Lisbon 2 - how will you vote?

[anewbeginning]

I would ask the people like FT and others to explain to me what there proposed alternatives would be if the Treaty was rejected once again?

The real question is What is Plan B?

The truth is the people of Ireland and Europe have been given no alternative.

The politicians tell us there is no Plan B. That's not good enough.

That lack of alternatives presented to the people is alarming. It reminds me of the Iranian elections, where the people were given a choice between Mullah endorsed candidate A or Mullah endorsed candidate B or Henry Ford when he said you can have any colour as long as it's black.

With Lisbon, the politicians are telling us we can vote anyway as long as it's Yes.

[Edo]

The real question is What is Plan B?

The truth is the people of Ireland and Europe have been given no alternative.

The politicians tell us there is no Plan B. That's not good enough.

That lack of alternatives presented to the people is alarming. It reminds me of the Iranian elections, where the people were given a choice between Mullah endorsed candidate A or Mullah endorsed candidate B or Henry Ford when he said you can have any colour as long as it's black.

With Lisbon, the politicians are telling us we can vote anyway as long as it's Yes.

Without wishing to appear to be a total pedant - surely the responsibility for coming up with Plan B rests with those who oppose Plan A no?

[McDave]

Not the whole history. The no vote was 860,000 in 2008. The whole history since 1987 is that the no vote has always been at least approx 500,000. That indicates the no vote is more likely to turn out, as indeed did the Nice I/II experience. One thing we can say is different from the "whole history" is that never before has a treaty 95% identical to one rejected in 2 other member states and then ratified there through parliament been presented twice to an Irish electorate, undermining its legitimacy.
On radio shows like Saturday View, the Right Hook, Lunchtime etc., the presenters often say that the majority of their callers are on the no side. That, to me, reflects a continuation of the experience of past EU referenda that the no side feel most strongly on the transfer of sovereignty to Brussels, and will turn out in force.

Yes, the No trend has been rising consistently since then. However, even on a lower Lisbon 2 turnout of 1.5 million you can still come out well over 500,000 but under 40%.

[molloyjh]

Well when the European Parliament voted to suppress the Galvin Report on abuse of the expenses-system, and when the EU budget hasn't been signed-off on for 14 years, we are entitled to draw conclusions. There are scores of offices our elite get appointed to, ranging from the European Economic and Social Council, to the Commission, to the ECJ, to the Court of Auditors themselves to the EIB to Europol, to Eurojust etc. and after Lisbon to the President of the European Council too.

Ah yes, more slogans and clap-trap from the master. Yet tou completely ignored the question I asked. I'll put it on a new line, make it nice and easy for you:

Do you think there are enough positions within the EU for most Irish politicians to be able to serve time on this "gravy-train"?

You see the logic to my question was simple. You claim the politicians here want to maintain the gravy-train. What I am asking is do you think most of those afore-mentioned politicians will ever work within the EU itself? I'm sure you'll find that the majority will not, and there-fore whether it is indeed a gravy-train or not makes no odds to most of them.

Continue on the basis of the Nice Treaty. The EU does need democratic-reforms but Lisbon makes the EU less democratic.

How?

I'm keeping that question nice and simple for you FT.....

[FutureTaoiseach]

How?

I'm keeping that question nice and simple for you FT.....

By centralising power in the hands of the unelected, unaccountable ECJ through the enshrinement of the Charter of Fundamental Rights into EU law, allowing them to overrule the Supreme Court and strike down national law that conflicts with it. The elite claim that the Charter only applies to EU law. The problem with that argument is that the Charter is itself going to be EU law under the Lisbon Treaty.

Also, through the abolition of the national veto in scores of new areas, including energy, judicial and police-cooperation etc. The elected Dail Eireann will find itself hemmed in constantly by EU directives/regulations/decisions in those policy-areas which it will be forbidden from contradicting with national legislation. Our democratically-elected govt will go from having a 100% say in such legislation through the veto to having a mere 0.9% voting weight on the Council of Ministers. To block legislation where Qualified Majority Voting is required, 4 member states including over 35% of the EU's population will be required. With just 0.9% of the EU's population, it will be almost impossible for small countries to block such legislation, as even 11 of them together couldn't breach the population-threshold, whereas 4 Big States could. The powers for national parliaments are too weak. They will only be able to object, not veto, new initiations of EU legislation handed down from the Commission. Likewise with the Citizens Petition. And I know the govt says we still have an optout from Justice and Home Affairs, but last year the govt announced its intention to "review" it within 3 years. Taken with the text of the 28th amendment to the Constitution Bill allowing the Oireachtas to abolish the optout, I think we all know what that means. The question is whether that text will be in the referendum-legislation to be published this week. If it is, then that's another reason to vote no.

