The Lisbon Treaty for Dummies

chachabinx

Hey I voted no the last time because I didn't agree with the Lisbon Treaty at the time. I can't even remember now why I voted no but I plan to vote no again because I don't think my vote should change because we ran into a bit of trouble.

I am an intelligent person but I know nothing about politics. And the reason for this? I SIMPLY DON'T CARE! When Im watchin it on TV my brain litterally switches off. Is anybody else like this?

Will someone please explain to me in english what is going on? And am I right to vote no. I might not vote at all but thats a wasted vote & I don't believe in that either...

SkepticOne

chachabinx wrote: »

Will someone please explain to me in english what is going on? And am I right to vote no. I might not vote at all but thats a wasted vote & I don't believe in that either...

I'm likely to vote no in the upcoming referendum but I think you should research things for yourself before voting one way or the other.

chachabinx

SkepticOne wrote: »

I'm likely to vote no in the upcoming referendum but I think you should research things for yourself before voting one way or the other.

Sorry I should have mentioned that its the fancy lingo that is my main problem.

Lunar_Wire

I voted no the last time, there is more reason to vote no now.
They are trying to bully us to vote yes. After the vote the government were already trying to tell us we voted the wrong way. They were seeking ways to make us vote again. They had EU leaders coming over trying to determine why we voted no. I feel that was to determine the best way to manipulate us to vote yes.
For me it's now a matter of principle. They have completely not listened to what the Irish people have said. It astounds me that opinion poles are heading for a yes! We are not being respected or listened to. We should vote no on this principle alone.
It's not a vote on Jobs, not a vote on EU membership and it is not a vote on the economy. Don't be frightened into changing your vote.
At this stage I really don't care what the legislation does. The fact that the majority voted no, but the elite want it through, is the sole reason we're being made vote again.
The government must go. Vote No!

r0nanf

Lunar_Wire wrote: »

At this stage I really don't care what the legislation does. The fact that the majority voted no, but the elite want it through, is the sole reason we're being made vote again.
The government must go. Vote No!

Our relationship with Europe should not be compromised because you think our government should go. I want them gone as much as the next person but I would never advocate ignoring the purpose of the vote and trying to remove the government through it. They won't get the budget through (and/or possibly NAMA) anyway so they'll be gone soon enough. Vote no because you understand the pros and cons, but not out of spite.

LostinBlanch

Here's a link to the Referendum Commission site on Lisbon.

They're bound by law to put forward both sides of the argument for everyone to understand before voting.

So whatever way you're voting, take a look at the site and see if it doesn't give you a clearer picture.

Diarmuid

Lunar_Wire wrote: »

No means no

Not always

carlmango11

chachabinx wrote: »

Hey I voted no the last time because I didn't agree with the Lisbon Treaty at the time. I can't even remember now why I voted no but I plan to vote no again because I don't think my vote should change because we ran into a bit of trouble.

I am an intelligent person but I know nothing about politics. And the reason for this? I SIMPLY DON'T CARE! When Im watchin it on TV my brain litterally switches off. Is anybody else like this?

Will someone please explain to me in english what is going on? And am I right to vote no. I might not vote at all but thats a wasted vote & I don't believe in that either...

If you don't understand it, don't vote. You shouldn't make an important decision on something you don't understand.

willow_d_whisp

Well if we don't know what's in it - it's probably because it's not being explained properly. Undoubtedly there are reasons for not explaining the treaty in simple terms. Better off to vote 'no' to keep the status quo if you don't know what is in the treaty. Because if you don't vote at all and then 'yes' is the result a new situation arises and the Irish Constitution is altered.

