Lisbon vote October 2nd - How do you intend to vote?

whatisayis

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

I had a look for the french constitutional changes. Its interesting reading overall.

I think maybe I wasn't too clear in what I was trying to say earlier.
In order to avoid a referendum in the Netherlands, the "constitutional elements" were removed in Lisbon.

As far as I am aware, the French president has always been the only one empowered to call a referendum in France and that still remains the way it is today from my reading of your post (Article 88-5(1) refers to the third paragraph of Article 89 which reiterates the power of the president to call a referendum).
It was up to Sarkozy to call a referendum but instead he removed the constitutional references and called it a mini-treaty amending previous treaties.

BlitzKrieg

I wasnt respoding to anything specific in your post, just you posted the links twice and I just wanted to show that I did read them both and they had sprinboarded me in checking some facts.

And 88-5(1) states that Notwithstanding the foregoing the forgoing being that a referendum is only needed in the case of an accension treaty. Lisbon is not an accesion treaty so there is no referendum. There will be for Croatia though.

What I have seen from reading through the different version of the french constitution is that the process of french ratification of European Treaties has been left undefined for years. There was nothing before 2005 that stated how a european treaty should be ratified it was always left to the president to decide. It was finally in 2005 when it was decided that the policy was it would be put to referendum whenever the EU was enlarged. Going by the history of french referendums on EU affairs prior, this can be seen as inconsistent seeing as there were only 2 referendums, one for 1972 for enlargment which is consistent with the new policy and one for Maastricht which is not consistent with the policy, yet there was no referendum for Nice which considering that was an enlargment treaty doesnt make sense.

France has now defined its ratification process with europe, under that definition, by their own constitution they did not need a referendum and that was defined before the european constitution treaty was voted down.

K-9

RandomName2 wrote: »

Back to the drawing board. As it stands that can currently happen if Ireland chooses a Commissioner that the EU Parliament rejects (That actually has happened - albeit not with Ireland). If, let's say Ireland choose its Commisioner by direct election, it would probably be rejected :pac:
Okay - definitely.

So what happens now? Bertie has been rejected. What next?

What does it say in the Treaty?

Daftendirekt

whatisayis wrote: »

I think maybe I wasn't too clear in what I was trying to say earlier.
In order to avoid a referendum in the Netherlands, the "constitutional elements" were removed in Lisbon.

Binding referenda were ruled illegal in the Netherlands after the rejection of the Constitution.

Nothing in the document itself needed to be changed in order to avoid holding a referendum. The document was changed however, to address the concerns of the Dutch about the overtly state-like language of the text, and to remove references to the flag and anthem.

whatisayis

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

I
And 88-5(1) states that Notwithstanding the foregoing the forgoing being that a referendum is only needed in the case of an accension treaty. Lisbon is not an accesion treaty so there is no referendum. There will be for Croatia though.

I am entirely open to correction on this but I think when it says "notwithstanding the foregoing" it means that either option can be used i.e. a referendum if the president decides to have one. The French president really does have an extraordinary amount of power it seems.

whatisayis

Daftendirekt wrote: »

Binding referenda were ruled illegal in the Netherlands after the rejection of the Constitution.

Why?

Scofflaw

whatisayis wrote: »

Why?

The Dutch Constitution has the Dutch parliament as the source of political authority, much as we have the people, and the UK has the monarch in parliament. The referendum on the Constitution was non-binding (so the parliament could have ratified the Constitution anyway), but in practice the parliament felt they were bound by it. That creates a constitutional problem.

cordially,
Scofflaw

BlitzKrieg

whatisayis wrote: »

I am entirely open to correction on this but I think when it says "notwithstanding the foregoing" it means that either option can be used i.e. a referendum if the president decides to have one. The French president really does have an extraordinary amount of power it seems.

Hmm I'll keep looking into it. Still if it means either option can be used it still leaves open the issue that the constitution only defines any sort of action on accession treaties.

the French ratification system is actually giving me a headache now, they are not consistent in any form. It almost makes me happy for the Crotty judgement in that its consistent.


On the dutch I cant find much. Considering the european constitution was the first referendum they had in 2 centuries I dont know if they actually made it illegal or just decided to be done with it.

edit: oh wow the first ever dutch referendum (of 4 ever) was even rejected...have any referendums in holland been successfull?

ok the second one was 1798 and was a repeat of the first one.

trying to find out on the 3rd one now...

