Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Getting NO Campaigners onto Boards.ie today - Joe Higgins confirmed

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Darragh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,241 ✭✭✭Darragh


    Folks

    It's been confirmed that I have a few minutes with Joe Higgins today at 2pm. Thanks for all the questions - if you have any more, please do let me know.

    Darragh


  • Options
    #33
    sceptre
    Registered Users Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    Darragh wrote: »
    Folks

    It's been confirmed that I have a few minutes with Joe Higgins today at 2pm. Thanks for all the questions - if you have any more, please do let me know.

    Darragh
    I'm sure it's been asked up the page but I'd particularly like to see/hear Joe outline his views on how Lisbon is going to negatively affect worker's rights.

    I doubt you'll have the time to be technical (and as you say you're going in as a layman) but if he mentions the Laval court case (the 1.84 minimum wage thing), it doesn't apply here as we have a minimum wage in law. I'd love to hear his views beyond that because no-one appears to have asked him. To save time (if you want to throw 30 seconds at it), the trigger phrase from the interviewer after his outline would be "But we have a minimum wage defined in law here, don't we?" He should rise well to that, it'll be something very important and perky that pretty much no-one else has bothered to ask him (it's a relevant question, trust me, I wouldn't lead you up the garden path).

    Well, that's my dream with the JH interview. Kudos on getting him regardless Darragh, he's a good and entertaining interviewee.


  • Options
    #34
    Dinner
    Registered Users Posts: 2,132 ✭✭✭Dinner


    Any chance you could ask him has he ever been in favour of an EU treaty?


  • Options
    #35
    turgon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,762 ✭✭✭turgon


    +1 to Sceptres question. Needs to be asked.


  • Options
    #36
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    sceptre wrote: »
    I'm sure it's been asked up the page but I'd particularly like to see/hear Joe outline his views on how Lisbon is going to negatively affect worker's rights.

    I doubt you'll have the time to be technical (and as you say you're going in as a layman) but if he mentions the Laval court case (the 1.84 minimum wage thing), it doesn't apply here as we have a minimum wage in law. I'd love to hear his views beyond that because no-one appears to have asked him. To save time (if you want to throw 30 seconds at it), the trigger phrase from the interviewer after his outline would be "But we have a minimum wage defined in law here, don't we?" He should rise well to that, it'll be something very important and perky that pretty much no-one else has bothered to ask him (it's a relevant question, trust me, I wouldn't lead you up the garden path).

    Well, that's my dream with the JH interview. Kudos on getting him regardless Darragh, he's a good and entertaining interviewee.

    Someone did mention that on the today FM debate and whoever it was (wasn't Joe, can't remember who) started waffling about some workers getting about €20 an hour as part of union agreements etc and foreign workers being able to undercut that. What that has to do with the Lisbon treaty is anyone's guess


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    ArmaniJeanss
    Registered Users Posts: 13,299 ✭✭✭✭ArmaniJeanss


    Does he have any second thoughts on his opposition to previous treaties, does he acknowledge that he was mistaken at the time on what he foretold would happen after Nice, Maastricht etc?


  • Options
    #38
    The Volt
    Registered Users Posts: 7,957 ✭✭✭The Volt


    http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=62338456&postcount=16

    Just a link to a previous post that I made, would love to know hid thoughts.

    Thanks Darragh


  • Options
    #39
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    Voltwad wrote: »
    http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=62338456&postcount=16

    Just a link to a previous post that I made, would love to know hid thoughts.

    Thanks Darragh

    I've heard his answer to this one: "Also, relating to his posters 'No to privitisation of health and education'. How would a ratifies treaty make this possible?"

    He says that we're losing our veto over health and education matters and that that could lead to it. Blitzkrieg seems to have dealt with it nicely though so if you're going to ask him the question ask him about the whole article please:

    http://ww.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=62246848&postcount=28

    The Council shall also act unanimously for the negotiation and conclusion of agreements:
    (a) in the field of trade in cultural and audiovisual services, where these agreements risk prejudicing
    the Union's cultural and linguistic diversity;
    (b) in the field of trade in social, education and health services, where these agreements risk seriously
    disturbing the national organisation of such services and prejudicing the responsibility of Member
    States to deliver them.


  • Options
    #40
    Soldie
    Hosted Moderators Posts: 1,713 ✭✭✭Soldie


    From what I can understand Joe objects to the treaty for two main reasons, and I'd like for him to clarify his positions on them.

    1. That the treaty doesn't do enough for workers.

    If this assumption is correct then it follows that his objection is not based what the treaty does, but based on what it does not do. If my assumption is incorrect then it follows that he feels as though there is something in the treaty that negatively affects workers. Can he clarify this?

    2. That passing the Lisbon treaty will lead to the privatisation of healthcare and education (and increase neo-liberalism).