Was reading in the paper today that the Labour T.D. Jan O Sullivan had a major reaction to what happened to the DELL jobs in Limerick. Seemingly the E.U. helped relocate the DELL jobs to Lodz Poland (E.U. gave 54.5 million of a grant to aid this), whereas the E.U. gave 14.8 million euro so that all the Irish DELL workers who were laid off would be 'retrained'. I think the 15 million won't last long in terms of re-training the Irish worker - there's little chance of new employment. Thought that quite strange.

saol alainn

Lunar_Wire wrote: »

I voted no the last time, there is more reason to vote no now.
They are trying to bully us to vote yes. After the vote the government were already trying to tell us we voted the wrong way. They were seeking ways to make us vote again. They had EU leaders coming over trying to determine why we voted no. I feel that was to determine the best way to manipulate us to vote yes.
For me it's now a matter of principle. They have completely not listened to what the Irish people have said. It astounds me that opinion poles are heading for a yes! We are not being respected or listened to. We should vote no on this principle alone.
It's not a vote on Jobs, not a vote on EU membership and it is not a vote on the economy. Don't be frightened into changing your vote.
At this stage I really don't care what the legislation does. The fact that the majority voted no, but the elite want it through, is the sole reason we're being made vote again.
The government must go. Vote No!

While I agree that it's not a vote on jobs, EU membership, etc., I'm not sure I understand what you mean about the bold bit. I know the irish people said no, but what did they say no to? About what in the treaty, exactly? I don't trust politicians, of any shade or creed, any more than anyone else does. But should people say no just for the sake of saying no? Also I believe the government can only be ousted at a general election. How will voting no get rid of them? Just by forcing them into an election? Is there a guarantee that that would happen? And what then? Virtually every party is hankering for a yes.

saol alainn

willow_d_whisp wrote: »

...........
Was reading in the paper today that the Labour T.D. Jan O Sullivan had a major reaction to what happened to the DELL jobs in Limerick. Seemingly the E.U. helped relocate the DELL jobs to Lodz Poland (E.U. gave 54.5 million of a grant to aid this), whereas the E.U. gave 14.8 million euro so that all the Irish DELL workers who were laid off would be 'retrained'. I think the 15 million won't last long in terms of re-training the Irish worker - there's little chance of new employment. Thought that quite strange.

Yes, I think it strange, too. I don't know of any other instance where the EU helped finance the relocation of a private company, or for re-training purposes. Did the Waterford crystal people, among thousands of others, get anything? I also thought it was illegal for a government to help, financially, any private company, so why should it be OK for the EU? Isn't it breaking its own rules? The reason it gave "..because Lodz has exceptionally high unemployment" (sic) is ridiculous. Where's the logic in that? They're just shifting unemployment elsewhere.

Martin 2

saol alainn wrote: »

Originally Posted by willow_d_whisp
...........
Was reading in the paper today that the Labour T.D. Jan O Sullivan had a major reaction to what happened to the DELL jobs in Limerick. Seemingly the E.U. helped relocate the DELL jobs to Lodz Poland (E.U. gave 54.5 million of a grant to aid this), whereas the E.U. gave 14.8 million euro so that all the Irish DELL workers who were laid off would be 'retrained'. I think the 15 million won't last long in terms of re-training the Irish worker - there's little chance of new employment. Thought that quite strange.

Yes, I think it strange, too. I don't know of any other instance where the EU helped finance the relocation of a private company, or for re-training purposes. Did the Waterford crystal people, among thousands of others, get anything? I also thought it was illegal for a government to help, financially, any private company, so why should it be OK for the EU? Isn't it breaking its own rules? The reason it gave "..because Lodz has exceptionally high unemployment" (sic) is ridiculous. Where's the logic in that? They're just shifting unemployment elsewhere.

Saol Alainn, willow_d_whisp’s post is completely wrong, the EU did not give Dell €54.5 million to help relocate to Poland, see link , in fact all they did was to allow the Polish government to give a €54 million grant to Dell, so the EU has given the ex Irish Dell workers €14.8million and nothing to the Polish operation. The Irish government has grant aided the establishment of similar FDI projects in Ireland.

