Another EU referendum on the way

eth0

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/1208/eurozone.html

Once again we will be expected to agree to give more sovereignty to EU and accept being screwed over further while being fed a constant stream of lies about how further integration is better for us and will give us the jobs and prosperity that never arrived when we voted yes to Lisbon.

The likes of Sarkozy and Merkel will be accusing us of holding up Europe and being wreckless and all this nonsense if we vote no.

This time I'm seriously thinking of putting some new slogans on all those FF posters I took down and hanging them up around the place.

"Vote Yes, we can't afford another referendum"

"Vote Yes, make the ultimate sacrifice for Europe"

"Vote Yes, help keep the Euro alive for another year"

Yes.

mikom

*Opens link*

*Spots picture of Lucinda Creighton*

"It's a no from me"

RichieC

Vote yes, it doesn't matter either way.

Tayla

We better hope that they even let us have a referendum and that they don't just push the changes through on their own

dlofnep

I'll be voting no, once and once only..

ThePower11

Atari Jaguar

sensibleken

Yay! lets make up our mind before we know what the question is!

TheZohanS

sensibleken wrote: »

Yay! lets make up our mind before we know what the question is!

Guarantee you it will be tax harmonisation and our corporation tax.


Even if it means going to the polls a dozen times I'm voting "NO" on this one.

sensibleken

sensibleken wrote: »

Yay! lets make up our mind before we know what the question is!

I'm not agreeing to that.

foxyboxer

ThePower11 wrote: »

Atari Jaguar

Atari Ja!.....guar.

hooradiation

eth0 wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/1208/eurozone.html

Once again we will be expected to agree to give more sovereignty to EU and accept being screwed over further while being fed a constant stream of lies about how further integration is better for us and will give us the jobs and prosperity that never arrived when we voted yes to Lisbon.

The likes of Sarkozy and Merkel will be accusing us of holding up Europe and being wreckless and all this nonsense if we vote no.

This time I'm seriously thinking of putting some new slogans on all those FF posters I took down and hanging them up around the place.

"Vote Yes, we can't afford another referendum"

"Vote Yes, make the ultimate sacrifice for Europe"

"Vote Yes, help keep the Euro alive for another year"

I hope there isn't one.
Simply because I cannot be fucked having to read this kind of shit masquerading as an opinion for months beforehand.

CardBordWindow

Vote for Jim Corr!

sensibleken

Abortions for All!

Shattered Dreamer

sensibleken wrote: »

Yay! lets make up our mind before we know what the question is!

Don't you follow the news? France & Germany want a treaty amendment to take more economic sovereignty from the member states & give it to the EU parliament in Brussels. I will be voting no because giving away more sovereignty to save what is clearly a sinking ship is pure stupidity.

UsernameInUse

RichieC wrote: »

Vote yes, it doesn't matter either way.

On your own.

If you want to be part of an undemocratic, authoritarian setup full of unelected bureaucrats - then speak for yourself...

The people of Ireland will say "no" - there is no two ways about it. The fact of the matter is that as a people - we do not want further European union integration. When will you Eurotrons accept that? We don't want to be a part of your economic prison, totalitarian wet dream - get over it.

KerranJast

There won't be a referendum. Nothing the EU can promise us will be worth giving up control of our corporate tax rates and budgets and the Govt know that which is why they're pushing for alternatives to treaty change.

Also the UK Govt are against treaty change too as it could force them into a referendum on the UK's continued membership of the EU.

Furthermore the proposed Financial transactions tax either won't happpen if the French and Germans insist on it being across the 27 (the UK will veto it affecting the City) or if it's Eurozone only it will just mean a flood of market movement to the City, the States and other markets to avoid the tax.

Debt restructuring and extending the debt loans to bailed out countries over a much longer of time like the reconstruction costs and reparations for WW2 is what's needed and the central EU Govts are slowly starting to drag their electorates towards understanding that.

sensibleken

TheZohan wrote: »

Guarantee you it will be tax harmonisation and our corporation tax.


Even if it means going to the polls a dozen times I'm voting "NO" on this one.

rate or base?

betcha it wont

Dotrel

Alright people, lets just pick the correct choice first time so our Government don't make us repeat the process until we give the answer they want.

orangebud

you have to admire how the eu came to power with no elected officials

I'll be voting no in the first referendum, probably be bullied & lied to in the 2nd referendum to vote yes

yeppydeppy

Won't somebody please think of the children!

sensibleken

Shattered Dreamer wrote: »

Don't you follow the news? France & Germany want a treaty amendment to take more economic sovereignty from the member states & give it to the EU parliament in Brussels. I will be voting no because giving away more sovereignty to save what is clearly a sinking ship is pure stupidity.

yes i do. and i see 2 countries that are going to have to bargain with 25 other ones and come out with something to propose that has a chance of success.

