What happens if Lisbon II is defeated?

[Tiernanator]

Surely that will be the end of it, Lisbon will be binned, something will be cobbled up in the European Parliamant, etc.

I guess why Lisbon is being voted on in Ireland is because it will change the Irish Constitution.

In effect when voting in Lisbon referenda, we are voting for a new Irish Constitution, although none of the politicians will put it that way.

Isn't it the case that Constitutions across Europe are also being changed by Lisbon. In effect parliamentarians are using Lisbon to change their constitutions.

Is this not the corner stone of the Lisbon debate? That parliamentarians alone should not be allowed change their own constitution. Because if they are and allowed bypass the people, eventually the day will come when parliamentarians can have it written into their constitutions that there will be no elections from now on and parliamentarians can stay in office forever, or similar measures.

Am I understanding this all wrong?

Is Ireland the last bulwark against an EU dictatorship, through our willingness to hold referenda on these matters?

And if we defeat Lisbon II, willl there be Lisbon III, IV and V?

The anti-democratic Yes side will push the agenda onto people stop fighting against Lisbon. They (Yes camp)are traitors to the island of Ireland.

[Tiernanator]

If we vote not then the Tories will reverse ratification, hold a referendum in the UK, and then that will be the end of the sorry saga that has been the EU Constitution/Lisbon. It will be recalled as a period when the EU lost the run of itself in the ravenous hunger of its political-elites to turn it into a superstate, to the point even of holding referenda and then violating the spirit of what the voters had said.

Might even give the UUP a vote at the next GE here FT anything to get rid of the undemocratic Lisbon Imposition.

[FutureTaoiseach]

Might even give the UUP a vote at the next GE here FT anything to get rid of the undemocratic Lisbon Imposition.

I assume you mean a lower preference given SF oppose Lisbon?

[anewbeginning]

No we are not voting for a new Constitution. We are, technically speaking, voting on a very small wording change to our Constitution which is necessary for the Dail and Seanad to ratify Lisbon. And no, the other member states Constitutions are remaining as is AFAIK.

What is the exact wording change?

Is is something like:

"In these matters, EU law supercedes Irish law"...

[hiding behind a poster]

I assume you mean a lower preference given SF oppose Lisbon?

I doubt it, given that British general elections are held under the first-past-the-post system.

[molloyjh]

What is the exact wording change?

Is is something like:

"In these matters, EU law supercedes Irish law"...

Well no actually. My post was phrased badly, it should have said changes. EU law has superceded Irish law since we joined the Union so that bit is nothing new. The logic being that there is no point in passing EU law if the member states can override it willy-nilly. Given that the EU only has competance in areas where it logically should and our elected representatives pass the laws as they do in the Dail that really isn't such a big deal.

The changes are just reference changes as such, so instead of the Constitution talking about an Article in say Nice or Maastricht, it now references the relevant Article in Lisbon.

[COMMIE]

Is it not true that the Irish Constitution will be superceded?

[eurosceptic]

A 2nd no means the status quo. Plain and simple.

[molloyjh]

Is it not true that the Irish Constitution will be superceded?

Not anymore than it has been the last few decades. What most people don't realise is that this provision has been part of the Irish Constitution since we joined the EU (or the EEC as it was then). The only change now is that the text already in the Constitution must be changed to reflect the new references to the Lisbon Treaty.

The thing about all of this is that the Irish Constitution does not in any way contradict the EU treaties as they stand. Lisbon does not alter this. For any changes to be made to the Constitution we must hold a referendum to approve them. If we say Yes to those changes then the Constitution is updated, if we say No it isn't. Currently anything that would change our Constitution requires unanimous decision between all member states (and again this does not change with Lisbon) and so our No vote would act as our veto.

In other words we still hold complete control over our own Constitution. It is only updated when we vote to have it updated, and there will be no change there with Lisbon.

The whole "EU Treaties and law superceeding the Irish Constitution", while technically true, is meaningless given that there are no areas where they differ. And if we were to ever try and change our Constitution in such a way that conflicts with EU law you'd have to ask the question "what are we doing in the EU at all?".

[Sucker Punch]

Well no actually. My post was phrased badly, it should have said changes. EU law has superseded Irish law since we joined the Union so that bit is nothing new.

Superior as of judicial activism by the ECJ, it was not stated clearly in the treaties as such, thus we have the judgement from the ECJ in Costa vs Enel :

It follows from all these observations that the law stemming from the treaty, an independent source of law, could not, because of its special and original nature, be overridden by domestic legal provisions, however framed, without being deprived of its character as community law and without the legal basis of the community itself being called into question

This judgment took many by surprise, not least the original MS Govts whom initially pushed for the communities in the first place.

The logic being that there is no point in passing EU law if the member states can override it willy-nilly. Given that the EU only has competence in areas where it logically should and our elected representatives pass the laws as they do in the Dail that really isn't such a big deal.

The changes are just reference changes as such, so instead of the Constitution talking about an Article in say Nice or Maastricht, it now references the relevant Article in Lisbon.

Lisbon will be the continuation of ECJ Judaical creep, the TEC stated clearly that EU law was superior to national law, it was emblazoned as an article in the treaty. This time in Lisbon, the article is skirted by direct mention. Instead it is inserted as references to the previous case law and decisions of the ECJ establishing the supremacy of EU law.

That EU law is superior to constitutional law can only said to be half true, thus far there hasn't been a major conflict (that I'm aware of), in many instances national law sits begrudingly aside, while the ECJ has tried to evade serious confrontation. I imagine however, that this can only be a matter of time before it happens.

Edit: As to your point highlighted in bold, this is your opinion, not fact.