And what has Europe ever done for us?

[Fergalino]

Well, to get started, environmental rules. For those that remember, and I do, not only did Ireland not have the legislation to deal with pollution until the EU legislated, there was no culture to protect the environment in Ireland until we were made aware of it by the efforts from Brussels. From farmers dumping slurry, to illegal dumping, to beaches, to people simply emptying ash trays out of cars, we were a polluting nation. we ourselves were destroying one of most beautiful landscapes in the world. EU legislation has helpted turn that tide. Environmental impact assessments have become necessary for big projects. Recycling has become prevalent. And the people's attitudes have followed suit.

To give you a good example of how effective EU law is - have a gander at the recent ruling of the European Court of justice in Commune de Mesquer (a town on the French coast) v Total, where the court found that oil spilled at sea must be classified as "waste", thereby ensuring that the "polluter pays" principle applies. This is one small example of what has and is being done for all of us.

"Hydrocarbons accidentally spilled at sea following a shipwreck, mixed with water and sediment and drifting along the coast of a Member State until being washed up on that coast, constitute waste within the meaning of Article 1(a) of Directive 75/442, as amended by Decision 96/350, where they are no longer capable of being exploited or marketed without prior processing.

For the purposes of applying Article 15 of Directive 75/442, as amended by Decision 96/350, to the accidental spillage of hydrocarbons at sea causing pollution of the coastline of a Member State:

– the national court may regard the seller of those hydrocarbons and charterer of the ship carrying them as a producer of that waste within the meaning of Article 1(b) of Directive 75/442, as amended by Decision 96/350, and thereby as a ‘previous holder’ for the purposes of applying the first part of the second indent of Article 15 of that directive, if that court, in the light of the elements which it alone is in a position to assess, reaches the conclusion that that seller-charterer contributed to the risk that the pollution caused by the shipwreck would occur, in particular if he failed to take measures to prevent such an incident, such as measures concerning the choice of ship;

– if it happens that the cost of disposing of the waste produced by an accidental spillage of hydrocarbons at sea is not borne by the International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund, or cannot be borne because the ceiling for compensation for that accident has been reached, and that, in accordance with the limitations and/or exemptions of liability laid down, the national law of a Member State, including the law derived from international agreements, prevents that cost from being borne by the shipowner and/or the charterer, even though they are to be regarded as ‘holders’ within the meaning of Article 1(c) of Directive 75/442, as amended by Decision 96/350, such a national law will then, in order to ensure that Article 15 of that directive is correctly transposed, have to make provision for that cost to be borne by the producer of the product from which the waste thus spread came."

I could go on and on - the Common Agricultural Policy (who remembers the backwardness of Irish farming before it was grant aided to modernise), roads, liberalised air travel (who remembers what it cost to fly Dublin London in the 80s!!!), the freedom to sell our products into Europe without tariffs (a small country cannot survive on its own market, so without this we were shagged), the principle of mutual recognition which enhances our ability to sell our products into Europe, the Euro, Erasmus ...

[joel]

Farming was "backward"? - in what way?

[TradCat]

Whatever about the details no rational person would deny the benefits of EU membership. But in 1915 it would have been possible to come up with a list of benefits of UK membership. Dublin was the second city of the empire and the country was part of what was probably the wealthiest single market in the world at the time.

But the desire for self-government had been the settled will of the Irish people for over a century at that point. The undemocratic denial of that desire led to bloodshed.

Who would argue now that we should have stayed in the UK.

The point is that the will of the people is not a problem to be finessed or got around. It is something to be respected and obeyed. The decision to split Ireland from the EU is not one we would make. It is not Ireland that is upping the ante and threatening to set aside the law. If they can kick us out for voting against their plan then in my opinion we will be getting out at the right time. Because a state that can't respond to the popular will won't last.

[Fergalino]

Farming was "backward"? - in what way?

What age are you? Go around and ask most farmers how they milked cows in the 70's. I remember people milkign by hand in the 70s. Or with hand held machines. How many milking parlours were paid for with grants. And land reclamation. Storage. Training.

[monet]

Whatever about the details no rational person would deny the benefits of EU membership. But in 1915 it would have been possible to come up with a list of benefits of UK membership. Dublin was the second city of the empire and the country was part of what was probably the wealthiest single market in the world at the time.

But the desire for self-government had been the settled will of the Irish people for over a century at that point. The undemocratic denial of that desire led to bloodshed.

Who would argue now that we should have stayed in the UK.

