Barroso's visit to Ireland - "Lisbon rejection would hurt Ireland"

Sully

The first day of his visit to Ireland, he had this to say::

IRELAND COULD lose its right to nominate an EU commissioner if it rejects the Lisbon Treaty for a second time, European Commission president José Manuel Barroso has warned.

He has also predicted a No vote on October 2nd would create uncertainty about Ireland’s place in Europe, threaten jobs and investment, and damage the economy.

“Honestly, there are some doubts now about the future situation of Ireland. Some people have asked me: Is Ireland going to leave the EU? For investor confidence, it is important that there is certainty about the future of Ireland in the EU,” said Mr Barroso, who arrives in Ireland today for a two-day visit, during which he will meet civil society groups, students and politicians.

Mr Barroso said Ireland would not be forced to leave the union in the event of a No vote. But he said not all audiences understood how the EU worked, citing the example of US firms asking him if Ireland would stay in the EU. “Perceptions count in politics . . . I tell you this very frankly. I believe confidence is part of the economy, as we have been seeing recently,” he said.

He told The Irish Times a No vote could also result in Ireland losing its automatic right to nominate a person to the commission, the EU executive branch that proposes new legislation and manages the EU budget.

“The only way to ensure that Ireland will always have a commissioner is to vote Yes to Lisbon. If not, of course we have to reduce the amount of commissioners. This is in the current treaties and we are legally obliged to do it,” said Mr Barroso in a reference to the Nice Treaty, which stipulates the number of commissioners must be less than the number of member states.

To accommodate Irish concerns following the first No vote last June, EU leaders agreed to invoke a clause in the Lisbon Treaty that would enable the commission to remain at 27 members. But the current EU treaties do not have this clause, which would prompt an immediate institutional problem if the Irish people vote No a second time and Lisbon cannot enter into force.

Mr Barroso said there was no agreement yet on a proposal by Sweden to allow 26 member states to retain a commissioner and give the 27th country the right to appoint a new EU high representative for foreign affairs. “There are different scenarios. Some people say we should have a commission of 15 members. It’s too soon to speculate,” he added.

Mr Barroso said he was not threatening the Irish people, but wanted to put across his honest and frank assessment of the consequences of a second No.

“We respect the vote of the Irish people. It has to be very clear that we are making no threats at all. I don’t want to put any kind of pressure on people. It’s up to each Irish citizen to make his or her decision,” he said.

He said the referendum campaign should be based on facts, not fears. “I don’t like racism or this type of campaign that is based on falsehoods and scaremongering. This is fanatical and should be condemned,” said Mr Barroso, when asked about the campaign led by the British party UKIP.

He said he had heard of No campaigner Declan Ganley but declined the Libertas leader’s invitation to debate the treaty. “I’m going to debate with elected politicians and with citizens in Limerick,” he said.

Mr Barroso, who was re-elected for a second five-year term as commission president on Wednesday, said Irish people had benefited enormously from EU membership and made a very important contribution to Europe. He said they had good economic, political and pragmatic reasons for voting Yes. He rejected criticism he was interfering in a national debate. “The European Commission has not only the right but a duty to inform, as any public authority. I believe we would be criticised if we were not informing citizens of what we are doing and about the reality of Europe,” he said.

Source:: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2009/0919/1224254866633.html

Interesting article it must be said. I wonder how this will shape future debates on Lisbon? This is been the heaviest indication of what the situation is if we reject Lisbon, compared to an earlier one the Shinners have been hyping on about.

Though, is there any harm in debating against Ganley? Surley Barroso could fight that one easily.

sink

Sully wrote: »

Though, is there any harm in debating against Ganley? Surley Barroso could fight that one easily.

"never argue with a fool onlookers may not be able to tell the difference"

ei.sdraob

IRELAND COULD lose its right to nominate an EU commissioner if it rejects the Lisbon Treaty for a second time, European Commission president José Manuel Barroso has warned.

he could have just said



vote YES to keep "our" commissioner






As for ganley he wasnt elected...