    What specific part of the treaty increases the likelihood of healthcare and education being privatised? What is neo-liberal about the ECB meddling with interest rates in an attempt to stimulate EU economies?


  • Options
    #41
    Darragh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,241 ✭✭✭Darragh


    Really-Stressed wrote: »
    Day before the vote,

    Oh hang on maybe we should get a spokesperson for the no side too.

    Or maybe the spokesperson for the No side finally got back to me. Well, one of the over 15 I contacted.


    Thanks all for the questions. Off to do the interview now. Will try get it live as soon as I can.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    free-man
    Closed Accounts Posts: 350 ✭✭free-man


    I love the way we have the Yes side making suggestions for a No campaigner.

    Communist party of Ireland - come on!

    If that was the case I nominate Bridget Laffan, except she gets to be cross examined by a No campaigner :D


  • Options
    #43
    Red Sleeping Beauty
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,443 ✭✭✭Red Sleeping Beauty


    sceptre wrote: »
    I'm sure it's been asked up the page but I'd particularly like to see/hear Joe outline his views on how Lisbon is going to negatively affect worker's rights.

    I doubt you'll have the time to be technical (and as you say you're going in as a layman) but if he mentions the Laval court case (the 1.84 minimum wage thing), it doesn't apply here as we have a minimum wage in law. I'd love to hear his views beyond that because no-one appears to have asked him. To save time (if you want to throw 30 seconds at it), the trigger phrase from the interviewer after his outline would be "But we have a minimum wage defined in law here, don't we?" He should rise well to that, it'll be something very important and perky that pretty much no-one else has bothered to ask him (it's a relevant question, trust me, I wouldn't lead you up the garden path).

    Well, that's my dream with the JH interview. Kudos on getting him regardless Darragh, he's a good and entertaining interviewee.


    The 1.84 min wage thing is on a Coir poster and has nothing to do with Laval.
    (At least that's what I read here before.)

    Higgins doesn't speak for Coir.


  • Options
    #44
    prinz
    Registered Users Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    Alan Rouge wrote: »
    The 1.84 min wage thing is on a Coir poster and has nothing to do with Laval.
    (At least that's what I read here before.)

    Higgins doesn't speak for Coir.

    “The poster … asks a crucially important question: how can we protect the right to earn a living wage when the EU Court is repeatedly undermining that right?” said Cóir spokesman Brian Hickey....

    “€1.84 is the average of the hourly minimum wage rates set by the EU's 12 Accession countries - mostly from Eastern Europe. Their wage rates were obtained from Eurostat."

    http://www.sbpost.ie/breakingnews/ireland/eycweyojqlkf/

    That is where €1.84 comes from, it appears nowhere in the Laval ruling, however Cóir and Joe Higgins like to use the Laval case as somehow undermining our national legal minimum wage. It doesn't. Our minimum wage is set in Dublin. Brussels has no say on what our minimum wage must be. Laval has no bearing on the raising or lowering of the minimum wage. What the Laval ruling stated was the Court had no authority to force a company pay staff more than x amount, when in Sweden there is no legal minimum wage.


  • Options
    #45
    Red Sleeping Beauty
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,443 ✭✭✭Red Sleeping Beauty


    prinz wrote: »
    http://www.sbpost.ie/breakingnews/ireland/eycweyojqlkf/

    That is where €1.84 comes from, it appears nowhere in the Laval ruling, however Cóir and Joe Higgins like to use the Laval case as somehow undermining our national legal minimum wage. It doesn't. Our minimum wage is set in Dublin. Brussels has no say on what our minimum wage must be. Laval has no bearing on the raising or lowering of the minimum wage. What the Laval ruling stated was the Court had no authority to force a company pay staff more than x amount, when in Sweden there is no legal minimum wage.
    Yes exactly prinz, you've proved my point. Joe Higgins didn't make the 1.84 claim but sceptre there has festered it upon Higgins - "if he mentions the Laval court case (the 1.84 minimum wage thing)".


  • Options
    #46
    OldJay
    Closed Accounts Posts: 943 ✭✭✭OldJay


    Alan Rouge wrote: »
    Yes exactly prinz, you've proved my point. Joe Higgins didn't make the 1.84 claim but sceptre there has festered it upon Higgins - "if he mentions the Laval court case (the 1.84 minimum wage thing)".
    You will actually find that 'No Higgins' did try to argue this case when up against Pat Cox in the Primetime debates last week on RTE.


  • Options
    #47
    prinz
    Registered Users Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    Alan Rouge wrote: »
    Yes exactly prinz, you've proved my point. Joe Higgins didn't make the 1.84 claim but sceptre there has festered it upon Higgins - "if he mentions the Laval court case (the 1.84 minimum wage thing)".


