Ireland would join to this?

claudiog

EU accounts about five hundred million of people, who had a say about the Treaty? Very few.
This simple reason should induce who instead have the opportunity to have a say, what the EU actually is. It is not merely a matter of EU institutions, since such institutions are made by the state's politicians, and in EU there are too much states that have no respect and enough consideration of the democracy.
Should the Ireland join to these un-democratic states?

I can post here the worst example of this, the Italy. There the prime minister is the owner of the three major private media in the country, he also hold many newspaper, and as prime minister have control over the three public tv channels. Recently he also launched a tv in Tunisia, in which he indirecly hold about 70% and Mr. Gaddafi about 30% (recall you nothing about the recent friendship with Lybia?). He was involved in several scandals, and many sais that he's suspected to be somewhat involved in mafia, however he protected himself with an artificial immunity enforced by law (approved with his parliamentary majority).
All parties are at various level involved in corruption and their interest are in conflict with their institutional mandate, so no one think to seriously oppose to the government. Next year is time for the regional election, but despite the statutary regional rules in which population should nominate their representative, they are instead nominated by the parties that sit around the central government, and the election rules are subject to change just few days before the election, local parties cannot gain space in the information media, and are required to collect subsciption to be allowed to compete while the parties that sit in the central parliament are not. The subscription are subject to inspection by the Carabinieri (a military police) "to verify the actuality of the will of the signer" often using intimidatory, even though not violent, methods.

Ireland would associate with such countries?
Ireland would glide back to the times in which it were not free?

EU might be a wonderful thing if only would be a loose confederation, where only common market, defense, and may be money, are the glue to keep toghether the peoples of the Europe.

Taxes competition, which is proved to be the fuel for the public efficency, is increasingly smashed by the member states that are very far to be efficent, for instance the big states such as Germany, France, Italy, Spain, and the UK.

EU is going to ensemble similar to the US, where secessionist movements are dramatically growing (see Vermount, Texas, the "free county", the FSP in New Hampshire, and many others), an opressive superstate in which you are merely a gear.

Ireland would join to all that?

Scofflaw

I'm tempted to say that complaints about Italy should be made in Italy.

amused,
Scofflaw

claudiog

You are right, for now.
What about if Ireland will join in a more tight way to the EU that will be influenced by states like the Italy? (And yes, Italy were only just an example)

OldJay

claudiog wrote: »

You are right, for now.
What about if Ireland will join in a more tight way to the EU that will be influenced by states like the Italy? (And yes, Italy were only just an example)

You worry about Italy, fella. You've got enough problems there.

humanji

How do you know Ireland won't influence other countries? We're not a bunch of victims waiting to be abused.

Euro_Kraut

There's corruption in Italy:eek::eek: I refuse to believe it.

You are right OP we need to leave the EU and live in corruption free Éire instead.

StealthRolex

I'm inclined to say we already are and voting No is not going to change it.

Voting Yes however puts us in the same position as some other countries on the periphery of Europe e.g. Malta and probably sends a clear message to the powers that be in Kildare St, Brussels and Luxembourg, namely that we no longer care what the politicians do on our behalf and fully accept that the political, business and military interests of the EU as a legal political entity are more important than the interests of individual citizens.

C'est la vie - we didn't see this coming and if our politicians did they now almost unanimously appear to be of the opinion that there is nothing we can do about it. All they can do now is join the party and cry into their gravy about lost voting weights and let those politicians with larger populations behind them make the decisions on our future.

Toe the line, do what you're told, the EU wants its Constitution and and regardless of the opinions of the citizens of the member states the EU politicians will do all in their power to get the type of Treaty that gives them what they want and not what the people of Europe want.

If that means using those with influence in the media or encouraging those with ties to the media to propagate its agenda so be it.

The nature of Europe now is that Ireland alone can make decisions for the rest of the Europe populace but to paraphrase those advocating a Yes vote " "We Must Be Selfish"...
We cannot take on the concerns of the Maltese, Polish, French, Dutch, German, British citizens or anyone else with legitimate concerns or otherwise because their freely elected politicans have made the decision for them and it is none of their concern now.