“I’m going to debate with elected politicians and with citizens in Limerick,” he said.

Sully

ei.sdraob wrote: »

As for ganley he wasnt elected...

It caught me at first but I think he was implying he will only debate with politicans who are elected. Ganley isnt, so he wont.

ei.sdraob

Sully wrote: »

It caught me at first but I think he was implying he will only debate with politicans who are elected. Ganley isnt, so he wont.

yeh

why should he debate with someone who doesnt represent (or democratically elected) the people


or respects their wishes and cant take NO for an answer

O'Morris

“Honestly, there are some doubts now about the future situation of Ireland.

Doubts which Manuel Barroso and his colleagues could very easily clear up if they wanted to.

Some people have asked me: Is Ireland going to leave the EU? For investor confidence, it is important that there is certainty about the future of Ireland in the EU,” said Mr Barroso, who arrives in Ireland today for a two-day visit, during which he will meet civil society groups, students and politicians.

Why didn't Brian Cowen insist on a declaration signed by the leaders of the other governments guaranteeing Ireland's position in Europe? If he did that it would have helped clear up the uncertainty about Ireland's future and that would have reassured foreign investors that we will continue to have access to Europe's markets regardless of how we vote on the Lisbon treaty.

Mr Barroso said Ireland would not be forced to leave the union in the event of a No vote. But

This has the same effect as someone on the no side saying something like

"Ireland's youth will not be conscripted into an EU army to fight in the Balkans BUT...."

the_dark_side

the whole thing is a joke... believe me, look back on this second referendum in 12 months time, we are being shoved around and dictated to by this pack of cnuts who refuse to accept the first vote on this treaty, we are not living in a democracy folks, and if this re-run is anything to go by, wait until you see the litany of unsavoury decisions that will be made against all EU countries once the second Lisbon vote is passed. There is no such thing as self determination any more.... check out Switzerland... they decided against adopting the Euro currency, arent they glad now!

ei.sdraob

the_dark_side wrote: »

the whole thing is a joke... believe me, look back on this second referendum in 12 months time, we are being shoved around and dictated to by this pack of cnuts who refuse to accept the first vote on this treaty, we are not living in a democracy folks, and if this re-run is anything to go by, wait until you see the litany of unsavoury decisions that will be made against all EU countries once the second Lisbon vote is passed. There is no such thing as self determination any more.... check out Switzerland... they decided against adopting the Euro currency, arent they glad now!

thats what Sinn Fein said in 2001 (or is that 20001? lol at typo on their page)

http://www.sinnfein.org/releases/01/pr010205.html

were still waiting so far EU has a great record of being of good to Ireland

O'Morris

ei.sdraob wrote:

thats what Sinn Fein said in 2001 (or is that 20001? lol at typo on their page)

http://www.sinnfein.org/releases/01/pr010205.html

were still waiting so far EU has a great record of being of good to Ireland

Why don't you use capital letters and punctuation?

Red Sleeping Beauty

Barroso can get the damn hell out of my country and stop interfering.

This is just more fear being spread from the establishment anyways. The gall of him to say "there are some doubts now about the future situation of Ireland" and then claim "It has to be very clear that we are making no threats at all. I don’t want to put any kind of pressure on people." The worst is this :

“I don’t like racism or this type of campaign that is based on falsehoods and scaremongering. This is fanatical and should be condemned,”

So he doesn't like scaremongering then ? Me neither. The absolute least he could do is try and give some positive reasons for voting yes to this thing other than just loose threats.

ei.sdraob

O'Morris wrote: »

Why don't you use capital letters and punctuation?

cause im lazy

but at least im not a liar


anyways are you gonna address my point or bicker over punctuation?

Euro_Kraut

.

Euro_Kraut

the_dark_side wrote: »

the whole thing is a joke... believe me, look back on this second referendum in 12 months time, we are being shoved around and dictated to by this pack of cnuts who refuse to accept the first vote on this treaty, we are not living in a democracy folks, and if this re-run is anything to go by, wait until you see the litany of unsavoury decisions that will be made against all EU countries once the second Lisbon vote is passed. There is no such thing as self determination any more.... check out Switzerland... they decided against adopting the Euro currency, arent they glad now!

