Lisbon I is over, roll on Lisbon II...

PH01

Now that this treaty has been defeated (based on early tallies), it's only a matter of time before we'll be asked to vote again on it again, and again, until there is a Yes vote.

So roll on 'Lisbon II'!?

biko

I hope not. Wouldn't surprise me though, the powers that be never listens to the people.

justfortherecor

Roll on Europe without us is more like it.

cornbb

biko wrote: »

I hope not. Wouldn't surprise me though, the powers that be never listens to the people.

There will be no "Lisbon II". The government only got away with that once because of massive voter apathy during Nice I. There was no such apathy this time, if there was a "Lisbon II" it would never be passed. We live with whatever result comes out of this one folks.

ShooterSF

PH01 wrote: »

Now that this treaty has been defeated (based on early tallies), it's only a matter of time before we'll be asked to vote again on it again, and again, until there is a Yes vote.

So roll on 'Lisbon II'!?

Be careful man it's not over yet even if it looks promising. I doubt they'll pull the same shaft twice as it would look a disgrace especially as most people will say the french and dutch weren't forced to revote when they said no to the constitution.

It would look to the world like the big powerhouse that is Europe is bullying lil old Ireland again.

Ponster

There won't be a Lisbon II as this *was* the II version. What Ireland voted on yesterday was the reformed European Constitution that was rejected by Holland/France in 2005.

Dinner

PH01 wrote: »

Now that this treaty has been defeated (based on early tallies), it's only a matter of time before we'll be asked to vote again on it again, and again, until there is a Yes vote.

What's that I see, is it a no voter not quite understanding why a second vote happens? Yes I think it is.


As with Nice we may get another chance to vote on Lisbon. The Irish negotiating team could go back to Europe and address the issues that the Irish people had with it. This is what happened with Nice, they did not just keep trying the same treaty until we said yes. Can't say I'm suprised that the no camp will peddle this type of sh!te if there is a second vote.

Ponster

ShooterSF wrote: »

..the french and dutch weren't forced to revote when they said no to the constitution.

The French and Dutch (I think) both had the original Constitution rewritten and renamed as the Lisbon Treaty so that there wouldn't have to be a referendum.

seamus

Three possible scenarios as I see it:

1. They make some token change to the proposed amendment to the constitution, such as safeguarding our neutrality, then put it up for vote again. This worked great for Nice.

2. We go back to the table, renegotiate some tiny areas, lose out a hell of a lot more than we would have, and put it back for vote.

3. Europe decides to press on ahead and leave us to decide what we want to do.

1 & 3 would very quickly result in a "Yes" vote. 2 would leave us up **** creek.

100gSoma

whats interesting is there are NO NEGATIVE comments on SKY news or UK based news websites where the readers can leave a comment. It seems the UK and FRENCH public resented not having a say on this and are quite happy with Irelands NO vote. I at least expected someone to say we had "ruined the EU" or such drivel.

PH01

Oh reckon we'll be voting on this again that's for sure.
Maybe a watered down version, or split in two. But we'll be voting on it again alright.

The only way we won't be voting on a treaty for an enlarged Europe is for Ireland to leave the EU (and we all know that this ain't going to happen).

oscarBravo

Arabel wrote: »

As with Nice we may get another chance to vote on Lisbon. The Irish negotiating team could go back to Europe and address the issues that the Irish people had with it.

There's the rub: what do they go back with? Abortion? Neutrality? Corporation tax? I-voted-no-because-I-don't-like-being-bullied-by-those-nasty-posters?

The treaty was about the best deal we could have hoped for. What on earth makes people think we'll get better?

BENDYBINN

I say europe pull the plug on us---after 6 months we would go back on our knees-cap in hand!

cornbb

All the No campaigners have said "we'll send a clear message that we want a better deal". The notion of a "clear message" from the No side is laughable, seeing as most No votes were based on protest votes, votes out of lack of understanding of the issues and votes based on lies and misinformation.

Then of course the No campaigners don't have to deal with the fallout, the government and the people have to do that.

djpbarry

oscarBravo wrote: »

The treaty was about the best deal we could have hoped for. What on earth makes people think we'll get better?

