How can Lisbon II be defeated.

[molloyjh]

Nonsense. You fit in quite well with the PC-brigade mindset. Asylum should be about safety, not merely a flag of convenience for economic migration. The UK does not allow asylum-seekers to work either. Given their partial optout from the Charter, Article 15 of the Charter could well mean we are the only English speaking country in the EU to allow asylum-seekers to work. That would lead to a large influx into this country by asylum seekers living in the UK. In a recession, this is an unacceptable burden to place on the Irish people, 600,000 of whom are expected to be out of work by the end of the year.

I firmly agree that asylum should be for safety reasons, but they shouldn't be getting into the country at all if it isn't. If they are here for other reasons then that is the fault of the immigration system we have set up and the whole thing needs to be tightened up. Once they are here why can't they be allowed to work?

Your exact quote was:

Irish workers will be displaced a result of the Charter's provisions forcing us to allow asylum-seekers to work.

This makes no reference to the reasons the asylum seekers are here and just says they shouldn't be allowed to work because it will put Irish people out of a job. Your just backpeddling now.

FYI I am far from PC. In fact I am very close to some of your opinions. I just feel that once they are here they should be allowed to work rather than being force to sponge off the system. We have enough home grown spongers as it is. Tighter controls over who gets in in the first place is required, not limiting what they can do once they are here.

Ha! I have to laugh. FT has gone and labelled me as part of the PC Brigade. Not something I'm normally associated with, but then given FTs penchant for fantasy that's no surprise.

[FutureTaoiseach]

This makes no reference to the reasons the asylum seekers are here and just says they shouldn't be allowed to work because it will put Irish people out of a job. Your just backpeddling now.

FYI I am far from PC. In fact I am very close to some of your opinions. I just feel that once they are here they should be allowed to work rather than being force to sponge off the system. We have enough home grown spongers as it is. Tighter controls over who gets in in the first place is required, not limiting what they can do once they are here.

Ha! I have to laugh. FT has gone and labelled me as part of the PC Brigade. Not something I'm normally associated with, but then given FTs penchant for fantasy that's no surprise.

If we allow them to work then it will send a message to others that they can come to Ireland under false pretences and be rewarded with a better life. In the midst of a severe recession, now is not the time to adopt a more liberal policy with respect to access by non-EEA nationals to our labour market. It would be unconscienable to force Irish workers into emigration while newcomers are allowed to work. I note that you do not dispute the accuracy of my argument that the Charter will force us to lift the ban on employment for asylum-seekers. Methinks in these hard times, the Irish people will be interested to here they are being asked to legalise the employment of illegal immigrants when employment is becoming increasingly scarce.

[molloyjh]

If we allow them to work then it will send a message to others that they can come to Ireland under false pretences and be rewarded with a better life. In the midst of a severe recession, now is not the time to adopt a more liberal policy with respect to access by non-EEA nationals to our labour market. It would be unconsicenable to force Irish workers into emigration while newcomers are allowed to work.

I am not advocating a liberal policy regarding access. In fact if you read what I said FT you would see I said we need tighter control over who does get access for the very reasons you are pointing out there, i.e. we just can't afford it. However I am saying that, assuming we have the nessecary procedures in place to minimise the number of BS acses getting in then we should be allowing those that are getting in to work. They wil then be contributing to the countries finances rather than being a drain on them. Please read what is written and not what you want to read.

[molloyjh]

And will you please post new bits of info into new posts. It's impossible to keep replying to posts that keep changing. The quoted article in 141 does nothing like what you say it does, and if you read it properly you will see that. It says that the opt outs are basically being transferred from one treaty to another, i.e. the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to the Treaty on the European Union.

Not only do you not understand corporate tax, but plain English seems to be causing you problems as well.

[FutureTaoiseach]

The electorate will rightly flinch from provisions contained in Lisbon to allow the EU to raise revenue independently of the member states:

The Union shall provide itself with the means necessary to attain its objectives and carry through its policies. The Council, acting in accordance with aspecial legislative procedure, shall unanimously and after consulting the European Parliament adopt a decision laying down the provisions relating to the system of own resources of the Union. In this context it may establish new categories of own resources or abolish an existing category.

[hiding behind a poster]

So, the word "unanimously" didn't, you know, leap out off the page at you there, FT?

[FutureTaoiseach]

So, the word "unanimously" didn't, you know, leap out off the page at you there, FT?

This govt does not deserve the power to concede control of our taxation system to Brussels - unanimously or otherwise. What is happening in Article 269 is that the European Council is aggregating powers to impose an EU taxation-system. Given that the other govts on the Council are not elected by the Irish people, it constitutes representation without taxation.

[hiding behind a poster]

This govt does not deserve the power to concede control of our taxation system to Brussels - unanimously or otherwise. What is happening in Article 269 is that the European Council is aggregating powers to impose an EU taxation-system. Given that the other govts on the Council are not elected by the Irish people, it constitutes representation without taxation.

Oh Dear God. Even by your standards that is a ridiculously circular argument. Utterly pathetic. I suppose we may as well leave the United Nations as well, given that if we agree a resolution UNANIMOUSLY with the other member states there, those other member states - shock, horror!! didn't have their governments elected by the Irish people!!

Honestly, sometimes what you post here goes beyond ridiculous. The EU cannot impose taxation measures, or "take control of our taxation system" either unanimously or otherwise, on member states. What it does every year is agree an EU budget, into which every member state contributes, and it then spends it on what is agreed by the member states in that budget. Needless to say, every member state does as much as possible to minimise the amount it pays in - and rightly so. But that is absolutely nothing to do with domestic taxation, which is each government collecting tax revenue for ITS OWN spending. And the EU can have nothing to do with that, because taxation is not an EU competence - and never ever ever will be. Our contribution to the EU budget then comes out of domestically-raised taxation, but the EU has absolutely nothing to do with how we raise that revenue.

[Lefronde]

Give up, its going to be a yes vote!

Yes to Lisbon No to Nutters!

[FutureTaoiseach]

Oh Dear God. Even by your standards that is a ridiculously circular argument. Utterly pathetic. I suppose we may as well leave the United Nations as well, given that if we agree a resolution UNANIMOUSLY with the other member states there, those other member states - shock, horror!! didn't have their governments elected by the Irish people!!

Honestly, sometimes what you post here goes beyond ridiculous. The EU cannot impose taxation measures, or "take control of our taxation system" either unanimously or otherwise, on member states. What it does every year is agree an EU budget, into which every member state contributes, and it then spends it on what is agreed by the member states in that budget. Needless to say, every member state does as much as possible to minimise the amount it pays in - and rightly so. But that is absolutely nothing to do with domestic taxation, which is each government collecting tax revenue for ITS OWN spending. And the EU can have nothing to do with that, because taxation is not an EU competence - and never ever ever will be. Our contribution to the EU budget then comes out of domestically-raised taxation, but the EU has absolutely nothing to do with how we raise that revenue.

Taxation is a shared EU competence.