Switzerland are not in the EU.

Euro_Kraut

Alan Rouge wrote: »

Barroso can get the damn hell out of my country and stop interfering.

You realize he is the President of the European Commission of which we are part of? He was elected by Irish MEPs (twice) and by the representatives of the other 400million people in Europe.

Its someone in Roscommen like telling Brain Cowen to go back to Offaly because he doesn't represent them.

O'Morris

Euro_Kraut wrote:

You realize he is the President of the European Commission of which we are part of? He was elected by Irish MEPs (twice) and by the representatives of the other 400million people in Europe.

The Irish referendum is an internal affair for the Irish people. As Manuel Barroso is not an Irish citizens he has no more right to interfere in our referendum than Nigel Farage has.

I don't have a problem with him offering his opinions on the treaty, or even with him coming here to campaign for a yes vote, but I do have a problem with him using his authority to issue threats to the Irish people about what might happen to us if we don't vote yes to Lisbon. I really don't want to see us hand over more to power to an EU that has people like this in positions of power.

Euro_Kraut wrote:

Its someone in Roscommen like telling Brain Cowen to go back to Offaly because he doesn't represent them.

If there was a general election and Brian Cowen started warning the people of Roscommon about the bad things that might happen to the economy of Roscommon if they didn't vote for the Fianna Fail candidate then I think they would be perfectly justified in telling him to feck off back where he came from.

Toiletroll

Yes to jobs, yes to recovery. It will be funny when the ordinary man & women who votes yes based on these claims finds themselves in a worse position after the next budget and still without jobs.

Then there will be real hatred toward FF, FG etc and even the EU.

We were lied to before NICE. We had Mc Creevey and others on radio (the audio samples are available) saying immigration will not exceed 2000 per year when we vote in NICE.

We had 50,000 in this year alone! :eek:

The yes side will argue that we opted into this and that but what it boils down too is that our politicians at the time lied and sait it wouldnt exceed 2000 per year. That was totally wrong.

Also, just reading latest issue of Focus magazine and there is an article about a decline in population almost certainly leads to prosperity. WHereas an increase will lead to decline in prosperity due to infrastructure capacity and more.

Everywhere you look you see yes to jobs, yes to prosperity and others.

When the next budget comes along and there are still no jobs next year, will the people look back at the Lisbon campaign and finally realise the lies, propoganda and agenda from our current political class?

The ordinary joe on the street who knows very little about Lisbon is looking at the X Factor posters bleeting yes for jobs and recovery may vote yes on this basis. They are putting on their suits ready for the day after a yes vote to start their new promised jobs and prosperity.

What happens when this doesnt come about and they are still in the same miserable postion as they are now.

What about all the people who will continue to loose their jobs who voted yes and thought it would save their jobs.

What happens when the promises dont come true? Will the nation finally realise ??

We should take photos of all towns and cities right now to include the sheer amount of these yes for jobs, yes for prosperity posters. Then when this does not materialise we can show these photos to the people who votes yes on this basis.

Bye bye FF, FG, Labour and whoever else is supporting these presumptions.

I think this is a very dangerous game by our political classes, get a yes vote at all costs. This could be a far worse detriment to society if our entire political establishment has to fall when the Scheiße! hits the fan...

Euro_Kraut

O'Morris wrote: »

If there was a general election and Brian Cowen started warning the people of Roscommon about the bad things that might happen to the economy of Roscommon if they didn't vote for the Fianna Fail candidate then I think they would be perfectly justified in telling him to feck off back where he came from.

I disagree. Brain Cowen is Toaisech of all of Ireland not just the county he is from. (unfortunately )

All party leaders campaign right across the country and not just in their home party. Barrosso was elected by Irish MEPs. He has a mandate to campaign here unlike Farage and UKIP.

schween

O'Morris wrote: »

The Irish referendum is an internal affair for the Irish people. As Manuel Barroso is not an Irish citizens he has no more right to interfere in our referendum than Nigel Farage has.

