View Full Version : Lisbon Treaty Round Two
EmmaGallen
06-22-2009, 00:29
So Ireland is getting set to hold round two of the Lisbon Treaty Referendum. And apparently the Conservatives will hold one following the result of Ireland's. Will Ireland vote no again? And if they do surely there will be a third one just for luck? Will the Tories stick to their promise?
morton700
06-22-2009, 07:28
Apparently more people favour it and the chances of it being yes have increased ...
I suspect the Conservatives will hold one because it is unlikely that the country will vote yes to it (what the Conservatives want) - over 50% of people voted for UKIP and the Conservatives in the European elections who both oppose it ...
coruscant
06-22-2009, 09:38
I think Ireland will pass it this time, they've secured a lot of what they wanted.
Hamsterwaffle
06-22-2009, 11:35
Something tells me my gloating and posting of the entire lyrics of "We are the Champions" at the rejection of the first referendum will come back to haunt me.
Something about this whole business seems rather familiar.
EU: Do you want a Lisbon treaty there Ireland?
Ireland: No
EU: Go on
Ireland: No I really don't
EU: Go on
Ireland: Thank you for the offer but no
EU: Go on
Yes it seems the EU is resorting to Mrs Doyle tactics.
Dirk/DSF
06-22-2009, 12:03
The EU should accept that Ireland does not want the Lisbon Treaty and GET OVER IT! Moreover, every nation should have a referendum on the issue.
Ireland may be the only country that voted no, but it was also the only country that was allowed to vote.
Look people. Ireland didnt accept the Treaty the first time round so now it makes perfect sense to find out which parts of it the people of Ireland had a problem with.
I am against the EU. I want out. I voted UKIP. But I dont accept this extremist nonsense of "Just accept the no vote!!". Why would pro-EU people abandon all further Treaties?
ciara_squires
06-22-2009, 14:19
how is it extremist to accept that a country democratically voted NO, plain and clear and if other countries were given a vote they'd vote no aswell- including us most likely..
Dirk/DSF
06-22-2009, 14:23
But I dont accept this extremist nonsense of "Just accept the 'no' vote!!".
Yes, because it would be completely ridiculous for Governments to accept the decision of the people!
Incidentally, is that why New Lie-bour didn't let us have a referendum on the issue?
Clearly it would be outrageous for the EU to let the people decide on the issue when their show-vote backfired!
EDIT:
how is it extremist to accept that a country democratically voted NO, plain and clear and if other countries were given a vote they'd vote no aswell- including us most likely...
I back Ciara.
how is it extremist to accept that a country democratically voted NO,
Yes, because it would be completely ridiculous for Governments to accept the decision of the people!
You are completely missing the point I just made.
1. The Irish voted No to the Lisbon Treaty - we agree.
2. If the Lisbon Treaty is changed, taking into account specific issues which some Irish may have had a problem with, then its perfectly reasonable to ask the Irish to vote again because the Treaty has been changed. It may not have changed much but it would've changed. - so, do we argree?
ciara_squires
06-22-2009, 14:26
What about the other countries? everyone should vote... Ireland's problems with it might be something someone else loved and something other countries hated, it needs to be voted on properly.
What about the other countries? everyone should vote... Ireland's problems with it might be something someone else loved and something other countries hated, it needs to be voted on properly.
Yes I agree... but do you agree with my point number 2?
ciara_squires
06-22-2009, 14:30
2. If the Lisbon Treaty is changed, taking into account specific issues which some Irish may have had a problem with, then its perfectly reasonable to ask the Irish to vote again because the Treaty has been changed. It may not have changed much but it would've changed. - so, do we argree?
Yeah vote again if it's been changed, but if they vote no again it should be accepted...
Oh sorry I actually disagree that Lisbon should be voted on in a referendum. Sorry, in the exitement of the moment I forgot my own stance :p
Dirk/DSF
06-22-2009, 14:47
You are completely missing the point I just made.
1. The Irish voted No to the Lisbon Treaty - we agree.
2. If the Lisbon Treaty is changed, taking into account specific issues which some Irish may have had a problem with, then its perfectly reasonable to ask the Irish to vote again because the Treaty has been changed. It may not have changed much but it would've changed. - so, do we argree?
