Lisbon 2 - how will you vote?

[Wendy]

Yes. No change there.

[Sean-Bhean bhoct]

It was actually something like 860k that voted No IIRC.

Your dead right...just looked it up. My mistake!

[Tony_1975]

I am, however, oppossed to the creeping federalisation of the EU. We will never be given a referendum with the question: "Do you support a Federal Europe?". In the EU, federalisation comes dripping slowly, treaty by treaty. For me, this is the time to shout stop.

No true democrat could feel at ease with how the EU has managed its latest Treaty. France and Holland vote No to the Constitution. The Constitution is then re-packaged as a Treaty (thus by-passing a second referendum in both countries). Ireland was the only country whose constitution offered us a chance to vote. We said No. We are being asked again to get the right answer. This is simply wrong. Does anybody feel at ease with this? Oh, I know there are legal reasons behind the scenario set out above. But the beauty of democracy is in its simplicity - one man, one vote, majority wins.

Democracy should not need teams of lawyers and bureaucrats finding loopholes and work-arounds. Should it?

An excellent post. Take a bow, Sir.

A few thousand people are determined to create a federal Europe for the rest of us, whether we want it or not.
Ireland, alone, has the power to force them to listen to the people. It will be to our eternal shame if we throw that chance away (for the second time in a decade).

There can be no adverse consequences to a No vote, as we will simply be voting to keep the Eu the same. The only way our NO vote can hurt us is if the EU make a point of making things difficult for us. If that is the case then Ireland has the status in the EU of a battered wife. "Do what we say or you will be made to pay"

[hiding behind a poster]

If you 'pester' you will only pester them into voting Yes. Your not going to be in the polling booth with them. You can only persuade.

You might point that last bit out to those on the No side who think we're being somehow "forced" to vote Yes this time, Kerrynorth.

For the record, I'll be voting Yes, anyway.

[Dunlin3]

I'll be voting yes.

[jdckelly]

Voting no, not a single word of the thing has changed so why change my vote

[slartibartfast]

I will vote No as I did last time, because I believe the EU is intended by it's citizens to be an organization that allows member countrys co-operate in many spheres and improve the lot of all, based on voluntary co-operation and agreement, NOT a super-state gathering more law-making powers to itself and weakening national parliaments.

Note the wording of the amendment last time which most of us didnt see in print until you actually voted (If I remember, it was not contained in the Referendum Commission document sent to each home), it was basically to add a clause 11 to article 29.4 stating, in essence: No provision of this constitution invalidates laws or measures taken that are required by our membership of the EU, or prevents laws enacted by the EU or it's institutions having the force of law here. i.e. OUR CONSTITUTION TAKES SECOND PLACE TO LAWS ENACTED IN A FOREIGN PARLIAMENT (by which I mean a parliament that serves the interests of more foreigners than Irish), a reversal of our own situation where even our own govt's laws take second place to the constitution.

[Sean-Bhean bhoct]

Voting no, not a single word of the thing has changed so why change my vote

And what words would you like to see changed exactly??

Don't make random assertions without backing them up.

[Sean-Bhean bhoct]

I will vote No as I did last time, because I believe the EU is intended by it's citizens to be an organization that allows member countrys co-operate in many spheres and improve the lot of all, based on voluntary co-operation and agreement, NOT a super-state gathering more law-making powers to itself and weakening national parliaments.

Note the wording of the amendment last time which most of us didnt see in print until you actually voted (If I remember, it was not contained in the Referendum Commission document sent to each home), it was basically to add a clause 11 to article 29.4 stating, in essence: No provision of this constitution invalidates laws or measures taken that are required by our membership of the EU, or prevents laws enacted by the EU or it's institutions having the force of law here. i.e. OUR CONSTITUTION TAKES SECOND PLACE TO LAWS ENACTED IN A FOREIGN PARLIAMENT (by which I mean a parliament that serves the interests of more foreigners than Irish), a reversal of our own situation where even our own govt's laws take second place to the constitution.

Alas more tainting of the truth by the No side!!

Article 29 simply affirms Ireland's opportunity to adhere to international law and to join international organisations for the betterment of external relations.

The provision of which you speak (29.4.10) sets out to ensure that the Constitution and EU law don't clash. Such a clash would undermine the Constitution to a much greater extent. Where exactly does it state that the Constitution takes second place?

Either you have a poor understanding of the law or you're trying to manipulate it to peddle your own beliefs. Either way it doesn't stand up.

[Aindriu]

Nothings changed - so NO again

+1

A lawyer was on Dublin's 98 yesterday saying that the so called guarantees night as well be written on toilet paper for all the good they are.