I don't have a problem with him offering his opinions on the treaty, or even with him coming here to campaign for a yes vote, but I do have a problem with him using his authority to issue threats to the Irish people about what might happen to us if we don't vote yes to Lisbon. I really don't want to see us hand over more to power to an EU that has people like this in positions of power.

If there was a general election and Brian Cowen started warning the people of Roscommon about the bad things that might happen to the economy of Roscommon if they didn't vote for the Fianna Fail candidate then I think they would be perfectly justified in telling him to feck off back where he came from.

Nigel Farage. Elected by British people to represent British people in Europe.

Jose Manuel Barosso. Elected by Irish MEPs along with other MEPs to represent the people of Ireland as well as Europe.

The Lisbon Treaty affects both Ireland and the EU hugely. So in my opinion Mr Barosso has every right to be here. Also you say that you don't mind Mr Barosso giving his opinion as long as he isn't making threats. These "threats" are obviously his opinion so here again you make no sense.

strathspey

Why don't the nay sayers rather answer this question....what hasn't the EU done for Ireland?

strathspey

Toiletroll wrote: »

......saying immigration will not exceed 2000 per year when we vote in NICE.

We had 50,000 in this year alone! :eek:

Some Irish have the shortest of memories......how many Irish were taken in over the centuries, by accomodating nations all over the world?

schween

Toiletroll wrote: »

We were lied to before NICE. We had Mc Creevey and others on radio (the audio samples are available) saying immigration will not exceed 2000 per year when we vote in NICE.

We had 50,000 in this year alone! :eek:

The yes side will argue that we opted into this and that but what it boils down too is that our politicians at the time lied and sait it wouldnt exceed 2000 per year. That was totally wrong.

Also, just reading latest issue of Focus magazine and there is an article about a decline in population almost certainly leads to prosperity. WHereas an increase will lead to decline in prosperity due to infrastructure capacity and more.

Everywhere you look you see yes to jobs, yes to prosperity and others.

When the next budget comes along and there are still no jobs next year, will the people look back at the Lisbon campaign and finally realise the lies, propoganda and agenda from our current political class?

The ordinary joe on the street who knows very little about Lisbon is looking at the X Factor posters bleeting yes for jobs and recovery may vote yes on this basis. They are putting on their suits ready for the day after a yes vote to start their new promised jobs and prosperity.

What happens when this doesnt come about and they are still in the same miserable postion as they are now.

What about all the people who will continue to loose their jobs who voted yes and thought it would save their jobs.

What happens when the promises dont come true? Will the nation finally realise ??
[/B]

First of all, McCreevy is a joke of a politician.

Secondly, you say there'll be 50,000 coming into the country this year. What about the thousands that are leaving the country? I doubt a decline in Irelands population will cure our woes.

Lastly, ordinary Joe on the street isn't stupid. Ordinary Joe on the street knows that on Saturday Oct 3rd the unemployment rate will magically drop to 3%. Be realistic.

isocket

Great!
Wheel on Barroso, the ex-marxist sleaze merchant, who promply insulted us after the last Lisbon Treaty result.

nullzero

ei.sdraob wrote: »

yeh

why should he debate with someone who doesnt represent (or democratically elected) the people


or respects their wishes and cant take NO for an answer

In a referendum all citizens are entitled to air their views at any level.
There are people on both sides who would like to hear what Ganley has to say regarding Lisbon even if he is a dodgy character.
Just because somebody doesn't agree with you doesn't grant you the right to declare a gagging order against them just in case the worst would happen and both sides would be equally represented.
If you believe in democracy then you should be delighted to see anybody being aloud to make their views known regardless of whether you agree with them or not.
The stupid militant attitudes from people on both sides of the Lisbon debate are shocking, the lies being pushed by both sides beggar belief and the Yes sides insistnace that the No side should have as little publicity as possible and using the publicity they do get to simply ridicule them and their views is stupid and only serves to make the Yes side look stupid.
Any rational person would look at the oppossing sides as they stand and probably decide not to bother voting and just move to a better country with a much lower instance of F***wits per head of population.

ei.sdraob

schween wrote: »

First of all, McCreevy is a joke of a politician.

