O'Leary admits on TV3 that Ryanairs Yes campaign is all about getting Aer Lingus

Scofflaw

AARRRGH wrote: »

Article 48 of the Lisbon treaty says the treaty can change after we've voted it in: http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-european-union-and-comments/title-6-final-provisions/135-article-48.html

Article 48 specifically states that the simplified revision procedure cannot give the EU new competences. Direct taxation would be a new competence. Therefore, competence over direct taxation cannot be given to the EU by virtue of the simplified revision procedure.

It's not complicated.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Sam Vimes

AARRRGH wrote: »

Article 48 of the Lisbon treaty says the treaty can change after we've voted it in: http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-european-union-and-comments/title-6-final-provisions/135-article-48.html

"The decision referred to in the second subparagraph shall not increase the competences conferred on the Union in the Treaties."

No it doesn't. Taking control of our taxes would be increasing the competence of the union

K-9

AARRRGH wrote: »

The smaller countries don't make up the majority of the EU.

France, Germany, Spain, Italy and the UK make up about 65% of the EU's population.

They do. The majority are under 11/12 Million and is why in addition to the population weighting, each state has a vote equal to each other.

Also, they do not meet 65%. Throw in Poland as well.

Sam Vimes

heyjude wrote: »

Would they be the same economists that failed to see the property crash, the US sub-prime crisis or the massive global downturn coming ? If so, then their credibility would seem to be at an all time low and their advice on the future, based on their recent forecasts, open to question.

Of course it's open to question, there's only so much you can say about the future without a crystal ball but I'll still take their advice over someone who's trying to play down the possibility because they have some other reason for wanting a no vote

P. Breathnach

AARRRGH wrote: »

History would tell us it is what's happening.

I know we like to believe we live in enlightened times, but if you pick up any history book you will see both those countries have been trying to take over Europe for centuries.

I don't see why now should be any different. And the way Europe is going (e.g. France/Germany having more voting power because of their large populations) it would appear nothing has changed.

An appeal to the lessons of history does not serve your case very well. The single biggest driver of the project that has evolved into the EU is a series of wars in Europe in which France and Germany were opposed to one another, and the the wish to create structures and relationships that would make for peace between European powers.

AARRRGH

Sam Vimes wrote: »

On a separate note, it's posts like that that will damage Ireland's economic prospects in the future. People keep saying that we won't be kicked out of the EU if we vote no etc but those posts show a fundamental mistrust of the EU, you pretty much think that it's an attempt by France and Germany to achieve domination through stealth and trickery. If businesses get the idea that your view is widespread in Ireland it wouldn't be much of a stretch to believe that Ireland might start distancing itself from the EU; not that we'll be kicked out but that we'll start to cut back on the relationship ourselves. And to a business that wants to locate in an EU country for all the advantages that brings, they have the choice of cheaper countries who are not so euro sceptic.

I don't mean to repeat myself, but history show us that we would be stupid to trust a few people with a lot of power.

Sure you just have to look to our own government - the people who are supposed to have our best interests at heart - to see how willing they are to screw us over. If our own local government doesn't give a damn about what's best for the country, how do you think German or French politicians feel?

I am a fan of the EU, but one of limited power.

Sam Vimes wrote:

"The decision referred to in the second subparagraph shall not increase the competences conferred on the Union in the Treaties."

No it doesn't. Taking control of our taxes would be increasing the competence of the union

I hope you're right, but won't be surprised when it turns out you're wrong.

AARRRGH

P. Breathnach wrote: »

An appeal to the lessons of history does not serve your case very well. The single biggest driver of the project that has evolved into the EU is a series of wars in Europe in which France and Germany were opposed to one another, and the the wish to create structures and relationships that would make for peace between European powers.

That was one of the original reasons for the EU, but I do not believe it is anything other than a minor advantage nowadays.

Dinner

AARRRGH wrote: »

I hope you're right, but won't be surprised when it turns out you're wrong.

No, he is right. That is the text of the treaty. You cannot twist "The decision referred to in the second subparagraph shall not increase the competences conferred on the Union in the Treaties." to mean the opposite.

Article 48 does not give the EU the ability to pass anything they want. It just doesn't.

smokingman

AARRRGH wrote: »

I hope you're right, but won't be surprised when it turns out you're wrong.

I know Aliens and Predators don't exist but I won't be surprised when they attack your house, kill all your pets and wipe this country off the face of the planet....won't be surprised at all.

Rb

Uninformed, selective quoting from a No voter? No way?

Sam Vimes

AARRRGH wrote: »

I don't mean to repeat myself, but history show us that we would be stupid to trust a few people with a lot of power.

I am a fan of the EU, but one of limited power.

