What do you think is the best course of action for Ireland to take now?

SimpleSam06

AtomicHorror wrote: »

EFTA members get the trading benefits without any of the decision making or executive power of EU membership.

They also don't need to deal with EU laws, regulations and tax levies. Sounds good to me.

AtomicHorror wrote: »

As to the value of the fisheries, what good is potential value if we cannot exploit it?

We most certainly can exploit it. Its very far from impossible to scale up the size of the Irish fleet and invest heavily in local packaging and processing plants, for a start. Profits from that can be fed back into the industry to open new subsidiary industries and expand the existing ones. Once the ball starts rolling there is no stopping it.

AtomicHorror wrote: »

At any rate, if the fisheries are really such an issue, the solution lies in our government. If they are not pushing for a fair share,we need to tell them to. If they fail, we must punish them.

I agree, the political will needs to be there. As it stands we're still dealing with CJ's cronies, donkey cart politicians still living in their glory days of the seventies and eighties.

Definitely time for a change.

SimpleSam06

AtomicHorror wrote: »

Neither seems clear to me. Perhaps you have data I haven't seen.

Well, if you can figure out the portal to the parallel world where we didn't join the EU, you run a quick google search there. Until such time, you'll have to make do with the fact that other EU countries apparently managed to produce these maritime industries and scale them up to the task, and turn a very healthy profit in the process.

thelordofcheese wrote: »

I'd imagine the "poor thick paddies" would be smart enough to realise that simply because something has worked elsewhere is no indication that it would work here or to the same extent.
Or you could just continue trying to be glib. Either way is good with me.

Eh but you make it so easy! As I recently almost said to Terry, if you see a bullseye that big it'd be a bannable offence not to take the shot, in fairness. So you have no reasons why the projects might fail except that "they might fail".

ejmaztec wrote: »

Given the minuscule size of Ireland's naval and air service, has anyone got any idea how much it would cost to upgrade these services to enable them to police the fishing territory effectively?

Bleh. Its much easier to do that nowadays than in the past. All you need to do is find the ships using either aerial reconnaissance or radar, then drop out to them with a chopper and order them to make port in Ireland. Seize the fish and the vessels if it keeps getting out of hand. Hey look, another subsidiary industry! You could probably trim back some of the useless army to finance it at the start.

Defenestrate

I vote stay in the EU, I don't like seafood.

Jigsaw

I have to agree with an earlier post made by Atomichorror. It is pointless using referenda to make decisions on complicated EU treaties. 99% of the population do not undertand what they are voting on and just rely upon some view peddled by a politician driven by party politics or some hack trying to impress his editor with some good copy.

When you vote for politicians, you have divested your decision making power with your elected representative. They work on your behalf and if you do not feel they have performed adequately, you have the option of voting them out at the next election.

Now plenty of the politicians probably don't understand the treaty fully either but at least they will have exposure to advisers and senior civil servants who can explain the salient points.

You could then say that parties will be be heavily whipped to toe the party line which may or may not be in the country's interest but I think it would've been better to leave it to the politicians than using a referendum.

AtomicHorror

SimpleSam06 wrote: »

We most certainly can exploit it. Its very far from impossible to scale up the size of the Irish fleet and invest heavily in local packaging and processing plants, for a start. Profits from that can be fed back into the industry to open new subsidiary industries and expand the existing ones. Once the ball starts rolling there is no stopping it.

I'm sure we could do it now. But could we have done it in 1974? Would we have had the same economic growth with only our inept politicians and a large national debt to pay?

Perhaps it would have made for a better long game. But that's speculative.

SimpleSam06

AtomicHorror wrote: »

Perhaps it would have made for a better long game. But that's speculative.

Not that speculative. I'm really starting to come around to the idea that we should withdraw from the EU and just join the EFTA countries.

And yes. Give us back our fishing grounds.

Tar.Aldarion

I really don't think we could have got this great fishing ground on it's feet back then. Do you think we should ahve joined teh eu, got the capability of doing it and then tell them to bugger off?

SimpleSam06

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

I really don't think we could have got this great fishing ground on it's feet back then. Do you think we should ahve joined teh eu, got the capability of doing it and then tell them to bugger off?