Secondly, you say there'll be 50,000 coming into the country this year. What about the thousands that are leaving the country? I doubt a decline in Irelands population will cure our woes.

Lastly, ordinary Joe on the street isn't stupid. Ordinary Joe on the street knows that on Saturday Oct 3rd the unemployment rate will magically drop to 3%. Be realistic.

weren't all the newspapers raving about

how on the net theres more people leaving this country this year even with inward migration included

immigration is a moot point when more people are leaving

O'Morris

ei.sdraob wrote:

immigration is a moot point when more people are leaving

Many of the people leaving are Irish people who can't find jobs in this country.

ei.sdraob

O'Morris wrote: »

Many of the people leaving are Irish people who can't find jobs in this country.

[citation needed]

The Volt

Anyone with half a head on their shoulders knows that Ganley can't even lie straight. It would do more harm that good should Barroso invite him to debate as those who can't think for themselves would more than likely be swayed by his BS

P. Breathnach

Alan Rouge wrote: »

Barroso can get the damn hell out of my country and stop interfering...

It's my country, too, and I don't remember mandating you to speak for all of us on this matter. I have a very profound mistrust of people who lay claim to a right to speak for others.

Sam Vimes

nullzero wrote: »

In a referendum all citizens are entitled to air their views at any level.
There are people on both sides who would like to hear what Ganley has to say regarding Lisbon even if he is a dodgy character.
Just because somebody doesn't agree with you doesn't grant you the right to declare a gagging order against them just in case the worst would happen and both sides would be equally represented.

No disagreeing with me does not warrant a gagging order but how about repeatedly lying to further his own agenda?

spank_inferno

Wheeling out that 'shady at best' character Borosso could have been nothing but a shot in the arm to the No side.

he hasnt got the acumen not to put his fat foot in it every time he opens his mouth, because his thinly veiled threats will do nothing more than harden any "dont know's" to a No vote come election day.

I'm convinced the outside bullying had a significant bearing on the result last time.

Sam Vimes

spank_inferno wrote: »

Wheeling out that 'shady at best' character Borosso could have been nothing but a shot in the arm to the No side.

he hasnt got the acumen not to put his fat foot in it every time he opens his mouth, because his thinly veiled threats will do nothing more than harden any "dont know's" to a No vote come election day.

I'm convinced the outside bullying had a significant bearing on the result last time.

Can you call it bullying if what he's saying is true? He's not threatening us, he's warning us of potential consequences. He's not the one who's going to be bringing the consequences

For exampe:

IRELAND COULD lose its right to nominate an EU commissioner if it rejects the Lisbon Treaty for a second time, European Commission president José Manuel Barroso has warned.

True

He has also predicted a No vote on October 2nd would create uncertainty about Ireland’s place in Europe, threaten jobs and investment, and damage the economy.

“Honestly, there are some doubts now about the future situation of Ireland. Some people have asked me: Is Ireland going to leave the EU? For investor confidence, it is important that there is certainty about the future of Ireland in the EU,” said Mr Barroso, who arrives in Ireland today for a two-day visit, during which he will meet civil society groups, students and politicians.

Mr Barroso said Ireland would not be forced to leave the union in the event of a No vote. But he said not all audiences understood how the EU worked, citing the example of US firms asking him if Ireland would stay in the EU. “Perceptions count in politics . . . I tell you this very frankly. I believe confidence is part of the economy, as we have been seeing recently,” he said.

Unless you think he's lying about the people having asked him that, that's also true and matches what the heads of many companies in Ireland have said independently.

