With hindsight...

Fanny Cradock

I realise that it might be a case of opening old wounds, but I wonder if perspectives on Lisbon II have changed in light of all that has gone on - and all that may yet come to pass.

I wasn't living in Ireland at the time of Lisbon II and so was mercifully spared all the arguments and making a choice that I did not feel well informed enough to make. So I don't pretend to have any special knowledge of what it all meant. fact, because I wasn't living here I have almost no knowledge of what it was all about.

However, I can't help but wonder what the impact of the Lisbon Treaty has upon us (if any) with respect to how things are today.

So my question is the following.

If for some bizarre reason the referendum was run again tomorrow for the third and final time - I dunno, one of the signatory misspelled their name or something - and lets say it is exactly the same treaty, would you vote differently?

II would be interested to know why. For example, would yes-to-no vote simply be be a protest vote against the EU? Perhaps a no-to-yes vote would be a protest against our Government? Or maybe you think that Lisbon negatively/ positively impacts our situation?

Scofflaw

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

I realise that it might be a case of opening old wounds, but I wonder if perspectives on Lisbon II have changed in light of all that has gone on - and all that may yet come to pass.

I wasn't living in Ireland at the time of Lisbon II and so was mercifully spared all the arguments and making a choice that I did not feel well informed enough to make. So I don't pretend to have any special knowledge of what it all meant. fact, because I wasn't living here I have almost no knowledge of what it was all about.

However, I can't help but wonder what the impact of the Lisbon Treaty has upon us (if any) with respect to how things are today.

So my question is the following.

If for some bizarre reason the referendum was run again tomorrow for the third and final time - I dunno, one of the signatory misspelled their name or something - and lets say it is exactly the same treaty, would you vote differently?

II would be interested to know why. For example, would yes-to-no vote simply be be a protest vote against the EU? Perhaps a no-to-yes vote would be a protest against our Government? Or maybe you think that Lisbon negatively/ positively impacts our situation?

You should find that a very large number of people will say that they would now vote No, essentially because Ireland is now in a bad place and the EU is somehow mixed up in it. A lot of people bought the Fianna Fáil spin story that the ECB made them bail the banks out, even though that was an excuse only offered two years after the event, and after a series of other excuses had worn thin. Currently, you'd have difficulty getting an EU referendum on giving everyone a free lollipop voted through.

For myself - no, nothing has changed. What you're seeing has nothing to do with Lisbon, or indeed the EU - on the contrary, what Ireland is currently on the receiving end of is exactly the kind of national self-interest that the EU largely suppresses in less troubled times.

cordially,
Scofflaw

censuspro

Lisbon had nothing to do with our financial and banking crisis. However, look at what the Yes side campaigned on during the debate:

Whilst nobody can be certain what will happen if we vote no ,we believe that from an Irish perspective alone , it is reasonable to assume the following:

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

Any of that sound familiar? That's after we voted Yes.

We were also told to vote Yes to Jobs!

RandomName2

I always stated that voting 'yes' for goodwill was both a bad reason in itself and without a firm basis in the first place (both of which proved true).

However I was hopeful at the time that Ireland would manage without a bailout, I am also of the opinion that political favours in the form of passing the lisbon legislation had little to do with the bailout being obtained as a refusal to grant it by our European partners would necessitate a very serious weakening of the euro as a viable currency.

---

As far as the other promised benefits of Lisbon:

1. Make the legislation process clearer to the public. Result: Yeah, right (!)
2. Citizens' petition to give power to the electorate. Result: Well, at least this was obviously fictional from the outset.
3. EU foreign minister (I forget the proper name) to give Europe a voice on the world stage. Result: (thankfully) did not come to pass in any real form.
4. Ireland to keep its commissioner (Lisbon II). Result: happened! :eek:
5. Ireland's commercial taxation rate to be protected through ratification. Result: More patently obvious rubbish.
6. More centralisation and streamlining of European decision processes. Result: Partially came to pass (although on-the-whole I think that this is a negative, and not a positive). Still a lot of quangos (which on the whole I think are a positive)
7. Ireland's neutrality to remain protected. Result: I don't know. Presumably we are currently contributing to the European Military R&D department, but otherwise I am unsure.
8. Focus on environmentalism. Result: (thankfully) not apparent, as yet - legislation to ban the construction of nuclear power plants voted down recently.
9. Strengthening of the EU Parliament. Result: this happened! Although it was obviously on the cards.
10. A strong guiding force in the form of the new Presidential position. Result: (thankfully) didn't come to pass; just an overpaid token position it seems (so far)

RandomName2

censuspro wrote: »

We were also told to vote Yes to Jobs!

Well, in all fairness it was the government promoting that message, so there was no need it believe it in the first place.

The whole 'Vote Yes to increase employment' and 'Vote No to prevent the minimum wage being quartered' made a mockery of the political process.

RandomName2

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

If for some bizarre reason the referendum was run again tomorrow for the third and final time - I dunno, one of the signatory misspelled their name or something - and lets say it is exactly the same treaty, would you vote differently?

II would be interested to know why. For example, would yes-to-no vote simply be be a protest vote against the EU? Perhaps a no-to-yes vote would be a protest against our Government? Or maybe you think that Lisbon negatively/ positively impacts our situation?

Sorry, I didn't answer the OP.

I don't think I would bother voting. A yes vote would be hypocritical on my part, and a no vote would mostly have no effect.