.

passive

http://www.jasonomahony.ie/The_Improved_Spoofers_Guide_To_The_Lisbon_Treaty.pdf

Voila... Read it, consider it, decide whether it makes more sense to you than some of the insane ramblings above and lies on posters.

saol alainn

Martin 2 wrote: »

Saol Alainn, willow_d_whisp’s post is completely wrong, the EU did not give Dell €54.5 million to help relocate to Poland, see link , in fact all they did was to allow the Polish government to give a €54 million grant to Dell, so the EU has given the ex Irish Dell workers €14.8million and nothing to the Polish operation. The Irish government has grant aided the establishment of similar FDI projects in Ireland.

.

Thanks, Martin. Indeed, I too got it wrong when I heard the news.

OldJay

chachabinx wrote: »

Hey I voted no the last time because I didn't agree with the Lisbon Treaty at the time. I can't even remember now why I voted no but I plan to vote no again because I don't think my vote should change because we ran into a bit of trouble.

You voted against the Treaty last time around, don't actually know why and will do the same this time around because you still don't know why and think this 'view' should remain unchanged?

ei.sdraob

Justind wrote: »

You voted against the Treaty last time around, don't actually know why and will do the same this time around because you still don't know why and think this 'view' should remain unchanged?

its amazing aint it?

with so much impartial information being available (see sig)

some people still try to claim ignorance

no wonder this country is in so much ****, some people dont care, and when their ignorance backfires they scream murder


/

IrelandSpirit

Hmmm, I understand your frustration there, but I’m not convinced that all this information being bantered about is all that impartial. The fact that any one of us can arrive at such diametrically opposed opinions, over the contents of the same document, sets alarms off in my mind.

It must be remembered that it is the treaty itself we’re being asked to vote on, not someone else’s analysis of it, or our own perhaps wishful interpretations. It is in essence a contract. And a contract needs to be clear, and absent of ambiguity for there to be full disclosure. It has to be straightforward, in other words, it can’t be open to interpretation or you simply don’t know what you’re signing up for.

People do not normally sign contracts that they’re suspicious about, that they’ve not fully understood, or that are ambiguous and open to interpretation. Most people don’t unless they’re mentally impaired, or they’re in some other way compromised and/or coerced.

Think about it. Forget for a moment everything we’ve heard about the Lisbon Treaty, forget everything we ‘think’ we know and imagine a salesman knocks on your door, and says,

“I have a great contract for you; sign this, and it’ll change your life for the better. Immeasurably!”

“Feck off, not interested.”

“Wait!” He hands you a document, it’s massive, a 349 page tome, running on for 67,850 words – and grins, “Just sign here.”

“Hmmm, European Constitution? I dunno, haven’t we already got our own?”

“This one’s far superior to ours.”

“What’s it say, exactly?”

He smiles, “Nothing to worry about, the government are all in favour it. Just sign it.”

“And did they… read it?” you ask, overwhelmed by the sheer complexity of the text.

He flashes you an awkward sideways squint, “Eh-hem, well, no, they didn’t actually read it, but that’s okay – it’s just a document that’ll give you HUGE benefits and privileges, like blah, blah, blah…”

Of course, you wouldn’t sign it in a fit! Perhaps you’d take the document to a solicitor to decipher what it really says, but most of us would just throw the thing away, or use it to light the fire. But let’s be fair; give the nice salesman a chance.

You take his document to be looked at by somebody legally versed, and you immediately discover that the language the salesman used looks like English, but the meanings are different. Simple words like ‘must’ actually means ‘may’, as in an offer. To ‘register’ means to give away all title, all ownership of a thing to another. To ‘apply’ means ‘to beg’. A ‘person’ apparently isn’t a person, as in a human being, but a ‘corporation’, a legal fiction, with benefits and privileges which can be revoked at the drop of a hat –

“Why’s it written like that? I barely understand a word!”

Your solicitor will perhaps shoot you a wry smile, “It’s written in Legalese, and it takes years to learn it.”

“But, is the contract any good?” you ask.