1. Yes.
2. May have? No more involvement than a vague interest in what problems they "may" have had? But yes, fundamentally, i agree in that case. However, your earlier comment, labelling us extremists was therefore inaccurate and *sniff* hurtful...
3. Again with the numbers...
What about the other countries? everyone should vote... Ireland's problems with it might be something someone else loved and something other countries hated, it needs to be voted on properly.
Right. (As per my earlier comment) I think every nation's people should have a say. Governments do not represent the people that directly.
Dirk/DSF
06-22-2009, 14:48
Oh sorry I actually disagree that Lisbon should be voted on in a referendum. Sorry, in the exitement of the moment I forgot my own stance :p
Ah! No worries, then.
EDIT:
(note the sarcasm)
ciara_squires
06-22-2009, 14:50
Oh sorry I actually disagree that Lisbon should be voted on in a referendum. Sorry, in the exitement of the moment I forgot my own stance :p
hahahha you nutter :p
hahahha you nutter :p
Yeah, but my point 2 still stands :p
Oh, and I number my arguments a lot because I find people understand them better when I do.
Dirk/DSF
06-22-2009, 15:04
Yeah, but my point 2 still stands :p
Oh, and I number my arguments a lot because I find people understand them better when I do.
So far as i can tell, yes.
Haha! I was wondering. ;)
I suspect the Conservatives will hold one because it is unlikely that the country will vote yes to it (what the Conservatives want) - over 50% of people voted for UKIP and the Conservatives in the European elections who both oppose it ...
Parliament's ratified it.
morton700
06-22-2009, 17:05
Parliament's ratified it.
They could always 'unratify' it ...
They could always 'unratify' it ...
Why would they do that?
The Conservative Party are already the laughing stock of Europe why the hell would they like to be seen as the biggest ****s to?
morton700
06-22-2009, 17:07
They're not going to.
How do you know? The treaty has also been changed ever so slightly which means they technically have to ratify it.
morton700
06-22-2009, 17:10
Why would they do that?
The Conservative Party are already the laughing stock of Europe why the hell would they like to be seen as the biggest ****s to?
Because maybe they don't agree with it???
A seizable chunk of the party do agree with it. The Conservatives have always governed as europhiles, even as the backbench winged.
Mind you Cameron's a good old Little Englander so I wouldn't put it past him to ****-off the entire continent and totally cut the UK adrift from the rest of the World. The UK has few close friends outside of Europe and the USA and Obama is on record calling Cameron an 'insignificant little man'-so no love lost there:p.
joanne.b.
06-22-2009, 18:01
A seizable chunk of the party do agree with it. The Conservatives have always governed as europhiles, even as the backbench winged.
Mind you Cameron's a good old Little Englander so I wouldn't put it past him to ****-off the entire continent and totally cut the UK adrift from the rest of the World. The UK has few close friends outside of Europe and the USA and Obama is on record calling Cameron an 'insignificant little man'-so no love lost there:p.
Wasn't Obama quoted calling David Cameron 'a light weight'?
That couldn't have done much for Cameron's self-esteem... :(
Yes, he called him that as well:D.
Darryl'Libertarian'Jones
06-22-2009, 22:50
Well, I guess the Republic must destroy the death star twice.
how is it extremist to accept that a country democratically voted NO, plain and clear and if other countries were given a vote they'd vote no aswell- including us most likely..
They've changed the opinion since the election (most of the infrastructure of the west was due to EU. Hell, you can't drive for 20 mins without a sign reminding you the EU helped build the road you're driving on).
People voted Labour in 2005 but want an election now.(and don't kid yourself everyone knew Gordon would take over at some point)
Why would they do that?
The Conservative Party are already the laughing stock of Europe why the hell would they like to be seen as the biggest ****s to?
Tories have banged on about this referendum. When interviewed a Tory spokesman was asked what if its already ratified when you're in power. He said it would be 'negotiated'. So nothing will happen basically.