We must vote for Jobs, Recovery , to Belong, because past performance is a guarantee of future performance. Investments can never go down, the EU will always give us money.

From my point of view we are part of Europe, for good or bad, better or worse, and we hold the future of 500 million people in our hands. It behooves us to listen to what those other citizens are saying and make our decision accordingly.

We have no right to be selfish about Jobs or Recovery or anything else not in the Lisbon Treaty or anything else that only exists in the imaginations of politicans. This is a European Treaty, based on the failed European Constitution, designed by politicians for politicians and big business and couched such that its true ramifications will be unknown until challenged and interpreted by lawyers and judges.

Furious-Dave

Wouldn't it be just awful if we lived in a country where the government is corrupt and perhaps receive "donations" from wealthy businessmen...oh, wait...:rolleyes:

claudiog, the reason why few people had a say about the treaty is because we all live in representative democracies, not direct democracies. Direct democracy is dangerous and simply doesn't work.

MrMatisse

Furious-Dave wrote: »

claudiog, the reason why few people had a say about the treaty is because we all live in representative democracies, not direct democracies. Direct democracy is dangerous and simply doesn't work.

I think Aristotle would have something to say about that.

StealthRolex

Furious-Dave wrote: »

Wouldn't it be just awful if we lived in a country where the government is corrupt and perhaps receive "donations" from wealthy businessmen...oh, wait...:rolleyes:

claudiog, the reason why few people had a say about the treaty is because we all live in representative democracies, not direct democracies. Direct democracy is dangerous and simply doesn't work.

Wouldn't it be nice though if we lived in a deliberative democracy rather than a recursive democracy (rhetorical?).

Furious-Dave

Really-Stressed wrote: »

I think Aristotle would have something to say about that.

Good for him. How many religious and political extremist groups do think exist in Europe? Remember that they have votes too. The referendum in Ireland has opened the door for groups like Cóir, Libertas, Sinn Féin etc all of whom have their own selfish agendas.

ei.sdraob

StealthRolex wrote: »

Wouldn't it be nice though if we lived in a deliberative democracy rather than a recursive democracy (rhetorical?).

deliberative democracy is another name for dictatorship

thankfully we are not in a dictatorship

/

OldJay

Really-Stressed wrote: »

I think Aristotle would have something to say about that.

???
Methinks you're barking up the wrong Greek philosopher.
Plato surely?

claudiog

Furious-Dave wrote: »

Wouldn't it be just awful if we lived in a country where the government is corrupt and perhaps receive "donations" from wealthy businessmen...oh, wait...:rolleyes:

Okay folk, I understand this, I'm not wholly unaware of what happens in Ireland.
But remember, as far the centre of decision is moved, as difficult is to try to change them in better.

Direct democracy is dangerous and simply doesn't work.

Are you sure? It seems in Switzerland does, very well!

StealthRolex

Furious-Dave wrote: »

Good for him. How many religious and political extremist groups do think exist in Europe? Remember that they have votes too. The referendum in Ireland has opened the door for groups like Cóir, Libertas, Sinn Féin etc all of whom have their own selfish agendas.

I think you'll find it was plain ordinary democracy and the free speech, freedom of association, freedom of assembly and many order democratic freedoms that did that.

I think you will also find that in any democracy a certain number of politicians do what is required to get elected so they can fulfill their own selfish agendas.

There is a solution to this. Cap all politicans salaries at twice the average industrial wage. This will ensure that you get dedicated, committed politicians in it for the vocation and joy of public service and not so they can line their own and their mates pockets. We might even find some intelligent ones there too.

PopeBuckfastXVI

StealthRolex wrote: »

I think you'll find it was plain ordinary democracy and the free speech, freedom of association, freedom of assembly and many order democratic freedoms that did that.

I think you will also find that in any democracy a certain number of politicians do what is required to get elected so they can fulfill their own selfish agendas.

There is a solution to this. Cap all politicans salaries at twice the average industrial wage. This will ensure that you get dedicated, committed politicians in it for the vocation and joy of public service and not so they can line their own and their mates pockets. We might even find some intelligent ones there too.