    The problem with your point is that they are two sides of the same coin. Higgins argues that under Laval our minimum wage is undermined and in danger of being scrapped/significantly lowered/undercut etc.The only difference between Higgins and Cóir is that Cóir put a figure on it. Higgins argues the same basic point however.


  • Options
    #48
    RandomName2
    Registered Users Posts: 5,565 ✭✭✭RandomName2


    prinz wrote: »
    The problem with your point is that they are two sides of the same coin. Higgins argues that under Laval our minimum wage is undermined and in danger of being scrapped/significantly lowered/undercut etc.The only difference between Higgins and Cóir is that Cóir put a figure on it. Higgins argues the same basic point however.

    Specifically COIR argue this in relation to migrant workers working in Ireland being potentially paid the same as their own national wage.

    Of course, that is not the impression they give in their posters.

    To tell you the truth, I actually don't know if this extended version of their argument is correct or not.


  • Options
    #49
    PopeBuckfastXVI
    Registered Users Posts: 5,155 ✭✭✭PopeBuckfastXVI


    RandomName2 wrote: »
    To tell you the truth, I actually don't know if this extended version of their argument is correct or not.

    It's not.


  • Options
    #50
    moogester
    Registered Users Posts: 103 ✭✭moogester


    PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »
    It's not.

    You cant just say its not without proof to back up your claim.


  • Options
    #51
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    moogester wrote: »
    You cant just say its not without proof to back up your claim.

    Ireland's minimum wage is €8.65. Lisbon does not change that. Connecting the Laval case to Lisbon doesn't even make sense because it has already happened and therefore cannot be allowed to happen through voting yes to Lisbon


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    moogester
    Registered Users Posts: 103 ✭✭moogester


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    Ireland's minimum wage is €8.65. Lisbon does not change that. Connecting the Laval case to Lisbon doesn't even make sense because it has already happened and therefore cannot be allowed to happen through voting yes to Lisbon

    It sets a dangerous precedent though does it not & shows that the EU will favour big business over the workers :confused:


  • Options
    #53
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    moogester wrote: »
    It sets a dangerous precedent though does it not & shows that the EU will favour big business over the workers :confused:

    All it shows is that Sweden doesn't have a legal minimum wage and that the ECJ couldn't force them to have one. A far more dangerous precedent would be the court exceeding its powers by forcing Sweden to go against its laws


  • Options
    #54
    PopeBuckfastXVI
    Registered Users Posts: 5,155 ✭✭✭PopeBuckfastXVI


    moogester wrote: »
    It sets a dangerous precedent though does it not & shows that the EU will favour big business over the workers :confused:

    The precedent it sets is that 'big business' must respect national wage agreements.

    Yikes!


  • Options
    #55
    moogester
    Registered Users Posts: 103 ✭✭moogester


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    All it shows is that Sweden doesn't have a legal minimum wage and that the ECJ couldn't force them to have one. A far more dangerous precedent would be the court exceeding its powers by forcing Sweden to go against its laws

    Fair enough then :)


  • Options
    #56
    Darragh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,241 ✭✭✭Darragh


    These interviews (35 minutes long!) are currently uploading so as soon as I have them uploaded, I'll add them here. Bear with me please.


  • Options
    #57
    sceptre
    Registered Users Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    Alan Rouge wrote: »
    Yes exactly prinz, you've proved my point. Joe Higgins didn't make the 1.84 claim but sceptre there has festered it upon Higgins - "if he mentions the Laval court case (the 1.84 minimum wage thing)".
    Hmmm, this is why I shouldn't get simplistic perhaps even when just suggesting a question rather than making a point (oddly enough I was doing the former). Yes, it's a Cóir thing. No, Laval wasn't directly €1.84 (actually it was 109SEK if I recall correctly which I usually do, which at a guess is about €10.60). It was Cóir's extension to the Lavel ruling but that's how people generally know the argument. And Higgins argued it on Prime Time and he's been pushing Laval as a terrible precedent. And rather than spend ten minutes introducing Darragh to the intricacies, which will cause everyone to argue over it again like spoiled children who can't read (which thankfully hasn't been done at all in this unrelated thread), I gave it a simple label. Which won't matter as if he asked the question (which I haven't seen yet), he'll be spending 15 seconds max asking it rather than 2 minutes introducing it. Joe Higgins is a smart guy, he'll jump right in there and hop out an answer, which is the point.

    Bleh, really... if I peed into a bucket this week it'd be sent for analysis.


  • Options
    #58
    Darragh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,241 ✭✭✭Darragh


    Well Sceptre I did ask the question and he did answer. You'll just have to wait to find out what it is ;)

    Part 3 uploading, part 4 converting as I type :)


Advertisement