Read the question before you answer it. Thats the reason we have multiple referendums on this crap, because nobody reads the questions. just makes up their mind on hysteria and election posters.

mikom

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-4DFf5h2tu7Q/TXehkT8trLI/AAAAAAAADsE/tgw_mPlfARw/s400/Fianna%2BFail%2B%2527VOTE%2BYES%2BTO%2BLISBON%2BFOR%2BJOBS%2527..jpg

TheZohanS

sensibleken wrote: »

rate or base?

betcha it wont

The German-French plan is based on the following key provisions:

• the European Commission to have the power to impose penalties for nations that run excessive budget deficits
• all 17 eurozone nations should amend their national legislation to require balanced budgets
• the eurozone countries to have common corporation and financial transaction taxes
• any future bailouts would not require private investors to absorb part of the costs, as happened in the Greece case

betcha it will.

eth0

yeppydeppy wrote: »

Won't somebody please think of the children!

The fecking children won't think of me will they?! All they think about is how they can get their hands on another XBOX 360 or iPad 2 or whatever Chinese fad of the month is in vogue now.

I hope to God we get the Punt Nua and that it will be so worthless nobody including myself can afford so much as a single electric toaster from China and we'll get back to normality after the consumerist binge of the past few decades.

sensibleken

TheZohan wrote: »

betcha it will.

whats that from? because the letter was talking about base, everyone else is talking about the rate of 12.5%.

besides doesnt mean its going to be in the treaty. as i sadi, lets wait for the question before answering it

My name is URL

So what's the question likely to be?

Why don't they just charge ahead and hold referenda on the formation of a wholly federalised Eurozone and have done with it? Maybe that way we could get rid of some of the bloat in our own government.

eth0

sensibleken wrote: »

whats that from? because the letter was talking about base, everyone else is talking about the rate of 12.5%.

besides doesnt mean its going to be in the treaty. as i sadi, lets wait for the question before answering it

They'll set the base rate to 12.5 and get us to accept the treaty promising 'no change' then they'll start increasing it in a few years

hooradiation

KerranJast wrote: »

There won't be a referendum.

B-b-but people have already decided they're going to vote no!
We'll have to have one so they can get that out of their system in case a real referendum comes around and they'd do something as monumentally stupid as decide how they're going to vote on an issue before they know what the issue is.

sensibleken

eth0 wrote: »

They'll set the base rate to 12.5 and get us to accept the treaty promising 'no change' then they'll start increasing it in a few years

any chance of the lotto numbers?

AeoNGriM

sensibleken wrote: »

Abortions for All!

Booooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

Ok then, abortions for some, little Irish flags for others.

Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay!

TheZohanS

sensibleken wrote: »

whats that from? because the letter was talking about base, everyone else is talking about the rate of 12.5%.

besides doesnt mean its going to be in the treaty. as i sadi, lets wait for the question before answering it

From the BBC and Van Rompuy.

From the ET:

BRUSSELS: Potentially explosive EU treaty change takes centre stage at an EU summit opening on Thursday as Europe's power couple Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy push to throw a fiscal strait-jacket on the eurozone.

The French-German demand for a rewrite of the European Union rulebook, which history has shown to be a long and politically dangerous road, aims to enshrine tough rules ensuring budgetary rigour across the 17 nations sharing the euro.

Nations agree tighter rules and better policing can help overcome the debt crisis in the long term, but are sharply divided over how to implement change and how far to go.

Why treaty change?

Because Berlin wants it. As one European diplomat put it: "The Germans fundamentally feel they were wronged by agreeing to replace the deutsche mark with the euro because member nations failed to respect the rules of the game demanding budgetary discipline in return." Given the failure of the initial and loosely-implemented Stability and Growth Pact governing the single currency, which France and Germany were the first to flout in 2004, Merkel is now calling for a "fiscal union" carving rules in stone that would be legally binding.

What changes are under consideration?

Germany had wanted the European Court of Justice to have the authority to sanction repeated budget offenders, but France was cool to that idea. So the suggestion is for the court to verify states meet the obligation of introducing a so-called "golden rule" into their legislation, requiring a balanced budget.

This way, eurozone debt levels could be brought back within a fixed threshold. Sanctions would be automatic and immediate and Brussels could be given guardianship of countries in dire straits. Special powers too could be conferred on a European commissioner to step in and intervene directly in national budgets when deemed necessary.

Are all the changes about tightening fiscal discipline?

No. EU president Herman Van Rompuy wants to also improve economic policy convergence in the 17-nation eurozone on issues such as tax, which Ireland is expected to resist to safeguard its cheaper corporate tax. With national interests and political stakes at play, others may demand a quid pro quo, notably Britain which has already threatened to scupper a deal failing EU pledges to protect the country's profitable financial sector.