“Only one way to find out,” he shrugs, “My legal team will need several months to check and cross-reference everything. Law is a very tricky business…”

No doubt, welcome to the Rabbit Hole, you’ve just taken the first step into the murky world of commerce. And several months later you receive apparently conflicting advice:
The contract is in your favour, you can apply for vast benefits and privileges.
But sign it, and you’ll waive all your inalienable rights.
What would you do?

I know that’s too oversimplified and not the best example, given the fact we sign away our rights for ‘privileges’ in most aspects of our lives anyway, but hopefully you get the picture. If a contract suffers from any 'textual interpretation' problems, or you’re in any way unsure, it’s perfectly OK to decline. It’s the wise thing to do. No buts, or maybes – when in doubt, do nought. The onus is not on you to do anything at all.

And if the salesman returns to your door a second time, with yet another one of his contracts,

“Again? Didn’t I tell ya the last time, NO!”

“I know,” he grins, “But the last contract was just too complicated. I’ve another one for you! It’s different this time.”

You pause, study his earnest smile, “Different, how different?”

“I’ve revised it; I’ve even made it shorter and easier for you to understand. Look.”

He hands you another tome, you look. Lisbon Treaty. And true enough, this new ‘revised’ version appears a little smaller, 287 pages this time, and yet consists of 76,250 words? Evidently, he’s merely reduced the font size of the text, to accommodate the higher word count on a lower page count.

“Sign it,” he says, “Go on, trust me. This new treaty is even better than the last! I promise…”

I reckon that’s basically what most of us are going on, ‘promises’, and yeah, agreed, a certain amount of fear-mongering from both sides.

Anyway, just something to think about…

eightyfish

willow_d_whisp wrote: »

Well if we don't know what's in it - it's probably because it's not being explained properly. Undoubtedly there are reasons for not explaining the treaty in simple terms. Better off to vote 'no' to keep the status quo if you don't know what is in the treaty.

Are you serious? RTE explained it, the refferendum comission explained it, all impartially. There have been dozens of debates on the radio, on TV, in newspapers. How many options do you want for finding out about the treaty? Opposing progress because of ignorance is inexcusable. Inform yourself then vote. It's not very difficult.

ei.sdraob

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

Hmmm, I understand your frustration there, but I’m not convinced that all this information being bantered about is all that impartial.

are you seriously claiming that Referendum Commision's website is not impartial :eek:

sigh

sceptre

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

“Wait!” He hands you a document, it’s massive, a 349 page tome, running on for 67,850 words – and grins, “Just sign here.”

I know I have the advantage of being able to read quicker than the average but then I had a few years to read it.

So did you.

You still have six days with the document in your hand and a wealth of explanatory material before the grinning polling station hopes that you'll turn up and say yes or no.

Obviously I have less sympathy than I might for anyone who can't read something half the size of the last Harry Potter book in two years or more or bother to even read the explanatory literature on either side or in the middle but then I'll freely admit to having high hopes for the Irish-educated voters.

batman2000

chachabinx wrote: »

Hey I voted no the last time because I didn't agree with the Lisbon Treaty at the time. I can't even remember now why I voted no but I plan to vote no again because I don't think my vote should change because we ran into a bit of trouble.

I am an intelligent person but I know nothing about politics. And the reason for this? I SIMPLY DON'T CARE! When Im watchin it on TV my brain litterally switches off. Is anybody else like this?

Will someone please explain to me in english what is going on? And am I right to vote no. I might not vote at all but thats a wasted vote & I don't believe in that either...

chachabinx, I'm reading your post and you contradict yourself. You didn't agree with the treaty and voted no. Yet you say you cant even remeber why you voted no.

Yet your an 'intelligent' person but know nothing about politics and don't seem to want acquire a base knowledge politics. IF you want to vote you should inform yourself. As an 'intelligent' person there is plently of material out there to read. I'm not talking about all 300 odd pages. There are simplified versions.

Then you say "I plan to vote no again". The fact is the referendum is slightly different because of the EU assurances given to Ireland. So it's not the same.

And all this "...The Government must go vote No...." it's crap. Are people that naive to think that because the Irish vote no that the Government is going to leave cabinet,rubbish. This vote is nothing to do with the Government and all about how the EU which Ireland is a part of, is to work in the future.