Dirk/DSF
06-25-2009, 13:42
I looked at the revised treaty and nothing much has changed. It's true, the EU has done a lot in the devolved countries (i don't think England is getting much benefit) - Scotland, from what i can see, is getting a lot of help. Ireland also gets a lot, though that's diminished since the Eastern European countries joined.
The question is, is this enough to make up for the loss of democracy?
I'd say no, because i hold democracy as extremely important. But the Lisbon treaty takes power away from the People. I believe the commissioner is now granted to Ireland again but it's not as if he's directly elected by the People of Ireland. Also, the Lisbon Treaty allows the EU beauracracy to take decisions by itself without the need for further treaties being made. It symbolises the death of democracy so that the EU imperialists can ensure the capitalists get a bit more dosh.
I looked at the revised treaty and nothing much has changed. It's true, the EU has done a lot in the devolved countries (i don't think England is getting much benefit) - Scotland, from what i can see, is getting a lot of help. Ireland also gets a lot, though that's diminished since the Eastern European countries joined.
The question is, is this enough to make up for the loss of democracy?
I'd say no, because i hold democracy as extremely important. But the Lisbon treaty takes power away from the People. I believe the commissioner is now granted to Ireland again but it's not as if he's directly elected by the People of Ireland. Also, the Lisbon Treaty allows the EU beauracracy to take decisions by itself without the need for further treaties being made. It symbolises the death of democracy so that the EU imperialists can ensure the capitalists get a bit more dosh.
We do need to give the EU parliament the power and not the commission
Dirk/DSF
06-25-2009, 13:57
We do need to give the EU parliament the power and not the commission
Why should the EU have the power to enforce laws that effect the Irish People without the need to consult them?
Why should the EU have the power to enforce laws that effect the Irish People without the need to consult them?
EU parliament would be representative wouldn't it.
Dirk/DSF
06-25-2009, 14:04
EU parliament would be representative wouldn't it.
Of all of the EU. And a majority would overwhelm what the EU representatives of Ireland would believe beneficial to the Irish People. Plus we'd need more checks that the EU representatives are truly representative of the Irish People.
Of all of the EU. And a majority would overwhelm what the EU representatives of Ireland would believe beneficial to the Irish People. Plus we'd need more checks that the EU representatives are truly representative of the Irish People.
I believe you should be able to have a referendum on whenever you want and its up for the national government to decide but for day to day stuff the EU parliament should be ok
Dirk/DSF
06-25-2009, 14:28
I believe you should be able to have a referendum on whenever you want and its up for the national government to decide but for day to day stuff the EU parliament should be ok
The Lisbon treaty gives them the power to make laws without the need for further treaties - i.e. without the agreement of the effected nation. And there is absolutely no obligation to run a referendum for national governments in the treaties as it is! (As seen by New Lie-bour's slippery tactics).
The Lisbon treaty gives them the power to make laws without the need for further treaties - i.e. without the agreement of the effected nation. And there is absolutely no obligation to run a referendum for national governments in the treaties as it is! (As seen by New Lie-bour's slippery tactics).
I know i'm just saying i'm not against the ideals of the EU but of course it needs to be reformed
Dirk/DSF
06-25-2009, 14:32
I know i'm just saying i'm not against the ideals of the EU but of course it needs to be reformed
See my blog for my view.
They've changed the opinion since the election (most of the infrastructure of the west was due to EU. Hell, you can't drive for 20 mins without a sign reminding you the EU helped build the road you're driving on).
http://ec.europa.eu/ireland/ireland_in_the_eu/impact_of_membership_on_ireland/index_en.htm
People voted Labour in 2005 but want an election now.(and don't kid yourself everyone knew Gordon would take over at some point)
It was a conservative slogan...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3714218.stm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2005/feb/22/uk.polls1
joanne.b.
06-25-2009, 17:20
http://ec.europa.eu/ireland/general_information/ireland_eu/impact/index_en.htm
It was a conservative slogan...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3714218.stm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2005/feb/22/uk.polls1
I think my family were voting for Brown back in 1997. :p
I think my family were voting for Brown back in 1997. :p
It's funny i watch Bremner, Bird and Fortune and they took the mick out of the tories in 2005 saying, 'the tories soon realised from the poles that saying people were going to get brown and that blair was going to go was making Labour more popular and making the tories seem foolish'
Ironic?