Or we could just elect better ones. Are you saying that high salaries put intelligent people off applying for jobs!?

Furious-Dave

claudiog wrote: »

Okay folk, I understand this, I'm not wholly unaware of what happens in Ireland.
But remember, as far the centre of decision is moved, as difficult is to try to change them in better.


Are you sure? It seems in Switzerland does, very well!

Ok, I stand corrected, with regard to one country. Still, look at the mess direct democracy has made in Ireland with the Lisbon referendum.

prinz

OP I think Italy has enough problems to worry about that our vote, no? The rise of fascism again for one.. I wonder how they feel about the EU hmmm.

humanji

Furious-Dave wrote: »

Ok, I stand corrected, with regard to one country. Still, look at the mess direct democracy has made in Ireland with the Lisbon referendum.

Well isnt Switzerland a representative direct democracy (or is it direct representative democracy)? So I don't think they're a true direct democracy.

Furious-Dave

StealthRolex wrote: »

I think you'll find it was plain ordinary democracy and the free speech, freedom of association, freedom of assembly and many order democratic freedoms that did that.

I think you will also find that in any democracy a certain number of politicians do what is required to get elected so they can fulfill their own selfish agendas.

There is a solution to this. Cap all politicans salaries at twice the average industrial wage. This will ensure that you get dedicated, committed politicians in it for the vocation and joy of public service and not so they can line their own and their mates pockets. We might even find some intelligent ones there too.

Sure they can speak out anytime they want, but usually most people just ignore them. However, it's clear that a lot of the electorate don't want to have to inform themselves on what they are voting for, and are looking for others to inform them. It's in these circumstances that direct democracy is dangerous. Because the groups with agendas taint the truth, or just outright lie, in order to achieve their goals.
Don't get me wrong though. I'm no fan of politicians, and certainly not the current government. And I agree with your point on a salary cap.

ei.sdraob

humanji wrote: »

Well isnt Switzerland a representative direct democracy (or is it direct representative democracy)? So I don't think they're a true direct democracy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switzerland

The 1848 federal constitution defines a system of direct democracy (sometimes called half-direct or representative direct democracy since it is aided by the more commonplace institutions of a parliamentary democracy)

The Swiss Parliament consists of two houses: the Council of States which has 46 representatives (two from each canton and one from each half-canton) who are elected under a system determined by each canton, and the National Council, which consists of 200 members who are elected under a system of proportional representation, depending on the population of each canton.

they have more direct democracy elements than ireland, but they still elect representatives

to call Switzerland either a direct only or representative only democracy is wrong
its a mixture of both (sort of like Ireland)

but then again the OP has shown lack of understanding of:

* Irish system
* Swiss system
* and his own Italian system (thats if hes not yet another incarnation of certain members from p.ie)

/

StealthRolex

ei.sdraob wrote: »

deliberative democracy is another name for dictatorship

thankfully we are not in a dictatorship

/

Maybe you should research deliberative democracy before chucking out misinformation, lies and mis truths.

There is no relationship between deliberative democracy and dictatorship and I suggest you back up your allegation and support your claim.

"Vote Yes or there will be consequences" is closer to dictatorship than it is to democracy, as is keep voting until you vote Yes.

for those that are interested in seeing just how close to dictatorship this model is here is a link to a European exercise in deliberative democracy.

http://www.tomorrowseurope.eu/

claudiog

prinz wrote: »

OP I think Italy has enough problems to worry about that our vote, no? The rise of fascism again for one.. I wonder how they feel about the EU hmmm.

Please, leave apart the "Italy matter", it was only an example!!
The core of my post was the risk of lack in democracy that, despite what the Treaty may say or not say, de-facto the EU politicians have proven to not keep much in consideration.
The same might be said for Germany. I have used Italy only cause it is the most sensational.

prinz

claudiog wrote: »

Please, leave apart the "Italy matter", it was only an example!!
The core of my post was the risk of lack in democracy that, despite what the Treaty may say or not say, de-facto the EU politicians have proven to not keep much in consideration..