Why not, its not like we owe them anything.

Spook_ie

SimpleSam06 wrote: »

Not that speculative. I'm really starting to come around to the idea that we should withdraw from the EU and just join the EFTA countries.

And yes. Give us back our fishing grounds.

Trouble is there are no fish left in then Irish Box, maybe if we hadn't joined the EC and joined NATO instead!

We could have got the NATO allies to bomb/block France's fishing ports...

SimpleSam06

Spook_ie wrote: »

Trouble is there are no fish left in then Irish Box, maybe if we hadn't joined the EC and joined NATO instead!

We could have got the NATO allies to bomb/block France's fishing ports...

There are still plenty of fish out there, although overfishing by our European "partners" is threatening to put an end to that.

rossie1977

Spook_ie wrote: »

Trouble is there are no fish left in then Irish Box, maybe if we hadn't joined the EC and joined NATO instead!

leave it a few years and see what happens, the results would surprise you, fish are not like cattle and sheep or even rabbits/wolves (who breed rapidly)

during WW2 most of the worlds fishing grounds were barely touched for 6 years and stocks exploded

thelordofcheese

SimpleSam06 wrote: »

Eh but you make it so easy! As I recently almost said to Terry, if you see a bullseye that big it'd be a bannable offence not to take the shot, in fairness.

heh, if i had your username i'd be the last person advocating cheap shots.

SimpleSam06 wrote: »

So you have no reasons why the projects might fail except that "they might fail".

And likewise you have no reason to why it would suceed except that you want them to. The only difference is that since we've joined the EU we've a terrible track record for improving our infrastructure, as you've admitted yourself. While it's certainly possible we could have exploited our fishing grounds in the manner you claim if we'd kept them (though i imagine we'd never come close to the amount the magil report claims was harvested) i don't think it's probable.

Spook_ie

rossie1977 wrote: »

leave it a few years and see what happens, the results would surprise you, fish are not like cattle and sheep or even rabbits/wolves (who breed rapidly)

during WW2 most of the worlds fishing grounds were barely touched for 6 years and stocks exploded

So thats easy then, stay in the EU for 6 years, as part of ratifying the Lisbon Treaty no fishing for 6 years, after 6 years tell them to f off and take up fishing.....sorted

LouOB

leave that up to the politicians
thats what we pay them for

SimpleSam06

thelordofcheese wrote: »

heh, if i had your username i'd be the last person advocating cheap shots.

Oh, I like people taking cheap shots at my username. They're like appetisers.

thelordofcheese wrote: »

And likewise you have no reason to why it would suceed except that you want them to.

Why else does anything succeed? Sitting there smirking and saying the country couldn't put a boat out to sea smacks of prejuidice, tbh. Your whole argument boils down to "dem tick padies".

thelordofcheese

SimpleSam06 wrote: »

Why else does anything succeed? Sitting there smirking and saying the country couldn't put a boat out to sea smacks of prejuidice, tbh. Your whole argument boils down to "dem tick padies".

Of course it does, i couldn't possible have concerns about the ability of our nation to implement anything of importance after the bertie bowl fiasco, the Port tunnel, E-Voting, The Health Service pay system (who's acrynom escapes me), The M50 and the general state of the health service. It's nothing to do with that at all, it's simply because i hate all irish people.

My god your insight is stunning.

Spook_ie

BBC 17th June

The main threat facing France is that of terrorism and the country's defence system needs to reflect that, French President Nicolas Sarkozy has said.

He is presenting a major overhaul of the military which includes cutting more than 50,000 defence jobs and boosting intelligence resources.

He wants to create a smaller, more mobile army that will be better equipped to respond to such threats.

He is outlining his new strategy to some 3,000 senior officers in Paris.

"Today, the most immediate threat is that of a terrorist attack", he said.

"The threat is there, it is real and we know that it could tomorrow take on a new form, even more serious, with nuclear, chemical and biological means."

His speech follows the release of the details of France's first major defence review in 14 years, under which some 54,000 military and civilian defence jobs will be cut.