Dirk/DSF
06-26-2009, 15:43
Back on topic, rather than just direct you over, i've decided to answer directly in addition.
I know i'm just saying i'm not against the ideals of the EU but of course it needs to be reformed
The EU is a threat to democracy and the People of every constituent country. It's also a bit clique-ish on an international level. It needs radical reform and a complete turnaround in policy and ideals, along with a huge reorganisation.
Since these demands are somewhat unrealistic, we might be s****ed. Particularly those with ideals such as yours and mine, which the current EU constitution actively excludes.
Darryl'Libertarian'Jones
08-12-2009, 00:10
Why is it that this situation reminds me of Star Wars? :confused:
What problems do people actually have with the Lisbon treaty? It looks ok to me.
Darryl'Libertarian'Jones
08-12-2009, 12:05
What problems do people actually have with the Lisbon treaty? It looks ok to me.
The way they are trying to enforce it, for one - maybe if they gave everybody a referendum, people wouldn't be so peeved off about it.
In a truly free society, the government fears its citizens, not vise versa.
The way they are trying to enforce it, for one - maybe if they gave everybody a referendum, people wouldn't be so peeved off about it.
In a truly free society, the government fears its citizens, not vise versa.
It's each member states responsibility for how they ratify the treaty.
Dirk/DSF
08-12-2009, 12:39
It's interesting that the text of the Lisbon Treaty hasn't been splashed wildly across the media with expressed fears for a totalitarian anti-democratic superstate.
Basically, among other things, the Lisbon treaty gives the power the the EU to make further treaties without the need to gain the approval of either any constituent nation's Government or indeed the People of any constituent nation.
They bypass entirely the people of the country to make any further "agreement" on the basis of a couple of marginally accountable Eurocrats in Brussels. They can make laws completely independently of the people or governments involved.
Daniel Frost
08-12-2009, 12:53
Maybe if it had been pasted over the news you'd know a bit more about it, hm?
It actually increases the role of member states' parliaments in decision making. The President will actually have to have democratic support of more than one country, it won't simply rotate (admittedly it would be better if it was elected by the people not the council). It introduces a clause which allows nations to exit, should they so wish- surely that is a change you like?
Dirk/DSF
08-12-2009, 15:33
Maybe if it had been pasted over the news you'd know a bit more about it, hm?
It actually increases the role of member states' parliaments in decision making. The President will actually have to have democratic support of more than one country, it won't simply rotate (admittedly it would be better if it was elected by the people not the council). It introduces a clause which allows nations to exit, should they so wish- surely that is a change you like?
Does it?
Proof?
Daniel Frost
08-12-2009, 15:43
Wikipedia :p
http://tinyurl.com/TheEU ... can people complete this survey for me please?
Basically, among other things, the Lisbon treaty gives the power the the EU to make further treaties without the need to gain the approval of either any constituent nation's Government or indeed the People of any constituent nation.
They bypass entirely the people of the country to make any further "agreement" on the basis of a couple of marginally accountable Eurocrats in Brussels. They can make laws completely independently of the people or governments involved.
LIES! The national governments are involved, through the Council.
A good book about the EU is "The European Union: A Very Short Introduction" which is published by Oxford University Press.
Thomas Hemsley
08-17-2009, 23:21
http://tinyurl.com/TheEU ... can people complete this survey for me please?
Done'd. :D
How do you know? The treaty has also been changed ever so slightly which means they technically have to ratify it.
The treaty hasn't been changed with regard to other countries - or at all really, it just clarifies that the military co-operation is "opt in" so Ireland doesn't have to break its neutrality and that the phrase "social affairs" doesn't include religion and abortion (it's more based on work things like maternity leave, minimum wage etc).
coruscant
10-10-2009, 15:08
I think we should do what Nigel Farage said, have it best of three so it's fair :p
vBulletin® v3.8.1, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.