Democracy is in far greater danger at home claudio from your fratelli d'italia. If you want a vote on EU treaties go campaign for it. What EU politicians have proven not to consider democracy?

ei.sdraob

StealthRolex wrote: »

Maybe you should research deliberative democracy before chucking out misinformation, lies and mis truths.

im giving the NO side a taste of your own medicine

I know well what deliberative democracy means

:pac:

claudiog

ei.sdraob wrote: »

to call Switzerland either a direct only or representative only democracy is wrong
its a mixture of both (sort of like Ireland)

Yes, this is true, Switzerland have also representative, but it's direct democracy elements are so strong, enough to say that it's not dangerous.

ei.sdraob

claudiog wrote: »

Yes, this is true, Switzerland have also representative, but it's direct democracy elements are so strong, enough to say that it's not dangerous.

Direct Democracy is dangerous when the people are asked to vote a complicated document like Lisbon (and Nice before)

and then told lies and drivel by all sorts of nut cases crawling out of the woodwork, same lies over and over, lies that have nothing to do with the said document

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Referendum

Some opposition to the referendum has arisen from its use by dictators such as Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini who, it is argued, used the plebiscite to disguise oppressive policies in a veneer of populism. Hitler's use of the plebiscite is argued as reason why, since World War II, there has been no provision in Germany for the holding of referendums at the federal level.

ask youself why your constitution prevents referendums on foreign affairs...

/

claudiog

prinz wrote: »

Democracy is in far greater danger at home claudio from your fratelli d'italia. If you want a vote on EU treaties go campaign for it. What EU politicians have proven not to consider democracy?

For the first part, agree with you (apart that the "fratelli ditalia" are not mine). To reply your second sentence, simply: Germans veted to Lisbon? French voted? Spanish voted? ....

Joyfulness of the representative democracy?

ei.sdraob

claudiog wrote: »

For the first part, agree with you (apart that the "fratelli ditalia" are not mine). To reply your second sentence, simply: Germans veted to Lisbon? French voted? Spanish voted? ....

Joyfulness of the representative democracy?

yes their elected politicians voted, that their job, and thats how democracy works in these countries

and there is no popular uprising, riots or opposition


* in France Sarcozy got elected on the premise that he will sign Lisbon btw

* In Germany referendums are illegal (see above post of mine)

* Spanish voted YES on constitution btw


/

claudiog

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Direct Democracy is dangerous when the people are asked to vote a complicated document like Lisbon (and Nice before)

and then told lies and drivel by all sorts of nut cases crawling out of the woodwork, same lies over and over, lies that have nothing to do with the said document

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Referendum
" Some opposition to the referendum has arisen from its use by dictators such as Adolf Hitler..."

ask youself why your constitution prevents referendums on foreign affairs...

/

So the reason to trash the direct democracy is cause Hitler adopted a referendum to gain power? It is not because a true free information is fundamental to the execise of the democracy (either direct or representative)?

Scofflaw

StealthRolex wrote: »

I think you'll find it was plain ordinary democracy and the free speech, freedom of association, freedom of assembly and many order democratic freedoms that did that.

I think you will also find that in any democracy a certain number of politicians do what is required to get elected so they can fulfill their own selfish agendas.

There is a solution to this. Cap all politicans salaries at twice the average industrial wage. This will ensure that you get dedicated, committed politicians in it for the vocation and joy of public service and not so they can line their own and their mates pockets. We might even find some intelligent ones there too.

I'm not sure why you think that would be the case. The possibility of feathering one's nest in politics is not simply a matter of salary, and a higher salary actually gives politicians more to lose if they are caught.

cordially,
Scofflaw

ei.sdraob

claudiog wrote: »

So the reason to trash the direct democracy is cause Hitler adopted a referendum to gain power? It is not because a true free information is fundamental to the execise of the democracy (either direct or representative)?

Your own nation was taken over by fascists thanks in part to direct democracy

Im surprised i have to give you a history lesson

claudiog wrote: »

It is not because a true free information is fundamental to the execise of the democracy (either direct or representative)?