And that power is limited, in fact Lisbon much more clearly defines exactly what the have competence over and more importantly what they don't. The treaty also transfers power away from the unelected commission to the directly elected parliament, to the national parliaments and to the people themselves through the citizen's initiative. And as I said earlier, they have a clause in QMV specifically to prevent a few large countries blocking the will of lots of smaller ones. The EU is doing the opposite of what you would expect if they were trying to centralise power.

And regardless of whether you think we'd be stupid to trust them or not, it will give an impression of Euro scepticism which will effect foreign investment.

AARRRGH wrote: »

I hope you're right, but won't be surprised when it turns out you're wrong.

I've shown you the text saying that the procedure can't be used to increase the competences of the union.

Here's the text from the article itself saying the decisions have to be unanimous and in line with our constitutional requirements:

That decision shall not enter into force until it is approved by the Member States in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements.

Here's the guarantee:

SECTION B: TAXATION wrote:

Nothing in the Treaty of Lisbon makes any change of any kind, for any Member State, to the extent or operation of the competence of the European Union in relation to taxation.

What more do you want?

P. Breathnach

AARRRGH wrote: »

That was one of the original reasons for the EU, but I do not believe it is anything other than a minor advantage nowadays.

I see. You invite us to learn from history. When history tells a story other than the one you favour, then there is nothing to learn from it.

Fighting Irish

tonycascarino wrote: »

http://www.tv3.ie/shows.php?request=businessmatters&tv3_preview=&video=14169

Interview starts 18 minutes in :

To take an exact quote at 20minutes and 8 secs :

"Look my campaign for a Yes vote...aah..one of the reasons that I am campaigning for a Yes vote is that our government is incompetent, yet I need to persude them to sell me Aer Lingus"

Michael has really shot himself in the foot here. This is just more proof that business organisations only want a Yes out self-interest.;)

Why else would a business care?

O'Leary is the man

AARRRGH

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I see. You invite us to learn from history. When history tells a story other than the one you favour, then there is nothing to learn from it.

No, that's not what I said. Not sure how you came to that conclusion.

Sam Vimes wrote:

The EU is doing the opposite of what you would expect if they were trying to centralise power.

We shall see.

Toiletroll

Vote NO to Lisbon...

The only jobs from a yes vote is cowans.

The only wealth will be given to corporate interests. They have shown us how they use the money we give to them. THEY use it to manipulate us.

Imagine, changing the constitution of your own country for your own selfish corporate interests. ABSOLUTE SHAM.

At least ganly might benifit from a NO vote externally, it for sure will be be through sacrifice of our constitution.

Anyone who is voting generation yes, hang your heads in shame.

Dave!

Can the thread title be edited by a mod or something? I mean it's blatantly untrue, just a pure lie.

AARRRGH your point on direct taxation has been refuted, could you not just acknowledge that and reconsider your position rather than post cryptic remarks like "i hope you're right but won't be surprised when it turns out you're wrong" and "we shall see"?

dvpower

AARRRGH wrote: »

Don't be so naive.

EVERYONE who wants a yes or no vote has a vested interest.

You're only fooling yourself if you think our politicians want us to vote yes because it's good for our country.

Declan Ganley is the same as everyone else.

What's your vested interest?

Rb

Toiletroll wrote: »

Vote NO to Lisbon...

The only jobs from a yes vote is cowans.

The only wealth will be given to corporate interests. They have shown us how they use the money we give to them. THEY use it to manipulate us.

Imagine, changing the constitution of your own country for your own selfish corporate interests. ABSOLUTE SHAM.

At least ganly might benifit from a NO vote externally, it for sure will be be through sacrifice of our constitution.

Anyone who is voting generation yes, hang your heads in shame.

Please do explain how they use it to manipulate us.

I'll only hang my head in shame if a No vote is returned this time around. What a tragic day for Ireland that could be.

Sam Vimes

Toiletroll wrote: »

Vote NO to Lisbon...

The only jobs from a yes vote is cowans.

The only wealth will be given to corporate interests. They have shown us how they use the money we give to them. THEY use it to manipulate us.

And of course the hundreds of thousands of people who work for those corporations and the economy in general will not benefit in any way from that extra wealth :rolleyes:

Rb

Sam Vimes wrote: »

And of course the hundreds of thousands of people who work for those corporations and the economy in general will not benefit in any way from that extra wealth :rolleyes:

It's as though everyone has suddenly forgotten about the obscene amounts of money builders and those in construction were making not so long ago, how some made so much money they could start their own businesses and continue to prosper until the crash, how almost every Irish person could get a "good" job because there were so many available that their recruiting standards were lower than they perhaps should have been etc.

You'd swear we've spent the last decade or so being bullied and mistreated by big business. I know some people are bitter and are hurting over what has happened recently, but christ let's not forget how good we had it until recently and how good we will have it again so long as we continue to progress.