I am not affliated with any campaign.

IrelandSpirit

sceptre wrote: »

I know I have the advantage of being able to read quicker than the average but then I had a few years to read it.

So did you.

You still have six days with the document in your hand and a wealth of explanatory material before the grinning polling station hopes that you'll turn up and say yes or no.

Obviously I have less sympathy than I might for anyone who can't read something half the size of the last Harry Potter book in two years or more or bother to even read the explanatory literature on either side or in the middle but then I'll freely admit to having high hopes for the Irish-educated voters.

Clearly there is a profound and irreconcilable difference between the Lisbon Treaty and a Harry Potter novel - but that aside, I have far more confidence in the people of this country to make informed choices than just ‘the Irish-educated’, as you say. Not sure what you mean by that… Being a fast reader doesn’t necessarily make one person more intelligent than the next.

Anyway, I’ll be voting ‘no’ again, unless I’m convinced otherwise in the next few days. Which I might… It might all change for me if it’s true that Tony Blair is tipped to become European President. Is he? I hope so, ‘cos he’ll make a good supreme commander, and if he grows a little moustache, all the better, powerful, a credit to us all. (Just messing)

IrelandSpirit

ei.sdraob wrote: »

are you seriously claiming that Referendum Commision's website is not impartial :eek:

sigh

I’m not claiming anything, you are. All I’m saying is that I’m not convinced.

ei.sdraob

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

Clearly there is a profound and irreconcilable difference between the Lisbon Treaty and a Harry Potter novel - but that aside, I have far more confidence in the people of this country to make informed choices than just ‘the Irish-educated’, as you say. Not sure what you mean by that… Being a fast reader doesn’t necessarily make one person more intelligent than the next.

Anyway, I’ll be voting ‘no’ again, unless I’m convinced otherwise in the next few days. Which I might… It might all change for me if it’s true that Tony Blair is tipped to become European President. Is he? I hope so, ‘cos he’ll make a good supreme commander, and if he grows a little moustache, all the better, powerful, a credit to us all. (Just messing)

wallowing in your own ignorance

and people wonder why the likes of Dell are leaving Ireland

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

I’m not claiming anything, you are. All I’m saying is that I’m not convinced.

no wonder so

considering you have shown in this thread to have a very closed mind, and whats worse are proud of it


/

IrelandSpirit

ei.sdraob wrote: »

wallowing in your own ignorance

and people wonder why the likes of Dell are leaving Ireland




no wonder so

considering you have shown in this thread to have a very closed mind, and whats worse are proud of it


/

Is that the best you can do? Lol! Jeez… if yer gonna insult me, at least do so. That comment says more about you than me, mate.

ei.sdraob

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

Is that the best you can do? Lol! Jeez… if yer gonna insult me, at least do so. That comment says more about you than me, mate.

Im not the one here being proud of keeping oneself in the dark

its hard to respect someone who has no respect for oneself

anyways its your choice, but dont be forcing your beliefs which are based on ignorance and self disrespect on others by posting here


/

sceptre

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

Clearly there is a profound and irreconcilable difference between the Lisbon Treaty and a Harry Potter novel

There is. I rather hope that both can be read in under two years though by anyone, or at least the simpler explanatory documents. There are plenty of them from both sides. And from the middle, even if you suspect that they're on one side.

Either way, no-one with the ability to read can have any excuse for not knowing enough. There's plenty of information out there if people look just beyond the silly posters. And people still have six days available to read any of these things, if they didn't bother in the previous 600.

- but that aside, I have far more confidence in the people of this country to make informed choices than just ‘the Irish-educated’, as you say.

I'm just hoping that they gave things the few minutes to read. Confidence doesn't enter into it.

It might all change for me if it’s true that Tony Blair is tipped to become European President. Is he? I hope so, ‘cos he’ll make a good supreme commander, and if he grows a little moustache, all the better, powerful, a credit to us all. (Just messing)

I'm being blunt but that's just stupid, even as comedy.