Information is vital to any democracy you are correct,

but if you spend some time reading the posts here on this forum you would see there is a concerted effort by some in the NO campaign to ensure that people are kept in the dark so they can continue to spread lies along the lines of minimum wage, abortion, conscription, fisheries, death penalty! etc etc

some even go as far as glamorize ignorance by saying crap like
"if you dont know vote NO"

and some go even further accusing the independent and impartial Referendum Commission of bias

and yet others go of on a tangent altogether claiming that the Voting Card itself is biased :eek:

/

Stabshauptmann

Justind wrote: »

???
Methinks you're barking up the wrong Greek philosopher.
Plato surely?

You're not referring to the mob stoning Socrates are ye?

OldJay

Stabshauptmann wrote: »

You're not referring to the mob stoning Socrates are ye?

No.
Plato's definitions of democracy.

sceptre

Please.... everyone... stop mixing up the Greeks... it hurts and other people won't know that you're probably joking... they may never check it... Even Goscinny and Uderzo didn't mix up the Greeks

RepublicanEagle

I am a student in UCC,doing a BA European Development Studies & French,and as a scholar in European economics and law,and from reading the treaty,I am voting No to Lisbon,I support what the EU has done for us,but they have earned millions from our fishing grounds,and placed quotas on agricultural goods that favor the big farmers all over France and Germany,the countries responsible for drafting up the CAP and CFP.Coincidence,I think not.However if the EU was to put people before profit in their policies and Lisbon,I would vote yes.
But this is not the case,it is beaucracy and profit before the people.
The Yes campaign are advocating that the No side,is anti European.That is pure and utter tripe.I hate this governent in Ireland and their policies.Does that make me anti-Irish?I think not.The Yes people who are voting,are under the delusion that it will create jobs and bring economic recovery?Where in the Treaty does it state that?And where has the EU been within the last 12 months,where jobs are being lost left right and centre,along with the rising dole queues.Nowhere.
Remember what happened to Dell in Limerick who relocated to Poland after the Polish offered them hundreds of thousands of euro?The EU did nothing about it,nothing,because Poland is actually becoming very powerful industrially and militarily,therefore have strong political influence on the EU Commission and Council.
The reality is,the Lisbon treaty,will favor the powerful states,not the small states such as Ireland.I guarantee that any citizen with any shred of civic responsibilty and intelligence,will know that this will repeat itself,if this referendum is passed.Before you vote read this treaty,most of have not,you follow the government like cattle to the slaughter,even after what they have done to us.Shame on all of you.

Sam Vimes

RepublicanEagle wrote: »

The Yes campaign are advocating that the No side,is anti European.That is pure and utter tripe.

Where ever did they get that idea :P

Group | Accession | SEA | Maastricht | Amsterdam | Nice | Lisbon
| | | | | |
Sinn Fein | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO
Socialist Party | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO
Workers' Party | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO
Socialist Workers' Party | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO
P McKenna | - | - | NO | NO | NO | NO
Anthony Coughlan/National Platform | - | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO
COIR/YD/SPUC | - | - | NO | NO | NO | NO
PANA | - | - | - | NO | NO | NO

robindch

claudiog wrote: »

an opressive superstate in which you are merely a gear.

Better than being a crank though.

hatrickpatrick

claudiog wrote: »

EU might be a wonderful thing if only would be a loose confederation, where only common market, defense, and may be money, are the glue to keep toghether the peoples of the Europe.

Taxes competition, which is proved to be the fuel for the public efficency, is increasingly smashed by the member states that are very far to be efficent, for instance the big states such as Germany, France, Italy, Spain, and the UK.

EU is going to ensemble similar to the US, where secessionist movements are dramatically growing (see Vermount, Texas, the "free county", the FSP in New Hampshire, and many others), an opressive superstate in which you are merely a gear.

Ireland would join to all that?

This is PRECISELY my fear about Lisbon. The EU used to be a "loose confederation" of economics, but it is indeed becoming far too politically powerful.

StealthRolex

Furious-Dave wrote: »

Sure they can speak out anytime they want, but usually most people just ignore them. However, it's clear that a lot of the electorate don't want to have to inform themselves on what they are voting for, and are looking for others to inform them. It's in these circumstances that direct democracy is dangerous. Because the groups with agendas taint the truth, or just outright lie, in order to achieve their goals.
Don't get me wrong though. I'm no fan of politicians, and certainly not the current government. And I agree with your point on a salary cap.

