EU Treaty - what are we voting on?

[FutureTaoiseach]

You sir, are either supporting this Treaty because you want a Federal Europe, or else you are blind to the true implications of this treaty.

You sir, need not tell me my position on anything. I am merely playing devil's advocat on the discrepencies in what you are putting forward. I have no problem with you creating a discourse against the Reform Treaty. You would want to make it on solid ground though,

Politicians are not to be trusted and the experience after Nice when stuff happened we were not told about shows this.

You are getting a referendum on it.

Unlike the other 26 countries. And why would that be I wonder?

To all intents and purposes, we are being asked to force on the French and Dutch, the content of a treaty they have already rejected. That is profoundly anti-democratic and morally indefensible. The manner in which the French govt is behaving on this issue smacks of the second Vichy France. Like in 1940, they deny their electorate a say on the creation of the Vichy dictatorship. Now in 2007, they deny their electorate a say on the creation of the EU dictatorship. They might as well call it the Vichy Treaty.

A no vote is a vote for a better treaty. One which preserves Ireland's Commissioner and our few (but vital) remaining national-vetos. One which opts-out of the Charter of Fundamental Rights thus preserving the Irish Supreme Court's role as the protector of our constitutional rights. It is a vote for a more democratic Europe - one where public opinion counts for something instead of arrogantly being swept aside by arrogant and powerhungry politicians.

[dub006]

If the constitution passes we will get a federated Europe with an EU standing army and a federal police force.
Resistance to enforcing eu legislation in Ireland (which FF have done consistently for years) was usually challenged in the courts.
After the enactment of the constitution the EU will have the power to send in EU troops to Ireland to enforce EU law if it deems it necessary.

This is precisely how the U.S. civil war started.The issue was slavery ,however it could have been one of hundreds of issues,because what it was really about was States rights versus Federal rights.

[Universal_001]

I tried to read it myself, and it's unreadable I agree....it's intentionally unreadable.

I've already, without knowing the intimate content, got several reasons to vote no:

1. They're not holding referendums this time, in case they get the wrong answer.
2. They've intentionally made it unreadable.
3. It's virtually the same, by their own admission, as the constitution, which was already rejected by two EU states.

[CookieMonster]

Paper ballots. with pencils

SF and their feckin' pencils.

Europe is laughing at us, ROC. LAUGHING!

[St Disibod]

I downloaded the latest draft of the treaty but it is unreadable as it refers to amendments to clauses and sub-clauses in other treaties.

That was the intended purpose. It is supposed to be illegible and unintelligible to all but a few- and it is hoped that they are all Eurocrats, or sympathisers at least.

It is a terribly undemocratic approach to the whole thing. The lesson from the whole affair, when boiled down to basics, is that if the citizens of Europe vote yes to Brussels’ wishes they sail through with much fan-fare and partying. If Europe’s citizens vote no they sail through anyway, there just isn’t a party. It’s enough to make me want to vote no at times.

But I do think this treaty is still in Ireland’s interest, so I don’t want to cut my nose off to spite my face. I’m inclined towards a yes vote. But certain people should hold back from telling us we’ll be the “laughing stock of Europe” if we vote no. Of the four nations polled on the initial treaty two rejected it. What’s it Gandhi used to say about them mocking you just before they fear you? And anyway Charlie McCreevy is one to talk. It was he who rushed to the front of the pack after Nice I to welcome the independent-mindedness of the electorate in the face of so much advice from the establishment to vote Yes.

The current treaty, in of itself, is an improvement on the status quo I believe. But the attitude emanating from Brussels is bordering on tyrannical, where it seems the general view is that people don’t really know what they do and need Brussels to bulldoze the incorrect decisions they make at the polling booth.

As you might guess, I am teetering at the edge of the Yes camp.

Is there anywhere one can see a comparison document showing the amendments made by this treaty in the context of the other treaties. Anyone who has used deltaview will know what I am on about.

Without a comparison it is very very difficult to know what we are voting on. You can be certain that the TDs don't understand it either. Unfortunately, the referendum allows them to opt out by leaving it up to the people to inform themselves and make their decision.

The Institute of European Affairs put together a sort of compilation edition: see here. But you need the jig-saw puzzle version if you want to know what’s really going on as that is the version we will be voting on.