So where's the bullying?

the_dark_side

the_dark_side wrote: »

the whole thing is a joke... believe me, look back on this second referendum in 12 months time, we are being shoved around and dictated to by this pack of cnuts who refuse to accept the first vote on this treaty, we are not living in a democracy folks, and if this re-run is anything to go by, wait until you see the litany of unsavoury decisions that will be made against all EU countries once the second Lisbon vote is passed. There is no such thing as self determination any more.... check out Switzerland... they decided against adopting the Euro currency, arent they glad now!

bump.

Interesting reading this again 2 years later, well almost

oscarBravo

the_dark_side wrote: »

bump.

Interesting reading this again 2 years later, well almost

Why? What impact has the Lisbon treaty had on us?

meglome

the_dark_side wrote: »

the whole thing is a joke... believe me, look back on this second referendum in 12 months time, we are being shoved around and dictated to by this pack of cnuts who refuse to accept the first vote on this treaty, we are not living in a democracy folks, and if this re-run is anything to go by, wait until you see the litany of unsavoury decisions that will be made against all EU countries once the second Lisbon vote is passed. There is no such thing as self determination any more.... check out Switzerland... they decided against adopting the Euro currency, arent they glad now!

So anyway... leaving aside it's 24 months time, and that our elected government chose to legally call the first and second votes as was their right, and that the people voted by a large majority yes, and that Switzerland isn't in the EU. All that aside what exactly has the EU made us do? I'd also like to know what exactly is in the Lisbon treaty that caused any of our current problems?

BTW If you believe they are making us be more economically prudent then you'll forgive me for thinking that's a great idea which I support 100%

the_dark_side wrote: »

bump.

Interesting reading this again 2 years later, well almost

You logic appears to be...
1. Lisbon Treaty
2. ????????????
3. Shoved around
This is interesting in the sense it's total nonsense.

My suggestion would be...
1. Elect bad government (repeatedly)
2. No governance of banks (by bad government)
3. Go mad borrowing money
4. Ignore many warnings (as we know best)
5. Realise we're screwed
6. Beg Europe for help
7. Try to blame Europe on what we did.

meglome

caseyann wrote: »

Lucky bastards.:D

You know it's funny... I know the EU isn't perfect, sure I see it as a force for good generally but certainly not perfect. But most of the criticisms are so ridiculous and so out of kilter with fact that I find myself consistently supporting the EU on boards and elsewhere. Some of the over the top rants on here and the journal.ie are actually getting on my nerves. Sure maybe it makes people feel better to think there is a big bad wolf who has created the mess we're in. I get that, human nature really. But unless we face up to the fact that WE as a nation created the mess there's a good chance we won't make the changes we need to make. It saddens and worries me to think we won't learn some hard lessons in our desire for someone else to blame.

the_dark_side

I usually have mixed feelings about Pat Condell's analysis, but I think he hits the proverbial nail on the head a couple of times here, regarding Ireland's re-run of the Lisbon vote, and the attitude of the EU in general..

we might as well sell off Leinster House, or turn it into a children's fun park, most of the citizens of Ireland wouldn't recognize it if they saw it anyway ;-)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6M8an_XKL8

meglome

the_dark_side wrote: »

I usually have mixed feelings about Pat Condell's analysis, but I think he hits the proverbial nail on the head a couple of times here, regarding Ireland's re-run of the Lisbon vote, and the attitude of the EU in general..

we might as well sell off Leinster House, or turn it into a children's fun park, most of the citizens of Ireland wouldn't recognize it if they saw it anyway ;-)

I wasted one and half minutes of my life there before I stopped watching. Why don't you tell us exactly what you think? Because so far I don't think I've seen you post anything that was factually correct.

BKtje

check out Switzerland... they decided against adopting the Euro currency, arent they glad now!

Yes and no. Yes they are in control of their currency and no because they are not really in control of their currency. With the Swiss franc viewed as a safe haven during the economic crisis, the swiss central bank is pumping billions into making the swiss franc less attractive. Yet these billions are at best slowing the strength of the swiss franc vs the euro. As one writer put it, it's like holding back the tide with your bare hands.