Well, they're not armed and their "danger" can only manifest if no one opposes them with an alternative agenda or picks holes in their arguments. Indeed some would say they add colour to an otherwise bland Irish political landscape and they may even be necessary to encourage debate in an environment where the overwhelming political message is "Vote Yes or else".

The fact that outright lies exist is neither here nor there with this debate as the lies are evident on both sides - some glaringly obvious, others subtle propaganda. Occasionally blatant threats and bribery. I note that Sarkozy has not threatened Ireland this time but his form of diplomacy and democratic principles do not preclude him threatening the Czech governement with "consequences" if they fail to ratify the Treaty.

Much has been made of the Coir lie regarding minimum wages. Nothing has been made of the Coir poster explaining the reduction in Irish voting rights against the increase in German voting rights. So this must be true. Proponents when put on the spot argue that this is necessary due to the size of the expanding EU membership. Why not change the voting structure so that each soverign state has one vote? Does it matter that Ireland has a smaller population than Germany? If we're talking "representative democracy" then each MEP represents an election win regardless of how many voted. Providing Germany with more votes than Ireland simply because it has more people is a indicator that Europe is moving to a less democratic position where larger states have more power and influence than smaller states. What happens when Turkey joins with it's population?

If you really want to stop agendas such as those proposed by Coir, Libertas and SF you will have to start considering dictatorship rather that argue against a particular form of democracy.

Finally - what about the agendas of FF, FG, GP, big business, multinationals, farmers, banks and all the other groups calling for a Yes? The agendas of these organisations have been suspect for some time.

MarkK

claudiog wrote: »

It seems in Switzerland does, very well!

Women in Switzerland were not allowed to vote until 1971, because a referendum was required to allow it.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/february/7/newsid_2738000/2738475.stm

StealthRolex

Scofflaw wrote: »

I'm not sure why you think that would be the case. The possibility of feathering one's nest in politics is not simply a matter of salary, and a higher salary actually gives politicians more to lose if they are caught.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Only if they take away their pension and correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think there are many examples of former Irish politicians being caught and winding up in the poor house.

ei.sdraob

StealthRolex wrote: »

Much has been made of the Coir lie regarding minimum wages. Nothing has been made of the Coir poster explaining the reduction in Irish voting rights against the increase in German voting rights. So this must be true.

Infallible logic there :eek:

btw the voting weights has been discussed to death here

/

claudiog

Thanks HatrickPatrick, at last one who fully understood the meaning of my post!

@ei.sdraob :

Your own nation was taken over by fascists thanks in part to direct democracy

Im surprised i have to give you a history lesson

I know very well the history, don't worry for me. My nation (which is not Italy) was taken becuase people were NOT informed, for the simple reason that, at least, they in large majority don't had understanding of italian!

There are other things that should be mentioned with regard to that time, but for what I'm concerned today, this is the only useful reply that I wanna place here.

StealthRolex

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Infallible logic there :eek:

btw the voting weights has been discussed to death here

/

I had the news media, radio and tellyvisual things in mind that provide information to a wider audience than the limited readership here.

prinz

RepublicanEagle wrote: »

I am a student in UCC,doing a BA European Development Studies & French,and as a scholar in European economics and law,and from reading the treaty,I am voting No to Lisbon,I support what the EU has done for us,but they have earned millions from our fishing grounds,and placed quotas on agricultural goods that favor the big farmers all over France and Germany,the countries responsible for drafting up the CAP and CFP.

Ireland has been a net beneficiary. What you're saying is Ireland received €10 but gave back €4 so we're quits*. You may notice the farmers of many of the "big countries" are the ones destroying milk etc recently. I don't think they are being in any way favoured.

*example, not representative.

RepublicanEagle wrote: »

Coincidence,I think not.However if the EU was to put people before profit in their policies and Lisbon,I would vote yes.
But this is not the case,it is beaucracy and profit before the people.
The Yes campaign are advocating that the No side,is anti European.That is pure and utter tripe.I hate this governent in Ireland and their policies.Does that make me anti-Irish?I think not.