Something that also has me baffled; I've yet to hear a single 'No' voter explain how we could (realistically) get a better deal. The usual response is a Libertas-style "we have to keep our commissioner!"

Seeing as a rejection now looks likely, I'm looking forward to Libertas (in particular) having to retract many of their claims.

Dinner

oscarBravo wrote: »

What on earth makes people think we'll get better?

Well, Good aul Mary Lou's poster had something along the lines of "get a better deal" giving people the false hope of negotiating more.

djpbarry

cornbb wrote: »

The notion of a "clear message" from the No side is laughable, seeing as most No votes were based on protest votes, votes out of lack of understanding of the issues and votes based on lies and misinformation.

Ain't democracy grand?

biko

I find it funny how everyone think "Europe" is going to disown us now.
We are still in the Union, nothing can change that.

Was France and Holland disowned when they turned v1 down in 2005? No.
Did yous even know it was on then? I suspect not.

Europe will/can not do anything other than have another look at the treaty and hopefully make it better/not use it.

cornbb

biko wrote: »

Europe will/can not do anything other than have another look at the treaty and hopefully make it better/not use it.

Well, what would you like to see changed?

gurramok

Unbelievable here the attitude of some posters.

It looks like its a No vote, how about respecting the wishes of the people for once?

nhughes100

Here's what I'd like to see changed for starters:

All member states to increase spending on their military capabilities - How about all member states to increase spending on improving their litreacy rates? That way more people in Europe could actually read and write and then maybe have a chance of reading the next treaty put to us.

If only this treaty was about re-organising the way Europe makes laws.

Dinner

gurramok wrote: »

It looks like its a No vote, how about respecting the wishes of the people for once?

That would be ideal if people actually voted for legitimate reasons. Too many people voted No because of the tripe peddled by Libertas and the like.

molloyjh

gurramok wrote: »

Unbelievable here the attitude of some posters.

It looks like its a No vote, how about respecting the wishes of the people for once?

If the outcome is No we will respect that in the sense that we won't try and overturn ot or sabotage it. That doesn't mean we can't have an opinion on it. And thats all people here are expressing.

Stabshauptmann

seamus wrote: »

Three possible scenarios as I see it:

1. They make some token change to the proposed amendment to the constitution, such as safeguarding our neutrality, then put it up for vote again. This worked great for Nice.

If I were in charge...

Probably we'll be the first to lose a commissioner so people see that they were lied to then a "concession" on our tax system made with big pomp and ceremony so people think we've won a victory then a vote which coincides with our getting a commissioner back.

seamus

gurramok wrote: »

It looks like its a No vote, how about respecting the wishes of the people for once?

What wishes would they be?
The ones who don't want an EU Army? No, wait that's done.
The ones who are unhappy with the government? Well, there'll be an election in a few years where they can sort that.
How about the ones who don't want abortion? Oh, wait...no.
Emm....how about the people who don't want taxes increased? Well, we don't really have much choice if we have no money.
How about the people who just said no because they didn't understand the treaty? Well, it'd be pointless to explain it further now, the votes have been cast.

My point being that there was no one reason that anyone provided for voting "No". So how do they expect their "wishes" to be granted?

If you simply didn't want the constitution changed, then your wish will be granted.

cornbb

nhughes100 wrote: »

All member states to increase spending on their military capabilities - How about all member states to increase spending on improving their litreacy rates? That way more people in Europe could actually read and write and then maybe have a chance of reading the next treaty put to us.

Well, that would be wonderful, only you're not going to Santa Claus with a list. Do you expect the 26 other states in the EU to just amend the treaty with a hodge-podge list of changes that the No campaigners haven't even proposed?

Stabshauptmann

gurramok wrote: »

Unbelievable here the attitude of some posters.

It looks like its a No vote, how about respecting the wishes of the people for once?

I care too much about the sovern rights of Irish citizens. That there were lied and mislead is as bad as taking their vote away.

One of the reaons I feel this way is that I had believed the no camps lies right uop until the tuesday before the election.