3rd one was another constitution.


hmm doesnt say if it failed or not...

It was a success

Scofflaw

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

Hmm I'll keep looking into it. Still if it means either option can be used it still leaves open the issue that the constitution only defines any sort of action on accession treaties.

the French ratification system is actually giving me a headache now, they are not consistent in any form. It almost makes me happy for the Crotty judgement in that its consistent.

As far as I know it's a purely political decision whether to hold a referendum, but the results are binding:

In France the 1958 constitution can be amended in one of two ways, a national referendum or by the French Congress (the National Assembly and the Senate meeting in joint session in Versailles).

Congressional amendment is the normal route - there is a requirement for a 3/5 weighed majorities of both houses sitting as one. Occasionally, referenda are used. That is entirely a matter for the President of the Republic. S/he decides whether to call the Congress into session to pass an amendment, or pass a referendum bill through both houses separately followed by a referendum.

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

On the dutch I cant find much. Considering the european constitution was the first referendum they had in 2 centuries I dont know if they actually made it illegal or just decided to be done with it.

Decided to be done with it - there's no requirement for referendums, so there's no need to make it illegal.

cordially,
Scofflaw

whatisayis

Scofflaw wrote: »

The Dutch Constitution has the Dutch parliament as the source of political authority, much as we have the people, and the UK has the monarch in parliament. The referendum on the Constitution was non-binding (so the parliament could have ratified the Constitution anyway), but in practice the parliament felt they were bound by it. That creates a constitutional problem.

cordially,
Scofflaw

But that doesn't really explain why they banned referendums after the Constitution vote (according to Daftendirekt)? Actually, please don't feel you have to answer that because I really don't want to get into it as it doesn't make much difference to me in relation to the Irish vote!

BlitzKrieg

personnally I'm just curious about this stuff.


It also helps to put the french and dutch referendums in context.

whatisayis

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

Hmm I'll keep looking into it. Still if it means either option can be used it still leaves open the issue that the constitution only defines any sort of action on accession treaties.

the French ratification system is actually giving me a headache now, they are not consistent in any form. It almost makes me happy for the Crotty judgement in that its consistent.


On the dutch I cant find much. Considering the european constitution was the first referendum they had in 2 centuries I dont know if they actually made it illegal or just decided to be done with it.

edit: oh wow the first ever dutch referendum (of 4 ever) was even rejected...have any referendums in holland been successfull?

ok the second one was 1798 and was a repeat of the first one.

trying to find out on the 3rd one now...

3rd one was another constitution.


hmm doesnt say if it failed or not...

It was a success

I have to admire your dedication! Whatever about the French ratification system, the whole Irish referendum hoopla is giving me a headache now!

ei.sdraob

RandomName2 wrote: »

At least they aren't threatening us.

Remember 'Europe has a long memory'

Quick! Man the ramparts! The EU Commission is coming! Recession - forever!

UKIP not threatening?

jebus have you not got this rubbish of theirs delivered yet to your home?

http://www.euinfo.ie/uploads/file/LT2-hi-q.pdf


/

RCIRL

I am getting fed up with this and all you yes heads, all your arguments me F*** all to me.

In case you have forgot, we are already in Europe! Did you hear that? We are already in Europe!

Listen to this, I have worked here for 15 years and paid my tax's, I have lost my job and have found no system in place to help me back into work, no system. I have been out of work almost a year now, I haven't slept well in weeks due to financial worries. We are a part of Europe.

My father used to own a business and hired many people over the years which contributed to the system, he is now a broken man entitled to nothing, not a single penny, nothing, over a year now and not one cent has come into his hands. Our Government sent two Garda to my fathers house to issue a summons, their is a chance my father is going to jail for not paying the tax man 750 euro. We are a part of Europe.

The only thing saving him and my younger brother is my mother who works in the partnership, they get funding from the dormant accounts. The Government are more than likely going to remove this funding as they need every penny they can get. If that happens my family is in deep trouble. We are part of Europe.

So their you go. Europe can go and stuff themselves. I can honestly say I would prefer to be out picking potatoes in a underdeveloped old Ireland at least I would hold some pride. I don't care what they have done for Ireland and what they can do.

I don't believe Europe will kick us out should we say no but even if they do I don't care. We now have enough infrastructure in place and it will give us a chance to remove those people we don't want in this country and those people we don't want to lead our country.