The point is that the will of the people is not a problem to be finessed or got around. It is something to be respected and obeyed. The decision to split Ireland from the EU is not one we would make. It is not Ireland that is upping the ante and threatening to set aside the law. If they can kick us out for voting against their plan then in my opinion we will be getting out at the right time. Because a state that can't respond to the popular will won't last.

was independence all that wonderful? i think historian willl argue the case. the first 70 years were a failure. we replaced rule from London by rule from Rome. it left bitter division and northern irish partitition and then nothern irish troubles. Economically it failed until early 90s when helped by eu funds, erm/euro, single market act we got our act togehter. really we should have stayed in till 1990 and then left peacefully and joined up the eu. we are too small and lacking in resources to satnd alone

[Fergalino]

Whatever about the details no rational person would deny the benefits of EU membership. But in 1915 it would have been possible to come up with a list of benefits of UK membership. Dublin was the second city of the empire and the country was part of what was probably the wealthiest single market in the world at the time.

But the desire for self-government had been the settled will of the Irish people for over a century at that point. The undemocratic denial of that desire led to bloodshed.

Who would argue now that we should have stayed in the UK.

The point is that the will of the people is not a problem to be finessed or got around. It is something to be respected and obeyed. The decision to split Ireland from the EU is not one we would make. It is not Ireland that is upping the ante and threatening to set aside the law. If they can kick us out for voting against their plan then in my opinion we will be getting out at the right time. Because a state that can't respond to the popular will won't last.

Comparing our participation in Europe to our domination by the UK shows how misguided you (as a group) are. We participate in Europe. We sit around the table as equals (in fact, if you take our population, we punch far above our weight). What you are saying is the equivalent of UKIP saying, "we defeated Hitler and now we are letting the Germans take over by the back door". While you are well entitled to have your view, my view is that you are seriouisly misguided.

While I am sure that a certain number of people who voted no will share your views (those in SF at least), I am sure that you will find that your very extremist views, which would, if followed, have led us to remain outside in '73, are not shared by the vast majority of people in this country.

[Fergalino]

Whatever about the details no rational person would deny the benefits of EU membership. But in 1915 it would have been possible to come up with a list of benefits of UK membership. Dublin was the second city of the empire and the country was part of what was probably the wealthiest single market in the world at the time.

But the desire for self-government had been the settled will of the Irish people for over a century at that point. The undemocratic denial of that desire led to bloodshed.

Who would argue now that we should have stayed in the UK.

The point is that the will of the people is not a problem to be finessed or got around. It is something to be respected and obeyed. The decision to split Ireland from the EU is not one we would make. It is not Ireland that is upping the ante and threatening to set aside the law. If they can kick us out for voting against their plan then in my opinion we will be getting out at the right time. Because a state that can't respond to the popular will won't last.

was independence all that wonderful? i think historian willl argue the case. the first 70 years were a failure. we replaced rule from London by rule from Rome. it left bitter division and northern irish partitition and then nothern irish troubles. Economically it failed until early 90s when helped by eu funds, erm/euro, single market act we got our act togehter. really we should have stayed in till 1990 and then left peacefully and joined up the eu. we are too small and lacking in resources to satnd alone

My view is that we did the right thing to choose to leave the UK in the 1918 election. If we had not, though our economy might have benifited somewhat, our culture would have been destroyed and we would have been dragged into WWII. But we were right to choose to join the EU project in '73. It benifits us culturally - for example, Irish has the status of an EU official langauge - and it has enormous economic benifits.

[TradCat]

monet

Yes independence is wonderful. Your argument is akin to a slave wanting to stay on the plantation so massa will feed him. If we made mistakes they were our mistakes but you may recall we suffered a famine under British rule.

Every country makes policy mistakes but the capacity to control our own affairs is essential and we are not too small to do so. We do need to reform our political system of course.

[FrankSpeaks]

Joining the EEC\EU was the best decision we ever made, it has transformed our country. Before we joined we were a people exporter now we are an importer. The amount of good legislation we were forced to enact transformed us, for example, equal pay, equal rights, married women in civil service and environmental legislation to name but a few. Before we joined the EU we were a backward people, living in a backwater country and anybody who doesn't believe this is an idiot or is to young to remember what it was like in 60s, 70s and 80s.

[TradCat]

FrankSpeaks

Before we joined the EU we were a backward people, living in a backwater country and anybody who doesn't believe this is an idiot or is to young to remember what it was like in 60s, 70s and 80s.

I'm old enough to remember being in the EU in the 70s and 80s. Are we going to credit the EU with all the good things and blame ourselves for all the bad things? That's insane.

Irish society was changing anyway. the mass media was more of an influence than the EU in that. Our biggest problem was the north and the USA did more for us on the peace process than the EU.

Our boom came when we cut tax against the advice of the EU. A little credit to the Irish please. I think the Yes side are portraying a caricature of the Irish reminiscent of the old Punch cartoon. Shame on them.