AARRRGH

Dave! wrote: »

AARRRGH your point on direct taxation has been refuted, could you not just acknowledge that and reconsider your position rather than post cryptic remarks like "i hope you're right but won't be surprised when it turns out you're wrong" and "we shall see"?

I believe the direction the EU is headed in means it's only a matter of time before our taxes are harmonised.

I would be absolutely amazed if in 100 years we still control our corporation tax rate.

Most people not care about Ireland in 100 years time, but I do.

So I believe stopping the EU becoming all powerful is the right thing to do.

We are, after all, a tiny crappy island at the edge of Europe.

dvpower wrote: »

What's your vested interest?

I am not pushing a yes or no vote. I simply intend on voting no.

Dinner

AARRRGH wrote: »

I believe the direction the EU is headed in means it's only a matter of time before our taxes are harmonised.

I would be absolutely amazed if in 100 years we still control our corporation tax rate.

Most people not care about Ireland in 100 years time, but I do.

So I believe stopping the EU becoming all powerful is the right thing to do.

We are, after all, a tiny crappy island at the edge of Europe.

So are you or aren't you acknowledging that Lisbon has no effect on our direct tax such as Corporation tax?

AARRRGH

Rb wrote: »

It's as though everyone has suddenly forgotten about the obscene amounts of money builders and those in construction were making not so long ago, how some made so much money they could start their own businesses and continue to prosper until the crash, how almost every Irish person could get a "good" job because there were so many available that their recruiting standards were lower than they perhaps should have been etc.

You'd swear we've spent the last decade or so being bullied and mistreated by big business. I know some people are bitter and are hurting over what has happened recently, but christ let's not forget how good we had it until recently and how good we will have it again so long as we continue to progress.

The last 10 years was a credit binge.

It had little practically nothing to do with progress.

Our entire economy was based around deluded people taking out huge loans to buy overpriced houses from each other.

Ireland would be a lot better off if the last 10 years didn't happen.

AARRRGH

Dinner wrote: »

So are you or aren't you acknowledging that Lisbon has no effect on our direct tax such as Corporation tax?

I have not read the entire treaty so I cannot say yes or no, but I do think the treaty is part of a long process which is about making the EU have more say over our affairs.

We all know it's only a matter of time before we have the Rome treaty or whatever.

Personally I think we'd be better off taking a position like the UK, where we keep our own currency and stay a bit more independent from the EU.

meglome

AARRRGH wrote: »

I believe the direction the EU is headed in means it's only a matter of time before our taxes are harmonised.

I would be absolutely amazed if in 100 years we still control our corporation tax rate.

Most people not care about Ireland in 100 years time, but I do.

I heard the sky is gonna fall in a hundred years time, only a matter of time really.

Dinner

AARRRGH wrote: »

I have not read the entire treaty so I cannot say yes or no, but I do think the treaty is part of a long process which is about making the EU have more say over our affairs.

We all know it's only a matter of time before we have the Rome treaty or whatever.

Personally I think we'd be better off taking a position like the UK, where we keep our own currency and stay a bit more independent from the EU.

So despite the fact that your assertion that Article 48 would allow the EU to change our direct taxation was proven to be false, you refuse to accept this and instead move the goalposts and act like there could be another article that will allow this.

I wish I could say that I'm surprised but this sort of thing happens all the time.

K-9

Dinner wrote: »

So despite the fact that your assertion that Article 48 would allow the EU to change our direct taxation was proven to be false, you refuse to accept this and instead move the goalposts and act like there could be another article that will allow this.

I wish I could say that I'm surprised but this sort of thing happens all the time.

Maybe the Irish Taxation Institute might reassure him:
http://www.tax-news.com/asp/story/Irish_Accounting_Profession_Urges_Yes_On_Lisbon_xxxx38927.html

Then again, they said the same thing last time and it still will not die.

AARRRGH

Dinner wrote: »

So despite the fact that your assertion that Article 48 would allow the EU to change our direct taxation was proven to be false, you refuse to accept this and instead move the goalposts and act like there could be another article that will allow this.

If some country wants to change something in the Lisbon treaty (using article 48), will we get to vote whether or not we want that change, or will our government decide for us?

Sam Vimes

AARRRGH wrote: »

I have not read the entire treaty so I cannot say yes or no, but I do think the treaty is part of a long process which is about making the EU have more say over our affairs.

Do you have some issue with the proof you have been provided that it doesn't?

AARRRGH wrote: »

We all know it's only a matter of time before we have the Rome treaty or whatever.

We already had the treaty of Rome :P

PopeBuckfastXVI

AARRRGH wrote: »

If some country wants to change something in the Lisbon treaty (using article 48), will we get to vote whether or not we want that change, or will our government decide for us?

We will get to vote on anything that increases the competence of the European Union, be that amendment or treaty.