[molloyjh]

By centralising power in the hands of the unelected, unaccountable ECJ through the enshrinement of the Charter of Fundamental Rights into EU law, allowing them to overrule the Supreme Court and strike down national law that conflicts with it. The elite claim that the Charter only applies to EU law. The problem with that argument is that the Charter is itself going to be EU law under the Lisbon Treaty.

Also, through the abolition of the national veto in scores of new areas, including energy, judicial and police-cooperation etc. The elected Dail Eireann will find itself hemmed in constantly by EU directives/regulations/decisions in those policy-areas which it will be forbidden from contradicting with national legislation. Our democratically-elected govt will go from having a 100% say in such legislation through the veto to having a mere 0.9% voting weight on the Council of Ministers. To block legislation where Qualified Majority Voting is required, 4 member states including over 35% of the EU's population will be required. With just 0.9% of the EU's population, it will be almost impossible for small countries to block such legislation, as even 11 of them together couldn't breach the population-threshold, whereas 4 Big States could. The powers for national parliaments are too weak. They will only be able to object, not veto, new initiations of EU legislation handed down from the Commission. Likewise with the Citizens Petition. And I know the govt says we still have an optout from Justice and Home Affairs, but last year the govt announced its intention to "review" it within 3 years. Taken with the text of the 28th amendment to the Constitution Bill allowing the Oireachtas to abolish the optout, I think we all know what that means. The question is whether that text will be in the referendum-legislation to be published this week. If it is, then that's another reason to vote no.

So you think 40% of the union representing just over 6% of the people in it should be able to block legislation. You think that's democratic? They would be the minority in every way. And how many times do you think the smallest 11 states would be opposed to something that the other member states would be in favour of? What, for example, would the Swedes be in favour of that the Danes would not be?

[FutureTaoiseach]

So you think 40% of the union representing just over 6% of the people in it should be able to block legislation. You think that's democratic? They would be the minority in every way. And how many times do you think the smallest 11 states would be opposed to something that the other member states would be in favour of? What, for example, would the Swedes be in favour of that the Danes would not be?

The premise of your question is that there is a "European demos", in the context of "democracy". I reject that premise. We are not mere constituencies of a single country. If we were, that argument would make sense. Another problem with that argument is that 90% of the national vetoes are already gone, and studies by Helen Wallace at the London School of Economics and Sciences-Po University in Paris show that since Enlargement, there has been no gridlock. In that context, we do not need to reform the voting-system to further strengthen the Big Countries or surrender more national-vetoes. It's not about 'making Europe more efficient' as our elites claim. No. It's about turning the EU into a state in which political-power is constantly being centralised and taken further away from the people. If I am unhappy with the performance of an EU Commissioner, what can I or the Irish people do about it? That epitomises the lack of democracy that is irritating so many across Europe. To all intents and purposes the Commission is the Federal Govt and that will be copperfastened under Lisbon. The unelected government of 27 countries.

[belfast]

No just like last time.

The question I have what do they not understand about NO.

Is it the N or the O.


If the same question is to be put at referendum it should have to wait another 10 year before the same question can be asked again.

[Ah Well]

What we have left is a bunch of unelected, unrepresentitive groups, who are so desperate for publicity they make wild and inaccurate statements.

I will again be engaging people on the doorsteps, and look forward to explaining the truth to them.

Yet again you Yes Camp types are obliviously blind to reality -> and perhaps also so in your engaging and "explaining" the truth to ppl on the doorsteps

Take one simple word of advice here and it's to do with those who are VERY non politically interested (unlike you or me who by virtue of the fact of posting on in this Forum indicate some sort of political interest)

There was a NO vote last Referendum and the majority of the Electorate couldn't give a rat's hole about anything political ...

Don't take it as read that things have changed all that much .... the Electorate are fickle, potentially anti establishment and anti politico in general

Lisbon II Polls are whatever they are .... October 2009 shall tell the true tale

And the No Camp does not entail "radical lefties, far right facists and religious nutjobs" as is portrayed on this Site by some posters. It contains ppl of all political persuasions and ideals from the far left to the far right and plenty in between. You see, that's where results might actually accrue ... when you have those of such difference with the same ultimate goal

Oct 2009 is by no means won by the Yes Camp ... bring it on .....

[FutureTaoiseach]

Starting to get confident. But early days.