France will trim its army, navy and air force from 271,000 troops to 224,000, with the army alone set for a 24% cut.

However, he said the intelligence budget for new satellites, drones and other surveillance equipment would double

BBC 5th June

An influential Polish member of the European parliament has called for the EU to develop "hard power" and spend more money to build a European army.

Foreign affairs committee chairman Jacek Saryusz-Wolski also wants the European parliament to have the final say on deployments under the EU flag.

The French have said beefing up the EU's military capability will be a key part of their six-month presidency.

The BBC has been told their plans also include a new EU military headquarters.

Other items on the French list of proposals involve calling upon all EU countries to increase spending on defence to meet a new target of perhaps 6% of Gross Domestic Product.
More aircraft

France's leadership of the EU will also include a push for the creation of more rapid reaction forces to enable Europe to collectively undertake three simultaneous missions.

They also want more helicopters and aircraft to be made available for missions.

The big problem is finding countries that want to contribute... troops and helicopters to real missions


The EU will not officially comment until the proposals are unveiled by French President Sarkozy in two weeks' time.

The head of the German army, Gen Wolfgang Schneiderhan, told the BBC that Europe needs to be able to react to crises.

"Working together with Nato we can improve the ability of both organisations to tackle the threats that face our world," he said.

The plans are likely to prove controversial in many countries, including Britain, where there is reluctance towards any move to a European army.

In Ireland there are concerns about neutrality, while in Germany there are worries about any policy that could go beyond a peacekeeping role.

So the French want to push for a 6% of GDP increase on military spending but they intend on slashing the size of their own armed forces, to me seems a little conflicting...

rossie1977

thelordofcheese wrote: »

Of course it does, i couldn't possible have concerns about the ability of our nation to implement anything of importance after the bertie bowl fiasco, the Port tunnel, E-Voting, The Health Service pay system (who's acrynom escapes me), The M50 and the general state of the health service. It's nothing to do with that at all, it's simply because i hate all irish people.

My god your insight is stunning.

in truth you could use that type of argument against any country

e.g off the top of my head
USA: welfare system, health service, the immigrant wall along the mexico border, new orleans

UK: nhs, wembley stadium, Millennium Dome

Defenestrate

rossie1977 wrote: »

in truth you could you that type of argument against any country

e.g off the top of my head
USA: welfare system, health service, the immigrant wall along the mexico border, new orleans

UK: nhs, wembley stadium, Millennium Dome

But the NHS is 10x better than the health system over here, the Wembley stadium is a privately built and owned stadium that has nothing to do with the government and the Millenium Dome is from 8 years ago now and has been offloaded to private owners for years anyway.

New Orleans is a ridiculous situation though, but then the same argument does apply against the US as it's run by a moron.

turgon

Hmm interesting poll, I see "not ratify and continue under Nice system" is not an option. OP likes Lisbon? Well seems as its the after hours forum, my suggestion: just rob a few nukes and drop them on Luxembourg. Its so small no one will notice if its gone.

rossie1977

Defenestrate wrote: »

But the NHS is 10x better than the health system over here

the WHO rank them almost equal, but what do they know :pac:

http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html

SimpleSam06

thelordofcheese wrote: »

Of course it does, i couldn't possible have concerns about the ability of our nation to implement anything of importance after the bertie bowl fiasco, the Port tunnel, E-Voting, The Health Service pay system (who's acrynom escapes me), The M50 and the general state of the health service. It's nothing to do with that at all, it's simply because i hate all irish people.

My god your insight is stunning.

Yours is sadly lacking I fear - Yet another punter who can't tell the difference between a people and their politicians. Up until fairly recently, Ireland had the highest quality of life in the world, way beyond the UK, so we must be doing something right.

This is despite the obvious and glaring shambles you have pointed out. of course, even such luminaries as the UK and US can't boast a clean sheet on civil projects either, which has not prevented them from getting things done.

I'm as great a critic of the current political establishment and the dug-in parasites that it has brought with it in the public sector as you are, probably more so. However I strongly dispute that we are permanently saddled with them or paralysed by them, and I find all suggestions that the Irish people couldn't achieve goals they set out to achieve highly distasteful.