Why is a strong swiss franc a problem? Swiss exports are incredibly expensive now, the tourist industry has all but collapsed, supermarket prices aren't dropping (due to (if the claims can be believed) suppliers pocketing the difference) causing many people living around the border to go (similar to NI I guess) to France and Germany (mainly) for their shopping.

Sure foreign holidays for the swiss will probably never be cheaper but all that comes at a price. I believe that the swiss economy is now expected to enter a recession next year but don't recall where I read it, one of the local papers probably.

All the above said, the swiss people (I believe) are generally still very happy not to be in the EU / Euro with the main argument being that they are glad to not have to bail out the troubled countries.

I'm no expert though, just going on what I constantly read in the papers here in Switzerland.

thebman

BKtje wrote: »

Yes and no. Yes they are in control of their currency and no because they are not really in control of their currency. With the Swiss franc viewed as a safe haven during the economic crisis, the swiss central bank is pumping billions into making the swiss franc less attractive. Yet these billions are at best slowing the strength of the swiss franc vs the euro. As one writer put it, it's like holding back the tide with your bare hands.

Why is a strong swiss franc a problem? Swiss exports are incredibly expensive now, the tourist industry has all but collapsed, supermarket prices aren't dropping (due to (if the claims can be believed) suppliers pocketing the difference) causing many people living around the border to go (similar to NI I guess) to France and Germany (mainly) for their shopping.

Sure foreign holidays for the swiss will probably never be cheaper but all that comes at a price. I believe that the swiss economy is now expected to enter a recession next year but don't recall where I read it, one of the local papers probably.

All the above said, the swiss people (I believe) are generally still very happy not to be in the EU / Euro with the main argument being that they are glad to not have to bail out the troubled countries.

I'm no expert though, just going on what I constantly read in the papers here in Switzerland.

From reading that it seems like they are bailing out everyone but the governments in the Euro area but are happier with it as it is an unofficial arrangement of people moving their money to Swiss banks and the cost is being their economy.

Anyway the Swiss want to stand on their own two feet for the most part and be completely independent. More power to them if that is what they want. I don't think I'd like that for Ireland or that it would suit our economy especially at the moment but I do think I'd like some of their political structures like a more direct form of democracy.

Without Europe, no controversial issue would be discussed in Irish politics, I'm fairly convinced of it. How political parties lack back bone.

View

thebman wrote: »

Anyway the Swiss want to stand on their own two feet for the most part and be completely independent.

Switzerland - a non-member of the EU - is a member of the (EU) Schengen Area which we - a member of the EU - have opted-out of for the time being at least. In addition, they have something like 39 bilateral agreements with the EU which cover a multitude of areas and include the EU's basic 4 freedoms (i.e. for goods, capital, services and people).

As such, the idea of Switzerland being "completely independent" may be theoretically true but is a bit of an exaggeration in practice.

Is mise le key

meglome wrote: »

BTW If you believe they are making us be more economically prudent then you'll forgive me for thinking that's a great idea which I support 100%
.

Ah yes, we are being told to be 'economically prudent' as it suits the capitalist cycle presently to cut cut cut back to the start again, if they succeed in cutting the bollox out of everything for years we will then be encouraged to spend spend spend (and so goes the capitalist cycle) & the rich continue to reap the rewards then & now.

It sucks.

meglome

Is mise le key wrote: »

Ah yes, we are being told to be 'economically prudent' as it suits the capitalist cycle presently to cut cut cut back to the start again, if they succeed in cutting the bollox out of everything for years we will then be encouraged to spend spend spend (and so goes the capitalist cycle) & the rich continue to reap the rewards then & now.

It sucks.

Well no... being forced to be 'economically prudent' doesn't suit the capitalist way at all. It's spending that fuels our system but borrowing truck loads of cash to feed that spending is where it went wrong.

And let's be very clear about this, if this was real capitalism banks like Anglo would have been let fail. It's the socialist way for the state to intervene.

Is mise le key

meglome wrote: »

Well no... being forced to be 'economically prudent' doesn't suit the capitalist way at all. It's spending that fuels our system but borrowing truck loads of cash to feed that spending is where it went wrong.