When the S**** hits the fan, good people will surface, people who clearly hold the people of Ireland at heart, maybe that's what we need.

Can you please stop dishing out the idea of Europe being good to us in the past means they will be good for us in the future.

Dish out the real facts, like this, I am going to vote No.

ei.sdraob

RCIRL wrote: »

I am getting fed up with this and all you yes heads, all your arguments me F*** all to me.

In case you have forgot, we are already in Europe! Did you hear that? We are already in Europe!

Listen to this, I have worked here for 15 years and paid my tax's, I have lost my job and have found no system in place to help me back into work, no system. I have been out of work almost a year now, I haven't slept well in weeks due to financial worries. We are a part of Europe.

please do tell us where money to pay your welfare is coming from!


/

RCIRL

ei.sdraob wrote: »

please do tell us where money to pay your welfare is coming from!


/

The title of this thread is "How do you intend to vote", I posted a comment on how I intend to vote and my reasons for it.

Thanks for your reply to my comment even though it has nothing to do with this thread. I hope by insulting me an Irish person in hard times gives you the benefit you sought out by making that kind of remark.

If you were sitting here face to face with me, would you say something like that?

Best of luck with your yes campaign.

ei.sdraob

RCIRL wrote: »

The title of this thread is "How do you intend to vote", I posted a comment on how I intend to vote and my reasons for it.

Thanks for your reply to my comment even though it has nothing to do with this thread. I hope by insulting me an Irish person in hard times gives you the benefit you sought out by making that kind of remark.

If you were sitting here face to face with me, would you say something like that?

Best of luck with your yes campaign.

Im not insulting you, i asked a very simple question to make you think, you obviously have no concept of where the money to pay your welfare is coming from in this day and age


you went on a big long rant about how you have it so bad after being made unemployed and blaming the EU for it and saying because of that you will vote NO (tho your circumstances have nothing to do with EU or Lisbon Treaty itself)


well i asked you a very simple question

"where is the money to pay your welfare coming from?"

think about it carefully, the answer starts with an E btw.....

you know what they say "don't bite the hand that feeds".....



/

Scofflaw

RCIRL wrote: »

I am getting fed up with this and all you yes heads, all your arguments me F*** all to me.

In case you have forgot, we are already in Europe! Did you hear that? We are already in Europe!

Listen to this, I have worked here for 15 years and paid my tax's, I have lost my job and have found no system in place to help me back into work, no system. I have been out of work almost a year now, I haven't slept well in weeks due to financial worries. We are a part of Europe.

My father used to own a business and hired many people over the years which contributed to the system, he is now a broken man entitled to nothing, not a single penny, nothing, over a year now and not one cent has come into his hands. Our Government sent two Garda to my fathers house to issue a summons, their is a chance my father is going to jail for not paying the tax man 750 euro. We are a part of Europe.

The only thing saving him and my younger brother is my mother who works in the partnership, they get funding from the dormant accounts. The Government are more than likely going to remove this funding as they need every penny they can get. If that happens my family is in deep trouble. We are part of Europe.

So their you go. Europe can go and stuff themselves. I can honestly say I would prefer to be out picking potatoes in a underdeveloped old Ireland at least I would hold some pride. I don't care what they have done for Ireland and what they can do.

I don't believe Europe will kick us out should we say no but even if they do I don't care. We now have enough infrastructure in place and it will give us a chance to remove those people we don't want in this country and those people we don't want to lead our country.

When the S**** hits the fan, good people will surface, people who clearly hold the people of Ireland at heart, maybe that's what we need.

Can you please stop dishing out the idea of Europe being good to us in the past means they will be good for us in the future.

Dish out the real facts, like this, I am going to vote No.

I'm sorry to hear that, but your No vote won't improve your situation a blind bit.

cordially,
Scofflaw

moceri

Some of You may be Voting Yes If you think the EU is Good for Jobs.

Yes it is good for Jobs; The EU provided 54 Million Euro funding to Dell to move its operation from Limerick to Poland.

So Poland is delighted. The Losers are Irish Workers.

So If you think the EU is Good for Jobs (in low cost economies) then Vote YES and hasten the exodus from Ireland.

ei.sdraob

moceri wrote: »

Some of You may be Voting Yes If you think the EU is Good for Jobs.

