Originally Posted by Sean-Bhean bhoct

Who should be the main voices? You mention the word democratic in your post regardless of the fact that the main players on the 'No' side last time were never democratically elected and had vested interests to put it mildly. And then the same 'No' side crib about their democratic rights being eroding by a lack of respect for the referendum result.

When you talk about the main voices here it is fair to say that these voices should be political ones i.e. those who have been elected democratically and have no immediate vested interests. Anything less is unacceptable. Libertas tried it the democratic way but didn't cut it - not only in Ireland but in Europe generally.

The government and the opposition agree on very little these days so I think that when they actually agree on something it's a pretty safe bet. And I also make the point that Labour, as populist as they are, vowed not to support a second Lisbon treaty but something tells me that they're not going to live up to that vow.

That leaves Sinn Fein as the only credible, democratically elected 'voice' on the 'No' side. So good luck with that...

Originally Posted by molloyjh

Fixed that for you.

It's amusing that some of the No voters here are proclaiming Lisbon to be a move to a facist/coporatist/socialist EU, both because of the contradictory nature of the claims and because of the fact that the majority of opposition is coming from extremes similar to those claims, i.e. the far right and far left elements.

If the EU were going down a socialist route FT why is the Socialist Party opposed to it? It's amazing how full of crap you really are. Your opinion doesn't even have to be consistant.

As for Yes slogans:

Socialists, Sinn Fein and dodgy right-wing business men. Do you trust them?

The No side want to deny you the right to vote. Say Yes to Democracy.

Don't think that shower are fit to represent you? <insert Libertas logo beneath>

The EU has given us millions. What have the Socialists, Sinn Fein or Libertas ever done for you?

Want a more efficient EU? Vote Yes.


Seeing as meaningful debate is wasted here, when in Rome....

Originally Posted by Watcher1

I dont see why, for a referendum, the only voices that should be heard are those of a democratically elected group. Most of the democratically elected groups were all in favour of Lisbon so by your logic, we would not have heard the no side (except for a small minority of democratically elected groups with a small voice and following).

I also dont believe that just because the government and most of the opposition are in favour of Lisbon that it is necessarily a good thing for the citizenry. I am very dubious of the benefits of Lisbon for us, the people. What exactly is in it for the politicians? Dick Roche already admitted during the last referendum campaign that since Nice, "Europe" has become 25% more efficient. The Irish government, for many, many years, even before Nice, could not keep up with everything that was coming out of Brussels and have been reprimanded on a number of issues because of it. This fuels my scepticsism as to their motivations. I actually believe that they will use Lisbon and Europe to side step even more responsibility if Lisbon is passed. This would defintely be a bad thing for this country and its peoples.

I am voting No again.

Originally Posted by molloyjh

Just thought I add this little bit of info into the fisheries debate raised by FT. Not that I think he'll listen or respond given his history of high-tailing it at the first sign of provable facts....

Have a look at this site.

http://www.marine.ie/NR/rdonlyres/B2...oflandings.pdf

Basically it reckons that on average there is €460m worth taken from the Irish EEZ annually (since 1973) and €800m from around Ireland. We already take 28% within the EEZ and 15% outside. So annually we "lose" approx €331m within the EEZ but we can assume (I think anyway) that we would take in around the same equivalent outside the EEZ. So over 35 years that would be just over €11.5 billion we have lost in the fishing industry. That in itself assumes we would have had the ability to land all that fish ourselves in that time period also, which we wouldn't have been able to do, but even still lets just assume we could and work with this inflated figure.

We got €1.4 billion from the EU in 2005 alone FFS (Ireland received net income of €1.4 billion from the European Union in 2005 - Per capita income of €350 highest of pre-May 2004 EU15)!

Up to 2002 we were net beneficiaries to the tune of over €34 billion (Ireland European Union/EU Cash Benefits, Receipts, Tops Per Capita Beneficiaries, Payments, Net Recipients, 1973-2003 Net EU Benefits, GNI, GDP, GNP per head : Comment Finfacts Ireland).

Given that we are still net beneficiaries (until at least 2013) it would be relatively safe to say that thus far we have received from the EU well over 3 times what we would have gotten from the fisheries industry:

Lost in Fisheries: €11.5bn

Gained in direct EU funding until 2002: €34bn
Guestimated amt gained 2003-2008 (@ avg 1bn a year): €6bn
Total Gained: €40bn

40/11.5 = approx 3.48 (this based on the exaggerated €11.5bn)

Then we need to factor in all the indirect income we have gained in terms of foreign investment (which is in part due to our Corporate Tax, but also our access to the EU markets).

So not only is your fishing industry claim completely bogus, I've also shown that membership of the EU has been an overwhelmingly positive thing for Ireland. Of course all that money was just a ploy to lull us into a false sense of security before the hand of facism (or is it socialism) comes crashing down on us, eh FT?

Originally Posted by Article 113 TFEU

The Council shall, acting unanimously in accordance with a special legislative procedure and after consulting the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee, adopt provisions for the harmonisation of legislation concerning turnover taxes, excise duties and other forms of indirect taxation to the extent that such harmonisation is necessary to ensure the establishment and the functioning of the internal market and to avoid distortion of competition.

Originally Posted by FutureTaoiseach

Bringing up EU membership itself is a distraction by the yes campaign.

Originally Posted by evercloserunion

Haven't the nay-sayers on this thread been talking about making Lisbon a referendum on the government? They are now openly admitting that they are not going to focus on the Treaty but rather focus on distractions like the popularity of the government.

Originally Posted by FutureTaoiseach

Fair play to MLM on Drivetime on Radio 1 now for exposing the worthlessness of the 'guarantees', in particular the fact that Lisbon allows for the veto on taxation to be relinquished without a referendum.