LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksI voted no because I'm anti-militarisation of europe and anti-privatisation. I'm also concerned about the increasing power of the European Court of Justice and how it clearly takes the side of big business over workers as seen in the Laval case.
I voted no because I'm anti-militarisation of europe and anti-privatisation. I'm also concerned about the increasing power of the European Court of Justice and how it clearly takes the side of big business over workers as seen in the Laval case.
I'm tired and bored with all this crap.
The referendum result was NO.
Let the Government now tell that to the EU political class.
No. The answer was NO.
I'm afraid that you'll find there's quite a few on the No side who don't want to discuss why people voted No. I voted Yes largely because I feel the institutional reforms in Lisbon were a significant move in the direction of democratisation of the EU.Originally Posted by Muppet
Never let the best be the enemy of the good.
To much say given to the European Court of Justice.
To much secrecy in the council of ministers and the failure of The E.U to agree its own budget (operational)
for 10 years.
The weakness of the Charter of Rights,
The fact Govt can only propose nominee to Comission in the future out of a short list for approval in Brussels,
Failure in Ireland to engage with European wide parties in any meaningfull way at a time integration is being pushed so much
thus an political discourse out of synch.
Subsidisation of the European Defense Agency.
The fact the British and Sarkozy France are promoting a cross atlantic new form of unilatiralism in world affairs and noone else
in Europe seem to be doing anything about it.
Do you want to defy pigeon holes and at the
same time avoid designer synicism Laugh with
rage!
In order of importance:
The Charter of Fundamental Rights becoming part of EU law would give the ECJ too much power to decide our human rights through interpretation of what is often a vague document. The Court has shown federalist and centralising tendencies and I don't want to give them an excuse to push it even further.
Concerns about the self-amending provisions of Article 48 and their potential to weaken the requirement insofar as it exists for EU referenda.
Only having a Commissioner 1/3rd of the time, whereas Nice didn't specify the precise size of the Commission (beyond it being lower than the number of states from Nov.2009 subject to unanimity) unlike Lisbon.
Loss of the veto in certain important areas of national sovereignty like energy and public health.
Unhappy with being asked to foist something on the French/Dutch that they had rejected - a dangerous precedent.
Worsens the democratic-deficit with purely advisory powers for national parliaments and citizens while real power is taken from national govts and parliaments through greater QMV etc.
I voted no because aspects of the Lisbon Treaty could undermine Article 1 of the Irish Constitution.
I could not reconcile a Common Foreign and Security Policy, with our inalienable, indefeasible, and sovereign right to determine our relations with other nations. It appeared that we would loose sovereignty over our foreign policy.The Irish nation hereby affirms its inalienable, indefeasible, and sovereign right to choose its own form of Government, to determine its relations with other nations, and to develop its life, political, economic and cultural, in accordance with its own genius and traditions.
Virtually everything else seems to be gone in earlier treaties.
Ollsgoil Dúthoilreachta - Dámhsgoil Ealadhantha Dúthgaoiseachta
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Why go over it though ? Its just going to be the usual patronising know it alls telling people that ' they didnt understand the treaty' etc etc . The reasons outlined by muppet are in line with many no voters imo . Some people just dont want to listen though .I'm afraid that you'll find there's quite a few on the No side who don't want to discuss why people voted No. I voted Yes largely because I feel the institutional reforms in Lisbon were a significant move in the direction of democratisation of the EU.
Hmm. It looks to me as thought the thread thus far consists of people stating why they voted No. So far we haven't had anybody "telling people that ' they didn't understand the treaty' etc etc", although we have had brio condemning anyone who asks why, and now yourself decrying it as an exercise in futility because of something that hasn't actually happened.Why go over it though ? Its just going to be the usual patronising know it alls telling people that ' they didnt understand the treaty' etc etc . The reasons outlined by muppet are in line with many no voters imo . Some people just dont want to listen though .I'm afraid that you'll find there's quite a few on the No side who don't want to discuss why people voted No. I voted Yes largely because I feel the institutional reforms in Lisbon were a significant move in the direction of democratisation of the EU.
Frankly, asking why people voted No would seem to me to be the opposite of telling them why they voted No - but I'm odd, so it's always possible that's an eccentric viewpoint.
Never let the best be the enemy of the good.
It was the monkeys that done it for me!
And no I'm not talking about Cowan, Kenny and Gilmore!
I voted yes because I believe that European integration is a "good thing"
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies
Reply With Quote