Defenestrate

rossie1977 wrote: »

the WHO rank them almost equal, but what do they know :pac:

http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html

That data is almost a year and a half old. Many failings have been exposed in the Irish Health Service over the last year, prompting calls for Harney's resignation.

rossie1977

SimpleSam06 wrote: »

Yours is sadly lacking I fear - Yet another punter who can't tell the difference between a people and their politicians. Up until fairly recently, Ireland had the highest quality of life in the world, way beyond the UK, so we must be doing something right.

This is despite the obvious and glaring shambles you have pointed out. of course, even such luminaries as the UK and US can't boast a clean sheet on civil projects either, which has not prevented them from getting things done.

I'm as great a critic of the current political establishment and the dug-in parasites that it has brought with it in the public sector as you are, probably more so. However I strongly dispute that we are permanently saddled with them or paralysed by them, and I find all suggestions that the Irish people couldn't achieve goals they set out to achieve highly distasteful.

you better define quality of life before people claim it was all due to our suckling of the EU teat

Health: Life expectancy at birth
Family life: Divorce rate
Community life
Material well being
Political stability and security
Climate and geography
Job security
Political freedom
Gender equality

today ireland ranks number three in the world for economic freedom http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/countries.cfm

5th in Human Development Index which measures life expectancy, literacy, educational attainment, and GDP per capita http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/

first in terms of quality of life http://www.economist.com/media/pdf/QUALITY_OF_LIFE.pdf

fourth from bottom in terms of the failed states index (we are nearly twice as sustainable as the USA) http://www.fundforpeace.org/web/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=229&Itemid=366

and sixth in the global peace index (we were fourth last year) http://www.visionofhumanity.org/gpi/results/rankings/2008/

i am with you on your last paragraph, so many begrudgers and naysayers in this country or at least on this website with threads like "what do you hate most about ireland", "what country would you move to" etc.

this country is not perfect and it will never ever ever achieve anything close to perfection (no country ever will) but what we have achieved since independence is truly remarkable given the fact that

*the birth of this nation happened some 60 years after a devastating famine that eliminated half our population,
*we were the only country in western europe not to experience the industrial revolution which set us back 100 years
*WW1
*the stock market crash and terrible recession that resulted across the world
*WW2
*the cold war
*policies of the likes of de Valera which shall we shall we say are better best forgotten

Capt'n Midnight

I don't think our politicians will take a course of action. If they were capable then they would have had a better Yes campaign. All they needed to do was get between 54,983 people out of 3,051,278 to change their minds or 109,965 to vote.

They will react to what the EU does.

The concern is that they try to attack the referendum process, maybe if they look long enough it might turn out that they can sign treaties on our behalf

Maybe they could have a re-run with the local elections. It won't cost much extra and besides people can vote on the local issues without affecting the refernedum.

maybe if someone organised a petition with more than 862,415 names on it then there could be another go ??

[edit] betcha they are sorry they couldn't use the e-voting machines [/edit]

jimi_t

rossie1977 wrote: »

the WHO rank them almost equal, but what do they know :pac:

http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html

And yet Thailand is at 47? I'd love to know how they quantify such data. The concept of a 'shared room' or 'visiting hours' are alien over there, MRSA is unheard of. You certainly wouldn't hear the same instance of 36 hour waits on hospital trolleys in corridors in the NHS as you do in Ireland either, or in practically any European country.

rossie1977

^^^ huh

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1338551/Revealed-the-NHS-scandal-of-'his'-and-'hers'-trolley-corridors.html

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/health/article3582299.ece

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/dec/07/france.paulwebster

ejmaztec

I thought that we'd all decided to go fishing and get away from this politics stuff Where is this Irish box, anyway? Do I need a big rod?

Spook_ie

Depends on if you're going for the Ginger Box, Brunette Box or the Blonde Box...

Run_to_da_hills

Take the money and run, we did well enough out of it, we accepted their bribes and sweeteners.

As far as losing our constitutional rights and becoming a part of this big brother euro dictatorship that will eventually force us to carry RFID based Identity cards and microchip implants.

NO WAY.

NO is NO. what part of NO do these coffers not understand.