TV3 Ganley-Sutherland debate now

[FutureTaoiseach]

They're using more or less the same slogans as from the Nice campaign.

It might be an idea for some pro-Lisbon groups to put posters up with old anti-Nice campaign slogans, along-side some current, similar anti-Lisbon ones, with a question - something like this: "They lied then. Are they lying now?"

The no to nice campaign were right about mass-immigration. Maybe the no side should put Dick Roche/De Rossa/O'Dea quotes from 2002 rubbishing claims of mass-immigration up on posters. It isn't just one side you know.

In any case, Ganley has said he voted yes to Nice so it's not the same old people.

1. The entire EU amends the Maastricht Treaty to remove the Irish abortion protocol - and that would involve a referendum in Ireland.

The Protocol (No.6) in Maastricht doesn't refer to the word "abortion". It simply says that the Treaty doesn't impinge on Article 40.3.3. of the Irish Constitution.

[corkman2007]

They're using more or less the same slogans as from the Nice campaign.

It might be an idea for some pro-Lisbon groups to put posters up with old anti-Nice campaign slogans, along-side some current, similar anti-Lisbon ones, with a question - something like this: "They lied then. Are they lying now?"

The no to nice campaign were right about mass-immigration. Maybe the no side should put Dick Roche/De Rossa/O'Dea quotes from 2002 rubbishing claims of mass-immigration up on posters. It isn't just one side you know.

In any case, Ganley has said he voted yes to Nice so it's not the same old people.

Can you tell me what a decision of the Irish government has to do with the EU?

It was the Irish government's decision to open up our labour markets in 2004, wasn't it?

I really don't care how Ganley voted on Nice.

I was pointing out that many of the 'No' campaign lies on Nice have been recycled for this campaign - something that could be highlighted by the 'Yes' side.

It might not be the same old people, but it sure is the same old lies.

BTW, thanks for your acceptance of the fact that the 'No' side used lies during the Nice campaign.

I'm sure you'll come to see through the lies being told about Lisbon eventually.

[ibis]

They're using more or less the same slogans as from the Nice campaign.

It might be an idea for some pro-Lisbon groups to put posters up with old anti-Nice campaign slogans, along-side some current, similar anti-Lisbon ones, with a question - something like this: "They lied then. Are they lying now?"

The no to nice campaign were right about mass-immigration. Maybe the no side should put Dick Roche/De Rossa/O'Dea quotes from 2002 rubbishing claims of mass-immigration up on posters. It isn't just one side you know.

In any case, Ganley has said he voted yes to Nice so it's not the same old people.

1. The entire EU amends the Maastricht Treaty to remove the Irish abortion protocol - and that would involve a referendum in Ireland.

The Protocol (No.6) in Maastricht doesn't refer to the word "abortion". It simply says that the Treaty doesn't impinge on Article 40.3.3. of the Irish Constitution.

Once again, FT, I invite you to think that through properly. The Protocol cannot specify what is in Article 40.3.3. - if it did, then we would need to change the Protocol if we voted to change Article 40.3.3 - and that change would need to be ratified by all the other member states. As it is, the exact contents of Article 40.3.3 are up to us, and us alone.

[FutureTaoiseach]

Can you tell me what a decision of the Irish government has to do with the EU?

It was the Irish government's decision to open up our labour markets in 2004, wasn't it?

It was still to do with the EU because no member state had the right to impose immigration controls on any other members - including the new ones. The old EU states could only restrict the right to work in old member states - not the right to move their.

[baldur0300]

The Protocol (No.6) in Maastricht doesn't refer to the word "abortion". It simply says that the Treaty doesn't impinge on Article 40.3.3. of the Irish Constitution.

This has been explained to you hundreds of times. The protocol ensures that NOTHING in the treaties can be interpreted as impacting on the operation of Article 40.3.3 in Ireland. So what if it doesn't mention abortion? You keep saying that like it is some grand point

[FutureTaoiseach]

The Protocol (No.6) in Maastricht doesn't refer to the word "abortion". It simply says that the Treaty doesn't impinge on Article 40.3.3. of the Irish Constitution.

This has been explained to you hundreds of times. The protocol ensures that NOTHING in the treaties can be interpreted as impacting on the operation of Article 40.3.3 in Ireland. So what if it doesn't mention abortion? You keep saying that like it is some grand point

Personally I favour more liberal rules on abortion in Ireland. But noone can say definitively that the Charter of Fundamental Rights will not bring in abortion via an ECJ ruling based on its contents. Someone could challenge Ireland's abortion laws in the ECJ, arguing that they violate the Charters 'right to privacy'. The right to privacy was the basis for the Roe vs Wade decision in the US in 1974 legalising abortion. Regarding Article 40.3.3., you have to remember that it doesn't define "the unborn" e.g. where does life begin? The ECJ could end up defining it for us.

