Referendum on Lisbon Treaty

Overheal

A better idea would be to discuss the treaty here and keep a boards.wiki page dedicated to the treaty as well.

Scofflaw

Gonkster wrote: »

You'll find that there's links to addendums not published in the "consolidated" version.

Feel free to provide them.

Gonkster wrote: »

The whole things just a joke.

No, it's a treaty.

Gonkster wrote: »

As for not voting...what would be the point? If every single one of us abstains then it would make sense, but I can't see that happening!
If I can't make heads or tails of it all, then I sincerely doubt that most of the politicians can either. I've noticed a few admissions that some haven't even bothered to read it.

I don't see the problem myself. It's readable, if complicated - it was put together by human beings, after all, not machine intelligences from Jupiter. If you have difficulty reading it, read a summary of a guide.

Gonkster wrote: »

I'll be voting no quite simply because we have been given the chance to make a difference here and the arguments against implementation seem quite solid and simple to follow. Not to mention the French and Dutch have made their feelings plain about it.
Perhaps with a no vote the EU might actually attempt to simplify things somewhat?

If you don't understand the Treaty, as you say you don't, you can have no idea whatsoever whether the arguments against implementation are even vaguely true. To claim that they "seem solid" is rather meaningless if you don't understand the Treaty - and yet you will vote No on the basis of them? Bizarre.

cordially,
Scofflaw

oscarBravo

Gonkster wrote: »

You'll find that there's links to addendums not published in the "consolidated" version.

Are there? Can you point them out?

The whole things just a joke.

What's a joke? The Treaty? The EU? Not exactly a compelling argument.

As for not voting...what would be the point? If every single one of us abstains then it would make sense, but I can't see that happening!

What's the point in voting, when you have no idea what the implications of voting are either way?

If I can't make heads or tails of it all, then I sincerely doubt that most of the politicians can either.

With respect, that's a pretty arrogant position.

I'll be voting no quite simply because we have been given the chance to make a difference here...

What difference will you make by voting no? Wouldn't you make a difference if you voted yes?

...and the arguments against implementation seem quite solid and simple to follow.

If you have any solid arguments against implementation that haven't been debunked to death in this thread, I'd be interested in hearing them.

Not to mention the French and Dutch have made their feelings plain about it.

Yes, they've elected government which have chosen not to hold referenda.

Perhaps with a no vote the EU might actually attempt to simplify things somewhat?

I refer you to both bonkey's and my points above.

Scofflaw

TravelJunkie wrote:

When I say clueless, I mean clueless.

That thread is no good to me. I'm thinking - 5 bullet points in simple english a 'Lisbon Treaty for Dummies' if you like.

Shortest I can make it is 12:

1. reduction in the number of EU Commissioners, who will then rotate - although this will also happen if Lisbon is rejected. Commission President will continue as at the moment.

2. Increase in QMV (non-veto) areas by 34 or 50 depending on how you look at it. Defence and taxation remain absolutely veto areas.

3. Change to QMV voting weights on the Council. It's horribly difficult to compare the old and new systems.

4. Presidency of the Council stops rotating amongst the members every six months, and becomes elected by the Council for 2.5 yearly terms.

5. The Treaty gives the European Parliament power over legislation in a raft of areas.

6. National parliaments get the power to force review of legislation if at least a third of them object to it.

7. The Treaty can be changed by amendments like our Constitution, rather than requiring a new Treaty every time. Any changes that would have required a referendum here will still require a referendum here.

8. Under the Citizens' Initiative , a petition with a million supporters can require the Commission to consider proposals on a particular issue.

9. The Treaty clarifies which areas the EU has power in, and that it does not have any powers outside those granted by the member states.

10. The Treaty provides for mutual assistance and for some elements of common foreign/security policy. The proposed changes continue the present arrangements respecting Irish neutrality.

11. The Charter of Fundamental Rights sets out rights that the EU must respect in all decisions, directives, and institutions, and that national governments must respect when turning EU directives into national law. The Charter is specifically prohibited from giving the EU any new powers.

12. Finally, Ireland can opt in or out of any EU provision on areas under "Freedom, Security, and Justice" - which covers areas like immigration, border controls, judicial and police cooperation.

Hope that helps.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Rossibaby

''8. Under the Citizens' Initiative , a petition with a million supporters can require the Commission to make legislative proposals on a particular issue''

is this not bull, it can consider the petition in any decision but the petition has absolutely no actual power to create change

oscarBravo

Rossibaby wrote: »

is this not bull, it can consider the petition in any decision but the petition has absolutely no actual power to create change

This is worse than the status quo how, exactly?

Scofflaw

Rossibaby wrote: »

''8. Under the Citizens' Initiative , a petition with a million supporters can require the Commission to make legislative proposals on a particular issue''

is this not bull, it can consider the petition in any decision but the petition has absolutely no actual power to create change

"Bull" in the sense of not being true? No, that's exactly what's in the Treaty. You get a million signatures, and the Commission has to produce a proposal on the subject.