IrelandSpirit

sceptre wrote: »

There is. I rather hope that both can be read in under two years though by anyone, or at least the simpler explanatory documents. There are plenty of them from both sides. And from the middle, even if you suspect that they're on one side.

Either way, no-one with the ability to read can have any excuse for not knowing enough. There's plenty of information out there if people look just beyond the silly posters. And people still have six days available to read any of these things, if they didn't bother in the previous 600.


I'm just hoping that they gave things the few minutes to read. Confidence doesn't enter into it.


I'm being blunt but that's just stupid, even as comedy.

Agreed, we should take more time to really look into these things. I didn’t vote for the last Treaty/Constitution mainly because I didn’t really know what it was. And also the fact that nobody in government on the ‘yes side’ had even read the thing. That didn’t help either! Lol!

Like most of us perhaps, this time I’ve tried to inform myself as much as possible, I’ve read the information from both the ‘yes’ and ‘no’ campaigns, listened to debates, waded through websites and so on, but in regards the Treaty itself, the actual document we’re being asked to vote on, I recognise my limitations – I do not know what it actually means, I might ‘think’ I do (and I think I do this time), but I am not proficient in legalese, I am not legally trained and unless we know exactly what we’re getting into, the bottom line is we only have other people’s promises and opinions to go by. People who more often than not have a vested interest in securing our votes.

And promises can be broken...


Sorry if my Tony Blair joke upset you; and I apologise all Tony Blair fans out there too.

It’s apparently not far off the truth though:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/feb/02/world.politics

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/geraldwarner/100003428/hail-tony-blair-president-of-europe-by-the-grace-of-gordon/

IrelandSpirit

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Im not the one here being proud of keeping oneself in the dark

its hard to respect someone who has no respect for oneself

anyways its your choice, but dont be forcing your beliefs which are based on ignorance and self disrespect on others by posting here


/

Relax, why are you feeling so threatened? It's impossible to force beliefs on others with the written word, on a thread? All we can do here is express our opinions, take it or leave it.

BTW. I'm not looking for your respect, you're sadly mistaken if you think that.

ei.sdraob

IrelandSpirit wrote: »

Relax, why are you feeling so threatened? It's impossible to force beliefs on others with the written word, on a thread? All we can do here is express our opinions, take it or leave it.

BTW. I'm not looking for your respect, you're sadly mistaken if you think that.

you are asking people to vote in a certain manner while not showing respect for yourself

never mind showing respect to the people you are addressing

the NO side go over and over talking about respect

but being proud of own ignorance while preaching to other people

is quite simply wrong


you have shown no respect for yourself and instead of helping people read up on the treaty you suggest that its too long and there isnt enough time!

rubbish I and others say, theres plenty of time and plenty of unbaisaded information

one just has to follow the link in my sig to REFCOMs site

to read up various condensed version of the treaty

heres me trying to get people to read the damn thing and come up with own conclusions

while you are preaching that its ok to be dumb and ignorance is bliss


/

IrelandSpirit

ei.sdraob wrote: »

you are asking people to vote in a certain manner while not showing respect for yourself

never mind showing respect to the people you are addressing

the NO side go over and over talking about respect

but being proud of own ignorance while preaching to other people

is quite simply wrong


you have shown no respect for yourself and instead of helping people read up on the treaty you suggest that its too long and there isnt enough time!

rubbish I and others say, theres plenty of time and plenty of unbaisaded information

one just has to follow the link in my sig to REFCOMs site

to read up various condensed version of the treaty

heres me trying to get people to read the damn thing and come up with own conclusions

while you are preaching that its ok to be dumb and ignorance is bliss


/

With all due respect, I suggest you back this up using evidence of what I did say, else at best you are merely sounding off base insults at me, and sounding like a complete idiot to boot.
And what’s worse, you are doing yourself no favours if you want to get more ‘yes’ voters onside. This is no way to conduct yourself if you want to be respected and taken seriously.