Perhaps for the next referendum on Bunreacht na hÉireann the government can embed the wording into a crosaire crossword. It would have much the same level of clarity.

It is not like EU Law comes about as a result of some form of fascist regime.

I wouldn't use the word fascist, but I've already used the word tyrannical and I am sticking to it.

And besides the ECJ itself is pretty shady- Les Verts v. European Parliament 1986 anyone?

However, vast tracts of the Charter are merely restatements of the European Convention of Human Rights which is already part of Irish Law.

It’s quite a bit different now…

For one thing children are going to be given the right to “express their views freely”. I think a qualification on that would be appreciated by parents sending their children to bed.

On the positive side the Charter provides an unqualified right to freedom of expression- the Convention allowed for any number of qualifications “in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.” I have already dropped an e-mail to the EU asking which format will enjoy supremacy. If the Charter wins out does that mean a person can deny the holocaust in Germany and all the other states such action has been long-banned in?

By the by, I don’t welcome freedom of expression because it allows for holocaust denial. I just like freedom of expression as a concept- though I'm not sure children need a specific and additional right to such a freedom.

Thanks for the reply St. Disibod. The consolidated version is where to start. If I can get a pre-treaty consolidated version then I might be able to convert them to Word and compare them.

[St Disibod]

If the constitution passes we will get a federated Europe with an EU standing army and a federal police force.
Resistance to enforcing eu legislation in Ireland (which FF have done consistently for years) was usually challenged in the courts.
After the enactment of the constitution the EU will have the power to send in EU troops to Ireland to enforce EU law if it deems it necessary.

This is precisely how the U.S. civil war started.The issue was slavery ,however it could have been one of hundreds of issues,because what it was really about was States rights versus Federal rights.

Except that the Treaty we are voting on includes a get-out clause. There will now be an established exit route. It is already possible to leave, but this will formalise the route and safe-guard it.

The US Civil War would never have happened had they had a similar mechanism.

[Trampas]

If the constitution passes we will get a federated Europe with an EU standing army and a federal police force.
Resistance to enforcing eu legislation in Ireland (which FF have done consistently for years) was usually challenged in the courts.
After the enactment of the constitution the EU will have the power to send in EU troops to Ireland to enforce EU law if it deems it necessary.

This is precisely how the U.S. civil war started.The issue was slavery ,however it could have been one of hundreds of issues,because what it was really about was States rights versus Federal rights.

Except that the Treaty we are voting on includes a get-out clause. There will now be an established exit route. It is already possible to leave, but this will formalise the route and safe-guard it.

The US Civil War would never have happened had they had a similar mechanism.

More irrelevant analogy. Yawn

The Brussels Journal site has published a list of political quotations
on the Treaty/Constitution including contributions from the Bert, Garret Fitzgerald, Sarkozy, Giscard (the artist formerly known as the author), Merkel etc.

www.brusselsjournal.com

[smiffy]

After the enactment of the constitution the EU will have the power to send in EU troops to Ireland to enforce EU law if it deems it necessary.

Which article?

[FutureTaoiseach]

If the constitution passes we will get a federated Europe with an EU standing army and a federal police force.
Resistance to enforcing eu legislation in Ireland (which FF have done consistently for years) was usually challenged in the courts.
After the enactment of the constitution the EU will have the power to send in EU troops to Ireland to enforce EU law if it deems it necessary.

This is precisely how the U.S. civil war started.The issue was slavery ,however it could have been one of hundreds of issues,because what it was really about was States rights versus Federal rights.

Except that the Treaty we are voting on includes a get-out clause. There will now be an established exit route. It is already possible to leave, but this will formalise the route and safe-guard it.

The US Civil War would never have happened had they had a similar mechanism.

That doesn't sway me. We shouldn't be in a position where we have to either accept Brussels dictats on new treaties or just leave. Economically, it would be very difficult for this country to leave. Not being in a trading-bloc would put us at a huge disadvantage in negotiating our trading-interests with large economies like the US and China. So this is really a false choice. By voting no, we will be able to help make the EU more democratic, by forcing the elites to consult public opinion. Most of us opposed to the treaty do not want withdrawl, but neither do we want a Federal superstate.