You may see the table above. A lot of the same people against Lisbon have never supported a European treaty. Ever. Were they all wrong? Add in Libertas who want a federal union modeled directly after the United States of Europe.. how big will Ireland's voice be then I wonder.

RepublicanEagle wrote: »

The Yes people who are voting,are under the delusion that it will create jobs and bring economic recovery?Where in the Treaty does it state that?And where has the EU been within the last 12 months,where jobs are being lost left right and centre,along with the rising dole queues.Nowhere.

Has been done to death.

RepublicanEagle wrote: »

Remember what happened to Dell in Limerick who relocated to Poland after the Polish offered them hundreds of thousands of euro?The EU did nothing about it,nothing,because Poland is actually becoming very powerful industrially and militarily,therefore have strong political influence on the EU Commission and Council.

:eek: Why do you think the likes of Dell were here in the first place?

RepublicanEagle wrote: »

The reality is,the Lisbon treaty,will favor the powerful states,not the small states such as Ireland.I guarantee that any citizen with any shred of civic responsibilty and intelligence,will know that this will repeat itself,if this referendum is passed.

What will be repeated?

RepublicanEagle wrote: »

Before you vote read this treaty,most of have not,you follow the government like cattle to the slaughter,even after what they have done to us.Shame on all of you.

:pac: I hate the way no voters assume that if you vote yes you are automatically pro-government etc etc.. the irony. For someone who, presumably you have read the Treaty.... you have no references to back up any of your post.

hatrickpatrick

claudiog wrote: »

Thanks HatrickPatrick, at last one who fully understood the meaning of my post!

Oh I think you'd find that plenty more understood it, but yes campaigners have an interesting habit of ignoring that core issue and concentrating on other issues which are "easy" to deal with.

I have yet to encounter one single yes campaigner who actually agrees that the EU shouldn't have political power over non-economic domestic policy, even though that is all we actually signed up to by joining the EU in the first place...

Sam Vimes

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I have yet to encounter one single yes campaigner who actually agrees that the EU shouldn't have political power over non-economic domestic policy, even though that is all we actually signed up to by joining the EU in the first place...

Yes it is all we signed up to in the first place because that's all the EU was at the time. It has subsequently developed and we agreed through referendum to go along with it. I see no reason why economics should be singled out as the only thing that is of any benefit when shared between nations

marco_polo

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Oh I think you'd find that plenty more understood it, but yes campaigners have an interesting habit of ignoring that core issue and concentrating on other issues which are "easy" to deal with.

I have yet to encounter one single yes campaigner who actually agrees that the EU shouldn't have political power over non-economic domestic policy, even though that is all we actually signed up to by joining the EU in the first place...

The evidence suggests otherwise Irish people have voted for increased non-economic co-operation four time already, on the SEA in 1987, Maastrict in 1992, Amsterdam in 1997 and Nice in 2002.

I strongly believe that we should be an EU member not just a member of the EEA (Which must be what you are suggesting Irish people want - as this in the only pure economic union in europe, like the League of Nations the EEC is long gone).

I think you are confusing your opinions on the EU with the opnions of the majority of Irish people on the EU.

Furious-Dave

I also believe that being part of a political as well as an economic union, like the EU, helps to keep countries in check. We all know that FF are corrupt, but isn't it better if they are being monitored by the EU in certain areas?

RepublicanEagle

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Where ever did they get that idea :P

Group | Accession | SEA | Maastricht | Amsterdam | Nice | Lisbon
| | | | | |
Sinn Fein | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO
Socialist Party | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO
Workers' Party | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO
Socialist Workers' Party | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO
P McKenna | - | - | NO | NO | NO | NO
Anthony Coughlan/National Platform | - | NO | NO | NO | NO | NO
COIR/YD/SPUC | - | - | NO | NO | NO | NO
PANA | - | - | - | NO | NO | NO

Links please.
I am amused how those statistics for P.McKenna were obtained seeming as she only recently became an independent,and was formally a Green Party member,yet you do not seem to have any stats about the Greens,Fianna Fail by anychance?