Does it force the Commission to actually produce specific legislation? No, it doesn't. Would that be a good idea?

As oscarBravo says, it represents an improvement over the status quo. Whether it represents perfection is a different issue - it does what it says.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Rossibaby

i didnt say it was worse...but anyone of average intelligence can see that when push comes to shove on any major issue,a petition like that mentioned above would not be worth the paper its written on and is a pointless point in the treaty's favour. its misleading if anything,does anyone really think the EU elite want to give any sort of power to citizens?

Scofflaw

Rossibaby wrote: »

i didnt say it was worse...but anyone of average intelligence can see that when push comes to shove on any major issue,a petition like that mentioned above would not be worth the paper its written on and is a pointless point in the treaty's favour. its misleading if anything,does anyone really think the EU elite want to give any sort of power to citizens?

Funnily enough, I now get to say "yes, obviously they do, because they are". It's there in the Treaty, in black and white - the power for citizens to get the Commission to consider proposals on an issue.


cordially,
Scofflaw

guinnessdrinker

I heard Kathy Sinnott on Newstalk last week and she saying she was working with a group putting together an easy to read version of the Lisbon treaty but I can't seem to find it anywhere.

I know she is against the treaty but she did say that the document was not going to be biased in any way becaue both the yes and no camp could use it.

Anyone else hear about this?

djpbarry

Rossibaby wrote: »

...but anyone of average intelligence can see that when push comes to shove on any major issue,a petition like that mentioned above would not be worth the paper its written on and is a pointless point in the treaty's favour.

Rustling up a petition with 1 MILLION signatories is no mean feat and is worthy of attention and there are cases of such petitions being taken very seriously. Here's an example.

turgon

It is true that the EU does not have to act on a citizens petition.

This is stated in "A Summery Guide to the Treaty of Lisbon" published by the National Forum on Europe (page 24, paragraph 4, sentence 3). The commission has to consider the proposal but does not have to act on it.

Scofflaw

turgon wrote: »

It is true that the EU does not have to act on a citizens petition.

This is stated in "A Summery Guide to the Treaty of Lisbon" published by the National Forum on Europe (page 24, paragraph 4, sentence 3). The commission has to consider the proposal but does not have to act on it.

I've edited point 8 - my original version is probably too strong, since the exact details of the petition mechanism have yet to be decided.

cordially,
Scofflaw

turgon

Good one, any way to make that 12 point thing like a sticky on its own so everybody should read it?it will get lost within 1 or 2 days here!

LostinBlanch

Rossibaby wrote: »

''8. Under the Citizens' Initiative* , a petition with a million supporters can require the Commission to make legislative proposals on a particular issue''

is this not bull, it can consider the petition in any decision but the petition has absolutely no actual power to create change

So it becomes a pressure valve, or a political liveline if you will, giving the idea that citizens of the EU can effect change. Much like Joe Duffy does, listens to those who ring in and lets them complain and let off steam. Result not a lot happens except people get to complain on Liveline. 1 Million people sign a petition and send it to the commission, result they've been acknowledged and can say well we've been listened to. The end result in both cases is that the appearance of being able to effect change (except in trivial cases where it doesn't negatively affect those in power) is greater than the actual ability to effect change.

* Wait, doesn't "citizens iniative" imply that we're already members of a European State? And owe alleigiance to that state? Miriam Webster Definition

oscarBravo

Sure, there's no guarantee that a citizens' initiative would effect change in the EU. But as it currently stands, there is absolutely no mechanism by which a million signatures can have any bearing whatsoever on EU policies.

So, a yes vote means that there's a possibility that a groundswell of popular opinion can directly effect change. A no vote means that such a groundswell can't have any direct affect whatsoever.

How is this a reason to vote no?

Edit: LostinBlanch, I'm already a citizen. Specifically, I'm a citizen of an EU country. Should Lisbon pass, I'll still be a citizen of an EU country, and not a citizen of the EU.

partholon

lisbon gives the EU status as a legal entitity in its own right so you'd actually have dual status as a citizen of ireland AND a citizen of the EU.

IRLConor

partholon wrote: »

lisbon gives the EU status as a legal entitity in its own right so you'd actually have dual status as a citizen of ireland AND a citizen of the EU.

It depends on how you define "citizen".

If you can be a citizen of something that's not a state, then you could already argue that you're a citizen of the EU.

If you can't be a citizen of something that's not a state, then you can't be a citizen of the EU before or after the Lisbon Treaty.

Giving the EU a single legal personality does not confer statehood upon it.

oscarBravo

As it currently stands, dual citizenship is illegal for (at least) Danish citizens, so I don't think it's accurate to say that post-Lisbon, citizens of EU countries will also be citizens of the EU.