And let's be very clear about this, if this was real capitalism banks like Anglo would have been let fail. It's the socialist way for the state to intervene.

Oh dear, its socialism for the state to use the tax payers as collateral to cover bad private losses!!!!!!!!!!, the delusion goes on.

Scofflaw

Is this even vaguely on topic?

moderately,
Scofflaw

censuspro

meglome wrote: »

You know it's funny... I know the EU isn't perfect, sure I see it as a force for good generally but certainly not perfect. But most of the criticisms are so ridiculous and so out of kilter with fact that I find myself consistently supporting the EU on boards and elsewhere. Some of the over the top rants on here and the journal.ie are actually getting on my nerves. Sure maybe it makes people feel better to think there is a big bad wolf who has created the mess we're in. I get that, human nature really. But unless we face up to the fact that WE as a nation created the mess there's a good chance we won't make the changes we need to make. It saddens and worries me to think we won't learn some hard lessons in our desire for someone else to blame.

The blogosphere is predominantly left wing. This forum in particular is pro EU.

oscarBravo

censuspro wrote: »

This forum in particular is pro EU.

No, it's not.

Is mise le key

oscarBravo wrote: »

No, it's not.

Yes, it is.

censuspro

Since this thread has been revived and in light of the scare tactics that Barroso and the Yes side used, it's interesting to reflect on what the Yes side said would be the consequences of a second No vote. All of which have transpired even after we voted Yes (with the exception of retaining our commissioner)

You can view these directly on lisbon2.ie

On the world stage there will be uncertainty over Ireland’s political future
Ireland’s influence in Europe will diminish
Ireland’s international influence will diminish
Foreign Direct Investment both from existing Irish Based businesses and potential investors will reduce
International confidence in Ireland will diminish leading to an increase in the cost of National Borrowing
There will be significantly less appetite in Europe for assisting Ireland in our current economic difficulties
We expect that existing jobs will be lost and potential new jobs will not be created
Ireland will not retain a commissioner
Other EU countries may want to reopen the debate on our corporation tax rate

Is mise le key

censuspro wrote: »

Since this thread has been revived and in light of the scare tactics that Barroso and the Yes side used, it's interesting to reflect on what the Yes side said would be the consequences of a second No vote. All of which have transpired even after we voted Yes (with the exception of retaining our commissioner)

You can view these directly on lisbon2.ie

You may expect a response soon like this,

"The treaty is a complex legal document, just read it & you will see nothing contained within it, is the cause for any of the things you pointed out have come to pass"

Or some other such head in the sand shíte.

Scofflaw

censuspro wrote: »

Since this thread has been revived and in light of the scare tactics that Barroso and the Yes side used, it's interesting to reflect on what the Yes side said would be the consequences of a second No vote. All of which have transpired even after we voted Yes (with the exception of retaining our commissioner)

On the world stage there will be uncertainty over Ireland’s political future
Ireland’s influence in Europe will diminish
Ireland’s international influence will diminish
Foreign Direct Investment both from existing Irish Based businesses and potential investors will reduce
International confidence in Ireland will diminish leading to an increase in the cost of National Borrowing
There will be significantly less appetite in Europe for assisting Ireland in our current economic difficulties
We expect that existing jobs will be lost and potential new jobs will not be created
Ireland will not retain a commissioner
Other EU countries may want to reopen the debate on our corporation tax rate

You can view these directly on lisbon2.ie

That's a marvellous piece of stopped clock correctness, claiming those are the outcome of Lisbon! There was a little issue with the collapse of our economy and banking system?

amused,
Scofflaw

oscarBravo

Is mise le key wrote: »

Yes, it is.

OK, I'll bite. This forum is an abstract social construct; a place where people discuss things from varying perspectives. It's logically impossible for it to be pro- or anti-anything. Some of the people who post here are in favour of the EU, to a greater or lesser degree; others are opposed to it, to a greater or lesser degree.

So, no: the forum is not pro-EU.

You may now make your case for the idea that it is.