you shocked by the idea of representative democracy in general? Think we should have direct democracy and referenda about each and every matter that requires legislation? Just what is so outrageous about trusting our elected representatives? After all we elect them (well those that bother to exercise that right). This is particularly so when all the major parties are agreed. If the Lisbon Treaty really was such a bad deal, then why aren't Fine Gael and Labour taking advantage of this to give the government a bloody nose? Instead Sinn Fein are getting all the exposure and attention and will no doubt claim credit for a No vote seeing as they're the only party in the Dail against it. Libertas are getting absolutely loads of attention out of this of course but since they're not a political party and haven't been elected by anyone, it's really only Sinn Fein who might gain electorally from all this.

I agree that the other 26 countries have chosen not to allow their people a free vote as they are afraid of an overwhelming NO. What does this say about them?

The other 26 countries have chosen to ratify the treaty according to their own respective constitutional traditions. (As already pointed out, Germany couldn't hold a referendum on the issue even if they wanted to) The other 26 countries are all democracies, their governments have been elected by the people. They are not acting in violation of their own constitutional arrangements. The way some No campaigners go on, you'd swear the half of them were dictatorships oppressing their people and seeking to impose the same treatment on us. If the people are so concerned about the direction the EU is taking, let them organise politically and stand for election. The problem with that of course is that it demands one develop a coherent ideology and set of policies across a whole range of issues. Referenda allow single issue and fringe groups to hijack the process, gain far more media attention than is justified by their numbers and use it to distort the arguments and spread confusion. In fairness, at least Sinn Fein have stood before the Irish people and had members elected to the Dail. I disagree fundamentally with them on almost every issue but I have no problem with them receiving the attention they do in this debate. I am however baffled as to why Ganley and Libertas and the other myriad small groups receive so much airtime.

Why will a No vote be a disaster? I don't believe that the rest of Europe will plough ahead and leave us behind politically or economically.

We don't know what the long term consequences of a No vote will be. It will certainly cause a major headache for our government in the short term. Personally, I'd prefer if their full attention was on managing this economy through difficult and uncertain times rather than trying to sort out the mess that will ensue from the unraveling of this process.

 

[diarmuidc]

someone with expertise to advise them" by that do you mean our self serving government politicians who have openly admitted that they have not read fully themselvs!! thanks but i think i will make my own mind up.

No I mean:

1. [broken link removed]
2. [broken link removed]
3. [broken link removed]
4. IFA
5. ICMSA
6. [broken link removed]
7. [broken link removed]
8. and Fianna Fail

and plenty more, but I'm sure you know better

 

[DavyJones]

I'm still undecided, I go from a yes to a no every few days then back again. Have the other 26 countries had poles to get a feel from the people and if so, what was the general opinion? I have read this thread with great interest and notice a lot of posters that I have come to respect are in either camps.
It's a bit mad that 4 million of us have a say now over 500 million!

 

[S.L.F]

Why? Can the people not be trusted to make the right decision?

No.

Harchibald,
it was the people of this country who voted in the goverment, who are trying to get us to vote for this.

If you are saying we can't be trusted to vote properly then in that case we voted for the wrong govt in. You can't have it both ways

 

[room305]

There is huge business and corporate influence on this treaty. European policy on Education is mmoving increasingly towards privitisation and this treaty allows for further privitisation of Health also. Im not a socialist but further privitisation of these key public services will benifit the rich and further marginalise the poor accross europe. this is the reason i am viting no

So hedge schools are making a come back?

 

[Nemesis]

I'm still undecided, I go from a yes to a no every few days then back again. Have the other 26 countries had poles to get a feel from the people and if so, what was the general opinion? I have read this thread with great interest and notice a lot of posters that I have come to respect are in either camps.
It's a bit mad that 4 million of us have a say now over 500 million!

I don't know but I really don't see how that would be relevant to our decision. The process is not decided by polls. It is decided by a parliamentary vote in those countries. We have to deal with whatever consequences follow from this, not the French or Italians or whoever else. It's all fine and dandy to talk about acting as a voice for other Europeans but it won't be other Europeans who have to deal with the fallout. It will be our government. I don't see how a No vote makes any sense. We are essentially undermining our government on the European stage. This is all the more so considering it was under the Irish presidency that most of the proposed changes were negotiated and agreed. People will no doubt say I'm scaremongering, but I am genuinely very concerned with where this is going. We are a small country, it strikes me as naive in the extreme to think that we can hold up the process completely without a negative impact on our influence and standing. I agree with the argument that our influence rests mainly on the goodwill and respect that we have gained during our years within the EU rather than the particular number of votes we have in the Council or whether we have a Commissioner all the time (and on that point, I don't see how we can do better than having the same entitlement to appoint a Commissioner as every other state).

 

[cole]

Are you shocked by the idea of representative democracy in general?

No.

Think we should have direct democracy and referenda about each and every matter that requires legislation? Just what is so outrageous about trusting our elected representatives?

We have a referendum on this topic. What's outrageous is the suggestion that the people can't be trusted to make the correct decision in this regard. Can someone please explain why the people can't be trusted?

 

[starlite68]

well put..cole!

 

[television]

So hedge schools are making a come back?

Im not sure I understand your point. actually I am sure I dont understand your point. I am in education and I can tell you the poor are at a severe disadvantage in education at every level. Privitisation or PPPs in education will make this suituation even worse

 

[GeneralZod]

Privitisation or PPPs in education will make this suituation even worse

I have no firm view on the merits of privatising public services. Can you explain why you think it is bad? As far as I'm aware in parts of Canada the public are given credits to buy their health care from private operators. It appears to work for them. Doesn't a regulated private sector where competition exists benefit the consumer.

 

[Nemesis]

No.

Pleased to hear it, because a lot of No campaigners appear to place no value on parliamentary ratification at all. It's dismissed as dodgy political elites cooking up schemes in back rooms. That's a dangerous way to start thinking about our democratically elected representatives. Parliamentary democracy is far from perfect but it sure beats the hell out of the alternatives.

We have a referendum on this topic. What's outrageous is the suggestion that the people can't be trusted to make the correct decision in this regard. Can someone please explain why the people can't be trusted?

Personally, I would not choose to express it in those terms. It's not that people can't be trusted. It's more that most people don't have the time to immerse themselves in the details of a complex Treaty like this. I mean for one thing, at best only about half of those entitled to vote on the issue will bother to turn up at all. Of those that do, many will not have devoted the time and attention required to understand it. That's borne out by the findings of the Irish Times poll. The reason most often cited for voting No was not understanding the Treaty or not knowing what they're voting for (30 per cent). If that holds true next Thursday then that's no way to decide on anything.

 

[S.L.F]

It's not that people can't be trusted. It's more that most people don't have the time to immerse themselves in the details of a complex Treaty like this. I mean for one thing, at best only about half of those entitled to vote on the issue will bother to turn up at all. Of those that do, many will not have devoted the time and attention required to understand it. That's borne out by the findings of the Irish Times poll. The reason most often cited for voting No was not understanding the Treaty or not knowing what they're voting for (30 per cent). If that holds true next Thursday then that's no way to decide on anything.

And since our elected reps haven't read it either it's not really surprising that people are going to be voting no!

 

[diarmuidc]

And since our elected reps haven't read it either it's not really surprising that people are going to be voting no!

Who exactly hasn't read it?

And do you think all the organisations I referred to above have not read it also but are advising a YES for the fun of it?

 

[extopia]

We simply do not know who has read it. We know that Charlie McCreevy, Bertie Aherne and Brian Cowan have not read it.