How can the treaty be changed?

How to change the EU's rule-book is highly contentious. Because of a widening rift between the 17 eurozone nations and the 10 states outside the single currency, the European Commission wants treaty change to be submitted to the entire 27 to avoid deepening the chasm.

But the leaders will be asked to consider a change affecting only eurozone countries, as treaty change requires ratification by unanimous vote. This is when non-euro members, such as British Prime Minister David Cameron, may be tempted to ask for a pay-back. Under pressure from eurosceptics in his Conservative party, he could even ask to repatriate powers touching on labour laws and financial regulation to London.

c_man

I seriously doubt any EU referendum will pass in Ireland for a very long time.

sensibleken

TheZohan wrote: »

From the BBC and Van Rompuy.

From the ET:

It doesnt say anything about base or rate. the negotiations have only just started, we dont know whats going to be in any treaty if one is even proposed. nobody knows whats going to be in a treaty that hasnt been written yet

KerranJast

As one European diplomat put it: "The Germans fundamentally feel they were wronged by agreeing to replace the deutsche mark with the euro because member nations failed to respect the rules of the game demanding budgetary discipline in return."

Yeah those delinquent member nations like...France and Germany, and those irresponsible banks spraying cheap cash around like confetti based in those inattentive countries...France and Germany :rolleyes:

TheZohanS

sensibleken wrote: »

It doesnt say anything about base or rate. the negotiations have only just started, we dont know whats going to be in any treaty if one is even proposed. nobody knows whats going to be in a treaty that hasnt been written yet

Jacques Myard, a French MP and member of President Sarkozy's ruling UMP party, has said French people feel very strongly about the issue.

"How is it that we are helping, for instance Ireland, that they are getting from Brussels our money.

"Some people say 'Okay, we help you, but you also have to help yourself by raising your own taxes and not having a kind of advantage which is unfair competition to our enterprise'."

Source.

(RTTNews) - In a joint letter sent to European Council President Herman Van Rompuy on the eve of a key European Union summit, the leaders of France and Germany have proposed common corporate and financial transaction taxes for eurozone countries.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel called for "strengthening growth through competitiveness and convergence of the economic policies of at least the 17 eurozone member states."

The letter calls for "a new common legal framework fully compatible with the internal market to allow for faster progress in specific areas."

The framework should cover financial regulation, the labor market, convergence and harmonization of the corporation tax base and introduction of a financial transaction tax, policies that support growth and a better use of European funds within the eurozone.

The proposed tax policy is not expected to be well received by all the member states. France has long complained about Ireland's low corporation tax rate of 12.5%, while the UK has been resisting moves towards tax harmonization in the 27-nation bloc.

Well I can tell you one thing, this new treaty isn't going to be about the shape of bananas. Anyone that thinks this isn't going to be about Corporation Tax is living in cuckoo land.

sensibleken

TheZohan wrote: »

Source.



Well I can tell you one thing, this new treaty isn't going to be about the shape of bananas. Anyone that thinks this isn't going to be about Corporation Tax is living in cuckoo land.

It might be, it might not be. But making your mind up before you know what the question is is frankly retarded.

TheZohanS

sensibleken wrote: »

It might be, it might not be. But making your mind up before you know what the question is is frankly retarded.

Not as retarded as living in denial.

Shenshen

sensibleken wrote: »

Yay! lets make up our mind before we know what the question is!

It's what most people seem to have done last time, since so many of them complain about having been asked to vote about the same thing twice...

Shattered Dreamer

sensibleken wrote: »

yes i do. and i see 2 countries that are going to have to bargain with 25 other ones and come out with something to propose that has a chance of success.

2 countries bargaining with the other 25? Clearly you missed something called the Lisbon Treaty. One of the biggest changes was the voting power each country has. France & Germany post Lisbon have 29 votes each. Through recent bullying tactic by both Nicolas Sarkozy & Angela Merkel, Italy & Greece have new leaders with ties to the European Central Bank. That's 29 more votes from Italy & 12 more from Greece. So for starters they already control 99 votes within the Parliament. Country like Spain & Portugal who are becoming increasingly weaker economically are obviously going to vote with France & Germany to avoid recession. That's a further 27 from Spain & 12 from Portugal. So that is for starters a total potential voting power for starters of 138 votes. With so much support for starters new member states are likely to follow & since most of EU member state economies are in a state of flux any measure they're told could strengthen their economies they're likely to follow.

Open your eyes there is nothing democratic about the EU. Everything that has happened with it recently has been the brain child of France & Germany. I don't see how rationally you or anybody for that matter could think voting away any more of our sovereignty is a good idea. As far as the worlds markets are concerned the Euro is a sinking ship. If you can't see it you need to lay off the EU & Irish government's kool aid

Robbo

TheZohan wrote: »

Source.