Yes it is good for Jobs; The EU provided 54 Million Euro funding to Dell to move its operation from Limerick to Poland.

So Poland is delighted. The Losers are Irish Workers.

So If you think the EU is Good for Jobs (in low cost economies) then Vote YES and hasten the exodus from Ireland.

a ffs

teh EU did not provide 54 million to Poland (but they did provide 15 million to Ireland ) over Dell


get your facts straight please, a quick googling would prove yourself wrong

why dont you got and read some news

theres no need to spread more lies




/

RandomName2

RCIRL wrote: »

I am getting fed up with this and all you yes heads, all your arguments me F*** all to me.

In case you have forgot, we are already in Europe! Did you hear that? We are already in Europe!

Listen to this, I have worked here for 15 years and paid my tax's, I have lost my job and have found no system in place to help me back into work, no system. I have been out of work almost a year now, I haven't slept well in weeks due to financial worries. We are a part of Europe.

My father used to own a business and hired many people over the years which contributed to the system, he is now a broken man entitled to nothing, not a single penny, nothing, over a year now and not one cent has come into his hands. Our Government sent two Garda to my fathers house to issue a summons, their is a chance my father is going to jail for not paying the tax man 750 euro. We are a part of Europe.

The only thing saving him and my younger brother is my mother who works in the partnership, they get funding from the dormant accounts. The Government are more than likely going to remove this funding as they need every penny they can get. If that happens my family is in deep trouble. We are part of Europe.

So their you go. Europe can go and stuff themselves. I can honestly say I would prefer to be out picking potatoes in a underdeveloped old Ireland at least I would hold some pride. I don't care what they have done for Ireland and what they can do.

I don't believe Europe will kick us out should we say no but even if they do I don't care. We now have enough infrastructure in place and it will give us a chance to remove those people we don't want in this country and those people we don't want to lead our country.

When the S**** hits the fan, good people will surface, people who clearly hold the people of Ireland at heart, maybe that's what we need.

Can you please stop dishing out the idea of Europe being good to us in the past means they will be good for us in the future.

Dish out the real facts, like this, I am going to vote No.

I think it is good to have some pride in the matter. Not say - 'I am afraid of EU retribution, so I feel I have to vote yes' (I have heard a good few people say this).

I think Yes to Jobs -Yes to Europe is a bluff - and by god it deserves to be called.

And the guilt of -oh Europe bailed us out when we were in dire straits - we would still be a backward hovel if it wasn't for EU handouts - we owe the EU so much and this is how we repay them?

Its rubbish! The EU is not giving money to Poland or any other state from goodwill (apart from actual overseas charity to Africa, etc. - and even this is mostly a publicity stunt) - but rather on the basis of economic dividends.

Oh Mayo should be sooooo grateful to Dublin for infrastructural development.

Wait!? Grateful? Does nobody understand about increased GDP, and return on initial investment? Is my bank supposed to be -grateful- when I invest money, am I supposed to be -grateful- when I get an interest return.

If they were genuinely so worried that a second referendum could have negative consequences - the government was not forced to give one (apart from the manner in which they feel obliged to please their European compatriots - not other EU sates, mind).

DSB

The no campaigners have really gone to some extreme lengths with their campaign of lies, and have probably pushed alot of neutrals towards voting yes. If they'd avoided shock tactics, and scare tactics, they'd probably have given themselves a much better chance. They've definitely underestimated the intelligence of the average Irish person.

Daftendirekt

whatisayis wrote: »

But that doesn't really explain why they banned referendums after the Constitution vote (according to Daftendirekt)? Actually, please don't feel you have to answer that because I really don't want to get into it as it doesn't make much difference to me in relation to the Irish vote!

I had to have a look for an answer to this myself. According to wiki, national referenda are illegal by default in the Netherlands, and a temporary law had to be put in place to allow the people to vote on the Constitution. This was intended to be a non-binding referendum, but as Scofflaw said, non-binding referenda can't really be non-binding if the Parliament feel bound to honour the result.

In principle, national referendums in the Netherlands are not possible by law. However, from 2002 until 2005, there was a Temporary Referendum Law in place which allowed for non-binding referendums, known in Dutch as Volksraadpleging (literally: People's Consultation), to be organised for laws already approved by the House of Representatives. No referendums were called based on this law. In order to hold the 2005 referendum on the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, a different law was temporarily put in place. That referendum was the first national referendum in the Netherlands in 200 years and it was the result of an initiative proposal by parliamentarians Farah Karimi (Greens), Niesco Dubbelboer (Labour) and Boris van der Ham (Democrats).