Where would I pick up my EU passport?

Scofflaw

IRLConor wrote: »

It depends on how you define "citizen".

If you can be a citizen of something that's not a state, then you could already argue that you're a citizen of the EU.

If you can't be a citizen of something that's not a state, then you can't be a citizen of the EU before or after the Lisbon Treaty.

Giving the EU a single legal personality does not confer statehood upon it.

If it did, then the EC, which already has legal personality, would presumably already be a state. So, of course, would the Universal Postal Union be.

As oscarBravo says, where can you pick up your EU passport as opposed to your national passport?

cordially,
Scofflaw

IRLConor

Scofflaw wrote: »

If it did, then the EC, which already has legal personality, would presumably already be a state. So, of course, would the Universal Postal Union be.

As would a limited company.

snubbleste

Just had my first view of a campaign poster on a lamp post. The date has yet to be called, will the local authorities' litter wardens actually take a dim view of politicians erecting posters prior to the date being set?

IRLConor

snubbleste wrote: »

Just had my first view of a campaign poster on a lamp post. The date has yet to be called, will the local authorities' litter wardens actually take a dim view of politicians erecting posters prior to the date being set?

I certainly hope so. A blanket ban on the posters would be better though IMHO.

EDIT: Report it to the local authority and see what they say?

snubbleste

I already did. Reply was 'is the date not on June 12th'
They said they would send out a community warden to have a look, i doubt anything will happen.

thepoopatorium

Hi all,

I'm a music blogger but have wanted to do a kind of idiots guide to the Lisbon treaty for some time, it being pretty jargon heavy and all.

here's my effort:

Idiots Guide to the Lisbon Treaty

hope it helps some people. all the same, would love to hear any feedback, or suggestions from those more in the know.

thanks!

rob

Young Catholic

In regard to the Lisbon Treaty/EU Constitution there is the following website : http://www.lisbonvote.com/
I am voting No.

Moriarty

Young Catholic wrote: »

In regard to the Lisbon Treaty/EU Constitution there is the following website : http://www.lisbonvote.com/
I am voting No.

/smirks

Yeah, because I'm going to take advice from youth defence.

mike65

from SBP

Public opinion has moved sharply against the Lisbon Treaty, with the Yes side now enjoying only a slender lead, according to the latest Sunday Business Post/Red C monthly tracking poll.

Support for the treaty has fallen from 43 per cent in February to 35 per cent today among those entitled to vote in the referendum. Those opposed to the treaty have increased from 24 per cent to 31 per cent. The number of undecided voters remains almost unchanged, at 34 per cent.

With seven weeks remaining until the expected polling date, incoming taoiseach Brian Cowen, the government and the broader Yes campaign face a difficult struggle to regain the initiative.

So many dunnos makes it hard to parse but it'll be a very low turn-out and a tight margin I'd say. The Nos might well be more inclined to get out to vote.

Mike.

Thirdfox

oscarBravo wrote: »

As it currently stands, dual citizenship is illegal for (at least) Danish citizens, so I don't think it's accurate to say that post-Lisbon, citizens of EU countries will also be citizens of the EU.

Where would I pick up my EU passport?

Our EU law class talks about the Directive on EU citizenship of 2004. Here are my notes from the law class:

• Citizenship
o Art 17 EC (ex 8)
 Established citizenship – everyone is a member
o Art 18 EC (ex 8a)
 Citizen’s right to move and reside freely (t&c apply)
o Directive 2004/38 on citizens’ right to move and reside in MS
 Not being fully utilised by citizens 
 Art 2.1 – Union citizens are defined (a la Art 17)
 2.2 Family members:
• Spouse, registered partner (where they are recognised), direct descendants u-21 and those of spouse/partner, ascending dependants and those of spouse/partner
 Art 4 No exit visa required
 Art 5 No entry visa required
 Art 6 Unconditional residence for 3 months
 Art 7 Residence for more than 3 months
• Workers/self-employed
• Self-supporting
• Vocational training (and no burden of state)
 Art 7.3 Rights retained if
• Temporary illness
• Involuntary unemployment after 1 year
• Vocational training (worker – link to job)
 Art 12/13 Family members right to remain
 Art 16 Permanent residence after 5 years
 Art 27-33 Restrictions
• Public policy/security/health reason

As far as I know your Irish passport doubles as an EU passport too. Not certain about that but you are already an EU citizen, Lisbon does not introduce this, it was introduced in 2004 formally.

edit:
looking through my notes it appears that Art 17 of the EC Treaty (formally Art. 8) establishes this:
Art 17 EC (ex 8):
Citizenship of the Union is hereby established. Every person holding the nationality of a MS shall be a citizen of the Union.

DU.LLAHAN

i am just after reading the pamlet that i got in the post and i dont see why i would'nt vote yes for it.