Lisbon 2 - how will you vote?

[Almanac]

In isolation this provision is welcome but when taken with all the other provisions on the expansion of Qualified Majority Voting, the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the new voting system, on balance it is not sufficient to justify a vote in favour.

FT to your credit you have held the line on the CFR. Top legal scholars have repeatedly expressed concern about the possible impact of the CFR in the hands of the judicially activist Court of Justice.

Articles 51 and 53 mirror the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the American Constitution in that they state the intent not to limit the rights recognised by member state's constitutions and affirm the principle of subsidiarity and the non-establishment of new powers for the Union. However the Ninth and Tenth Amendments in practice have failed completely to prevent wholescale expansion of federal power.

The ECJ showed its colours in its 2005 decision on environmental crime which gave the European Commission the right to tell member states to impose criminal sanctions for breaches of EU law.

[myksav]

Just listening to the Marion Finucane programme. FT actually has it right with his "elites" comments. If the "Ireland for Europe" is one thing, it is full of 'elites'.

[THE SINNER]

No,No,No!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[WackoJacko]

I wouldn't vote yes even if you paid me to.

[FutureTaoiseach]

FT to your credit you have held the line on the CFR. Top legal scholars have repeatedly expressed concern about the possible impact of the CFR in the hands of the judicially activist Court of Justice.

Articles 51 and 53 mirror the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the American Constitution in that they state the intent not to limit the rights recognised by member state's constitutions and affirm the principle of subsidiarity and the non-establishment of new powers for the Union. However the Ninth and Tenth Amendments in practice have failed completely to prevent wholescale expansion of federal power.

The ECJ showed its colours in its 2005 decision on environmental crime which gave the European Commission the right to tell member states to impose criminal sanctions for breaches of EU law.

Yes and it underlines the need for US Senate-style confirmation hearings to weed out the appointment of judicial-activist judges to the ECJ. The process as it stands lacks democracy and transparency. The Seanad should have powers to confirm state-appointments and govt appointments to the Irish seat on the ECJ.

[Mr Boxing]

It will be NO again from me.

[ms a]

Intend to vote No.

[Gruntledpig]

I have already voted "no" on good reasons - based on the provisions of the draft treaty and my hopes for the future of the country and of the EU - I haven't seen or heard anything since the first vote that would challenge my views on Lisbon - and I'm more than a little annoyed that the outcome of the first vote has been sidestepped!

[Liberal333]

A yes from me

[manicstreet]

NO again!