If I felt people had all the information and made an informed decision then so be it. The majority of ppl are saying they didnt understand the treaty, so lets educate them

gurramok

Arabel wrote: »

That would be ideal if people actually voted for legitimate reasons. Too many people voted No because of the tripe peddled by Libertas and the like.

Tripe or not, do you not realise what your saying?

In other words, your saying the electorate who are over 18 are of very low intelligence to vote no, thats deeply insulting to hundreds of thousands of adults.
If it turns out to be a Yes vote, will your respect that unlike the No vote?

biko

Yes voters, how about you sit down and let us grown ups handle this?

gurramok

seamus wrote: »

What wishes would they be?
The ones who don't want an EU Army? No, wait that's done.
The ones who are unhappy with the government? Well, there'll be an election in a few years where they can sort that.
How about the ones who don't want abortion? Oh, wait...no.
Emm....how about the people who don't want taxes increased? Well, we don't really have much choice if we have no money.
How about the people who just said no because they didn't understand the treaty? Well, it'd be pointless to explain it further now, the votes have been cast.

My point being that there was no one reason that anyone provided for voting "No". So how do they expect their "wishes" to be granted?

If you simply didn't want the constitution changed, then your wish will be granted.

Of course they had hundreds of reasons whether valid or not. The yes side didn't convince and intelligent people voted either way based on this, its time to accept the way people voted.

100gSoma

Arabel wrote: »

That would be ideal if people actually voted for legitimate reasons. Too many people voted No because of the tripe peddled by Libertas and the like.

Have to agree with Gurramok. I find your comment insulting. I did not vote because I was convinced of tripe by either the YES camp or the NO camp. I accept that quite a few people may have voted NO because they were unhappy with the bully tactics and the arrogance of the YES camps to assume we would all vote yes because BIFFOs head is up on a poster smiling down at us.

seamus

gurramok wrote: »

Of course they had hundreds of reasons whether valid or not. The yes side didn't convince and intelligent people voted either way based on this, its time to accept the way people voted.

And if it comes out as a "No", the constitution won't be changed. That's acceptance.

Putting it up for vote again, with changes, is not disregarding people's wishes. As I said in another thread, if the country really thinks it's a bad idea then we can continue defeating it, then vote out the idiots who keep putting it up for vote.

colly10

gurramok wrote: »

Of course they had hundreds of reasons whether valid or not. The yes side didn't convince and intelligent people voted either way based on this, its time to accept the way people voted.

+1 - I'm getting sick to death of listening to this crap, if your on the yes side ye it's a pity that not everyone agrees with you, get over it ffs.

Zube

biko wrote: »

Yes voters, how about you sit down and let us grown ups handle this?

[grabs popcorn]

Should be good for a laugh. Declan "businessman" Ganley for pope!

gurramok

seamus wrote: »

And if it comes out as a "No", the constitution won't be changed. That's acceptance.

Putting it up for vote again, with changes, is not disregarding people's wishes. As I said in another thread, if the country really thinks it's a bad idea then we can continue defeating it, then vote out the idiots who keep putting it up for vote.

Sadly it dont work like that. People vote in general elections based on their pocket, not on a European issue which is way down their list.

If there is a Lisbon II with changes and put again in a referenda, so be it.

I'd respect the result and so should anyone who cares about democracy where you have to convince voters to sway your way and not brand them as stupid(not you, other yessers are)

djpbarry

nhughes100 wrote: »

All member states to increase spending on their military capabilities...

This is not true and has been debunked over and over again.

Kaptain Redeye wrote: »

The majority of ppl are saying they didnt understand the treaty, so lets educate them

There's only so much that can be done. People have to take some responsibility and educate themselves - with the wealth of information available (on the internet in particular), there really is no excuse.

Dinner

gurramok wrote: »

Tripe or not, do you not realise what your saying?

In other words, your saying the electorate who are over 18 are of very low intelligence to vote no, thats deeply insulting to hundreds of thousands of adults.
If it turns out to be a Yes vote, will your respect that unlike the No vote?