[baldur0300]

The Protocol (No.6) in Maastricht doesn't refer to the word "abortion". It simply says that the Treaty doesn't impinge on Article 40.3.3. of the Irish Constitution.

This has been explained to you hundreds of times. The protocol ensures that NOTHING in the treaties can be interpreted as impacting on the operation of Article 40.3.3 in Ireland. So what if it doesn't mention abortion? You keep saying that like it is some grand point

Personally I favour more liberal rules on abortion in Ireland. But noone can say definitively that the Charter of Fundamental Rights will not bring in abortion via an ECJ ruling based on its contents. Someone could challenge Ireland's abortion laws in the ECJ, arguing that they violate the Charters 'right to privacy'. The right to privacy was the basis for the Roe vs Wade decision in the US in 1974 legalising abortion. Regarding Article 40.3.3., you have to remember that it doesn't define "the unborn" e.g. where does life begin? The ECJ could end up defining it for us.

And as i've already explained to you on a number of other occasions, the only arbitors of the Irish Constitution are the Irish Courts. They simply cannot interpret the meaning of article 40.3.3 in any way. Similarly the Charter cannot override other elements of the Treaties and the Charter does not create new competences.

[FutureTaoiseach]

The Protocol (No.6) in Maastricht doesn't refer to the word "abortion". It simply says that the Treaty doesn't impinge on Article 40.3.3. of the Irish Constitution.

This has been explained to you hundreds of times. The protocol ensures that NOTHING in the treaties can be interpreted as impacting on the operation of Article 40.3.3 in Ireland. So what if it doesn't mention abortion? You keep saying that like it is some grand point

Personally I favour more liberal rules on abortion in Ireland. But noone can say definitively that the Charter of Fundamental Rights will not bring in abortion via an ECJ ruling based on its contents. Someone could challenge Ireland's abortion laws in the ECJ, arguing that they violate the Charters 'right to privacy'. The right to privacy was the basis for the Roe vs Wade decision in the US in 1974 legalising abortion. Regarding Article 40.3.3., you have to remember that it doesn't define "the unborn" e.g. where does life begin? The ECJ could end up defining it for us.

And as i've already explained to you on a number of other occasions, the only arbitors of the Irish Constitution are the Irish Courts. They simply cannot interpret the meaning of article 40.3.3 in any way. Similarly the Charter cannot override other elements of the Treaties and the Charter does not create new competences.

There is no credibility to that argument. Why are they making the Charter part of EU law? Gerard Hogan SC is obviously not convinced the Charter won't impact on national law. Why have Britain and Poland opted-out from the Charter? They obviously believe it would impinge on national laws.

[ibis]

The Protocol (No.6) in Maastricht doesn't refer to the word "abortion". It simply says that the Treaty doesn't impinge on Article 40.3.3. of the Irish Constitution.

This has been explained to you hundreds of times. The protocol ensures that NOTHING in the treaties can be interpreted as impacting on the operation of Article 40.3.3 in Ireland. So what if it doesn't mention abortion? You keep saying that like it is some grand point

Personally I favour more liberal rules on abortion in Ireland. But noone can say definitively that the Charter of Fundamental Rights will not bring in abortion via an ECJ ruling based on its contents. Someone could challenge Ireland's abortion laws in the ECJ, arguing that they violate the Charters 'right to privacy'. The right to privacy was the basis for the Roe vs Wade decision in the US in 1974 legalising abortion. Regarding Article 40.3.3., you have to remember that it doesn't define "the unborn" e.g. where does life begin? The ECJ could end up defining it for us.

And as i've already explained to you on a number of other occasions, the only arbitors of the Irish Constitution are the Irish Courts. They simply cannot interpret the meaning of article 40.3.3 in any way. Similarly the Charter cannot override other elements of the Treaties and the Charter does not create new competences.

There is no credibility to that argument. Why are they making the Charter part of EU law? Gerard Hogan SC is obviously not convinced the Charter won't impact on national law. Why have Britain and Poland opted-out from the Charter? They obviously believe it would impinge on national laws.

They're making the Charter part of EU Law so that the EU will have to respect the rights contained in it. I know you think trying to respect rights is actually a sneaky power-grab, but that's frankly paranoia on your part.

[corkman2007]

FT, you are the biggest bullsh*t artist on this issue ever.

You know damn well that the Protocol says that nothing in the treaties can affect Ireland's constitutional position on abortion. The Charter of Fundamental Rights only has legal effect because of what's in the treaties and is therefore covered by the 'nothing in the treaties' clause.

Stop peddling lies on Lisbon and abortion - you know you can do it.

You've dropped your claims on the 'collective expulsions' issue - do the same on the abortion issue.