Well I can tell you one thing, this new treaty isn't going to be about the shape of bananas. Anyone that thinks this isn't going to be about Corporation Tax is living in cuckoo land.

You might have had a point, right up until you trotted out the Straight Banana Euromyth, it's one I don't care an emulsified high-fat offal tube for.

COYW

c_man wrote: »

I seriously doubt any EU referendum will pass in Ireland for a very long time.

So, if the EU offer a 50% cut on the money to be paid back, people will not pass it?

Shattered Dreamer

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-05/s-p-said-to-place-all-17-euro-nations-on-downgrade-watch-over-debt-crisis.html

In case you think I'm blowing smoke:rolleyes: They will abandon the Euro if it drives up the cost of lending to every EU member state.

sensibleken

Shattered Dreamer wrote: »

2 countries bargaining with the other 25? Clearly you missed something called the Lisbon Treaty. One of the biggest changes was the voting power each country has. France & Germany post Lisbon have 29 votes each. Through recent bullying tactic by both Nicolas Sarkozy & Angela Merkel, Italy & Greece have new leaders with ties to the European Central Bank. That's 29 more votes from Italy & 12 more from Greece. So for starters they already control 99 votes within the Parliament. Country like Spain & Portugal who are becoming increasingly weaker economically are obviously going to vote with France & Germany to avoid recession. That's a further 27 from Spain & 12 from Portugal. So that is for starters a total potential voting power for starters of 138 votes. With so much support for starters new member states are likely to follow & since most of EU member state economies are in a state of flux any measure they're told could strengthen their economies they're likely to follow.

Open your eyes there is nothing democratic about the EU. Everything that has happened with it recently has been the brain child of France & Germany. I don't see how rationally you or anybody for that matter could think voting away any more of our sovereignty is a good idea. As far as the worlds markets are concerned the Euro is a sinking ship. If you can't see it you need to lay off the EU & Irish government's kool aid

I think you have missed the part about QMV not covering issues like taxation but rather retaining neccesary unanimity at the council

Shenshen

TheZohan wrote: »

Well I can tell you one thing, this new treaty isn't going to be about the shape of bananas. Anyone that thinks this isn't going to be about Corporation Tax is living in cuckoo land.

Why not just wait and see what it actually IS going to be about before deciding how you're going to vote?
Or is that a cloud-cuckoo land attitude as well?

foxyboxer

Corporation Tax.

Why do I pay 21% tax and a high earner pays 40% and a Corporation only pays 12.5%?

Boot on the other foot? Maybe they have a point?

sensibleken

TheZohan wrote: »

Not as retarded as living in denial.

well while your at it can you tell me when we're having it so i can plan my holidays around it. some lotto numbers would be good too

RichieC

foxyboxer wrote: »

Corporation Tax.

Why do I pay 21% tax and a high earner pays 40% and a Corporation only pays 12.5%?

Boot on the other foot? Maybe they have a point?

Because it attracts foreign corporations who provide employment.

force eleven

Lucinda Creighton will be the Dick Roche of this campaign. Better looking admittedly, but will help the No vote tremendously. Bring.It.On.

Robbo

Shattered Dreamer wrote: »

2 countries bargaining with the other 25? Clearly you missed something called the Lisbon Treaty. One of the biggest changes was the voting power each country has. France & Germany post Lisbon have 29 votes each. Through recent bullying tactic by both Nicolas Sarkozy & Angela Merkel, Italy & Greece have new leaders with ties to the European Central Bank. That's 29 more votes from Italy & 12 more from Greece. So for starters they already control 99 votes within the Parliament. Country like Spain & Portugal who are becoming increasingly weaker economically are obviously going to vote with France & Germany to avoid recession. That's a further 27 from Spain & 12 from Portugal. So that is for starters a total potential voting power for starters of 138 votes. With so much support for starters new member states are likely to follow & since most of EU member state economies are in a state of flux any measure they're told could strengthen their economies they're likely to follow.

Open your eyes there is nothing democratic about the EU. Everything that has happened with it recently has been the brain child of France & Germany. I don't see how rationally you or anybody for that matter could think voting away any more of our sovereignty is a good idea. As far as the worlds markets are concerned the Euro is a sinking ship. If you can't see it you need to lay off the EU & Irish government's kool aid

Source please.

My understanding of QMV under both the transitional arrangement and the full-on post-Lisbon system is at odds with yours. For a start, blocking minorities are easily formed with 4 (I think) countries needed to veto just about everything.

shedweller

But if it is about corporation tax then we are more or less agreed on a no vote! What else could it be about?