I'm not saying that at all. I'm simply saying that the majority (but not all) of No voters that I've come across both on boards and off have had questionable reasons to do so. Some no voters have based their vote on the truth, while most others I've encountered have based it on personal feelings or campaign posters and not on the facts.

Judging by the amount of people voting no because "I don't want higher taxes" it seems that so many people have bought into the poster campaign and are basing their decisions on that and other mistruths. I don't put this down to lack of intelligence, I think it's more to do with convenience. It's a lot easier to read all the posters than to sit down to an evening with the referendum commision. It's also to do with a far from perfect Yes campaign which hasn't made itself entirely clear on the treaty, but thats a very difficult thing to do. It's easier to put "Keep your taxes low, vote no" on a poster than "Lisbon is a very complex treaty which will help to streamline the EU into a more effective machine". Add to this the people who went against the treaty because FF supported it it's no surprise that it looks to be defeated.


By the way, I'm under no illusion that this doesn't happen on the other side too. I'm sure some people voted yes because mammy told them to and thats just as bad as the no side, but I doubt it happened on as large a scale.

colly10

Arabel wrote: »

Judging by the amount of people voting no because "I don't want higher taxes" .

I would be surprised if many of the no side voted based on this

Arabel wrote: »

it seems that so many people have bought into the poster campaign and are basing their decisions on that and other mistruths.

Some of the yes side also voted yes based on the partys which voted yes

Arabel wrote: »

It's a lot easier to read all the posters than to sit down to an evening with the referendum commision. .

I never believed that this commission was completly impartial, i've stated this a few times and don't really want to get into it again, also there failure to answer some questions is a little worrying, if they can't answer some direct questions on the treaty then it's hard to trust them to find potential loopholes let alone report them

Arabel wrote: »

Add to this the people who went against the treaty because FF supported it it's no surprise that it looks to be defeated.

Or the people who voted yes because Sinn Fein/Libertas cannot be trusted?

Dinner

colly10 wrote: »

Or the people who voted yes because Sinn Fein/Libertas cannot be trusted?

I've already acknowledged that some people voted yes because of family lines or a dislike of SF and think that those reasons are as rediculous as the reasons that some people had for voting no, but in my experience there have been more people voting no for the wrong reasons than yes.

Inquitus

There will be a Lisbon 2 and it will be passed, mark my words, it's Nice all over again

cornbb

Inquitus wrote: »

There will be a Lisbon 2 and it will be passed, mark my words, it's Nice all over again

A massive font doesn't make you correct. Read my earlier post again (#4)

jaqian

If the Treaty is defeated the Govt have to take a lot of the blame for how they handled it. There should have been a point for point analysis on the treaty clearly defining what the Treaty meant for us and then had serious debate on these points instead of all the hearsay throw around by both the Yes and No camps.

There also should have been better reporting on what we have gained from Europe as there seems to be great confusion over "what has Europe ever done for us" mentality.

And why-oh-why did they tack on getting rid of the right to hold a referendum as regards future Treaties? That should have been kept separate so as not to confuse people.

Dinner

Inquitus wrote: »

There will be a Lisbon 2 and it will be passed, mark my words, it's Nice all over again

You mean we can renegotiate and modify some aspects of the treaty and put the reformed treaty to the people again?

You're right, that is nice.

VoidStarNull

In Nice II, the treaty itself was left unchanged but the government added side conditions to the constitutional changes to address the neutrality concern. That meant that treaty negotiations did not have to begin again.

In the case of Lisbon, it's pretty hard to identify anything the Irish government can do by itself to satisfy people's concerns. Neutrality, abortion, etc have already been done to death. Maybe a constitutional amendment to guarantee low corporation tax? Would be daft, and wouldn't satisfy many people anyway. Perhaps an amendment to guarantee worker's rights? The question of whether we want to be more socialist would appear to be an issue for the Dail, not the constitution.

That leaves changing the treaty itself, which would require new negotiations - the outcome of which are not under our control alone. That may be what people want, but it's not a Nice II scenario.

Our man in Havana

Inquitus wrote: »

There will be a Lisbon 2 and it will be passed, mark my words, it's Nice all over again

I concur.