P. Breathnach

DSB wrote: »

The no campaigners have really gone to some extreme lengths with their campaign of lies, and have probably pushed alot of neutrals towards voting yes. If they'd avoided shock tactics, and scare tactics, they'd probably have given themselves a much better chance. They've definitely underestimated the intelligence of the average Irish person.

Sadly, they are right at the level of a very large minority.

Daftendirekt

RCIRL wrote: »

I am getting fed up with this and all you yes heads, all your arguments me F*** all to me.

In case you have forgot, we are already in Europe! Did you hear that? We are already in Europe!

Listen to this, I have worked here for 15 years and paid my tax's, I have lost my job and have found no system in place to help me back into work, no system. I have been out of work almost a year now, I haven't slept well in weeks due to financial worries. We are a part of Europe.

My father used to own a business and hired many people over the years which contributed to the system, he is now a broken man entitled to nothing, not a single penny, nothing, over a year now and not one cent has come into his hands. Our Government sent two Garda to my fathers house to issue a summons, their is a chance my father is going to jail for not paying the tax man 750 euro. We are a part of Europe.

The only thing saving him and my younger brother is my mother who works in the partnership, they get funding from the dormant accounts. The Government are more than likely going to remove this funding as they need every penny they can get. If that happens my family is in deep trouble. We are part of Europe.

So their you go. Europe can go and stuff themselves. I can honestly say I would prefer to be out picking potatoes in a underdeveloped old Ireland at least I would hold some pride. I don't care what they have done for Ireland and what they can do.

I don't believe Europe will kick us out should we say no but even if they do I don't care. We now have enough infrastructure in place and it will give us a chance to remove those people we don't want in this country and those people we don't want to lead our country.

When the S**** hits the fan, good people will surface, people who clearly hold the people of Ireland at heart, maybe that's what we need.

Can you please stop dishing out the idea of Europe being good to us in the past means they will be good for us in the future.

Dish out the real facts, like this, I am going to vote No.

While I offer my deepest sympathy to your father, none of this has anything to do with the EU, or with Lisbon.

drkpower

DSB wrote: »

The no campaigners have really gone to some extreme lengths with their campaign of lies, and have probably pushed alot of neutrals towards voting yes. If they'd avoided shock tactics, and scare tactics, they'd probably have given themselves a much better chance. They've definitely underestimated the intelligence of the average Irish person.

Sadly, both sides have engaged in scare tactics. And sadly, barely a referendum goes by in this country without both sides using scare tactics.

Even if some of the Coir lies were particular stinkers (€1.84 anyone...), the 'Yes' side cannot take the high moral guide particularly when you consider the dishonesty that they themselves have engaged in.

ei.sdraob

drkpower wrote: »

, the 'Yes' side cannot take the high moral guide particularly when you consider the dishonesty that they themselves have engaged in.

such as?

Johnnnybravo

I never knew there was so many sheep in Ireland til I read this thread. Run along now little sheep and do what yere told to do by the people that already ****ed up this country.

The Volt

Run along now little idiot and follow the people who manipulated you with relative ease

RandomName2

drkpower wrote: »

Sadly, both sides have engaged in scare tactics. And sadly, barely a referendum goes by in this country without both sides using scare tactics.

Even if some of the Coir lies were particular stinkers (€1.84 anyone...), the 'Yes' side cannot take the high moral guide particularly when you consider the dishonesty that they themselves have engaged in.

Threats on the Yes side. Scare tactis on the no side. I will personally blame Coir when Friday returns a 'yes' (although the 'no' side were always going to be outgunned by the limitless resources on the 'yes' side).

Saw a student dare question the yes side's Pat Cox and Professor Laffan - I also saw the abuse hurled at him by the two (I wouldn't be hopeful if I were he, of getting a good degree).

Let us never forget the manner in which the yes politicians are going to win this referendum. Insults, threats, innuendo, lies, and bullying.

Granted, some non-government yes side organisations have actually addressed the treaty itself - but these have been seriously sidelined by the hard-core political machine which has entirely refocused the issue (successfully).

This entire referendum is about as ugly as it could possibly get. It will not have a happy legacy.