DishonestPikey

Inquitus wrote: »

There will be a Lisbon 2 and it will be passed, mark my words, it's Nice all over again

Yeah only if they use big fonts and give a free lolly pop to everyone who votes. Maybe they should redo it as an Ann and Barry picture story?

On a more serious note, I think it will be put back to us with concessions and vetos. The British did not accept the treaty as is and if you look back they never do. They take what they want and reject what they don't want. This is the problem with having a referendum. you don't get to tick a box for the parts you like and dislike. Its take it all or leave it.

mumhaabu

Ireland today has fired a warning shot over the European bureaucracy of red tape and corruption. I voted NO yesterday, I voted no because the EU is not a free market and until the day that I can import a Car into Ireland without VRT free I will NO to the EU forever.

The United Kingdom will elect the Conservative party in a years time and I firmly believe the time will then be right for Ireland & the UK to withdraw from the European Union and negotiate a free trade deal with the United States & NAFTA. The EU are currently trying this with the Transatlantic Economic Council & Ireland and the United Kingdom could create a Transatlantic Free Trade Area, this could then be advanced towards a common market and free movement of people between the British Isles and the USA and Canada.

Ireland and the UK have more in common with the USA than Europe and the the fact that we speak English and both our countries share massive ancestry in North America. Our future lies westward and we must move closer to Boston than Berlin.

DishonestPikey

mumhaabu wrote: »

Ireland today has fired a warning shot over the European bureaucracy of red tape and corruption. I voted NO yesterday, I voted no because the EU is not a free market and until the day that I can import a Car into Ireland without VRT free I will NO to the EU forever.

The United Kingdom will elect the Conservative party in a years time and I firmly believe the time will then be right for Ireland & the UK to withdraw from the European Union and negotiate a free trade deal with the United States & NAFTA. The EU are currently trying this with the Transatlantic Economic Council & Ireland and the United Kingdom could create a Transatlantic Free Trade Area, this could then be advanced towards a common market and free movement of people between the British Isles and the USA and Canada.

Ireland and the UK have more in common with the USA than Europe and the the fact that we speak English and both our countries share massive ancestry in North America. Our future lies westward and we must move closer to Boston than Berlin.

And what exactly do we have to offer the US if we were to severe links with the EU? Potatoes?

RE*AC*TOR

I'm surprised and pleased that the vote seems to be for no.

Delighted in fact. If the government put it up for vote again, I hope people will have learned their lesson from Nice.


Lot of sour auld heads posting here.

molloyjh

mumhaabu wrote: »

Ireland today has fired a warning shot over the European bureaucracy of red tape and corruption. I voted NO yesterday, I voted no because the EU is not a free market and until the day that I can import a Car into Ireland without VRT free I will NO to the EU forever.

The United Kingdom will elect the Conservative party in a years time and I firmly believe the time will then be right for Ireland & the UK to withdraw from the European Union and negotiate a free trade deal with the United States & NAFTA. The EU are currently trying this with the Transatlantic Economic Council & Ireland and the United Kingdom could create a Transatlantic Free Trade Area, this could then be advanced towards a common market and free movement of people between the British Isles and the USA and Canada.

Ireland and the UK have more in common with the USA than Europe and the the fact that we speak English and both our countries share massive ancestry in North America. Our future lies westward and we must move closer to Boston than Berlin.

If we pull out of the EU then we will lose a lot of, if not all of, our foreign investment. Most foreign companies come here due to our low corporation tax and our free trade agreement with the EU. I we lose one we immediately become far moe unattractive to foreign companies, and in the current economic times thats a very bad news story!

vandermeyde

mumhaabu wrote: »

Ireland today has fired a warning shot over the European bureaucracy of red tape and corruption. I voted NO yesterday, I voted no because the EU is not a free market and until the day that I can import a Car into Ireland without VRT free I will NO to the EU forever.

You do realise that VRT is imposed by the Irish Government and it's the EU which has ruled that this is an unfair and unjust tax which goes against the ethos of EU free market principles? It'll be scrapped after we've had our knuckles rapped from Brussels but will morph into some kind of carbon based import tax in replacement..