How will you be voting in the upcoming Nice treaty ?

netwhizkid

Hi,
How will you vote in the upcoming Nice treaty ? I will be voting no anyway, If people vote yes, you are voting to make this country 2nd class, ask yourself, do you go swimming somewhere ? the pool was propaply part financed by the E.U, do you drve to work on a very good road, again alot of E.u money went into that road probally, no more money, coming here, if people votes, Yes, We already rejected it before, why should we vote again ? but yes we should go out in big numbers and vote NO, Bertie has spun a web of lies unlike no other, Remember "A lot done, more to do" all we hear of is cutbacks and job losses, if the E.U is enlarged, we will have no jobs, farming will be a waste of time, all big buisness will move to eastern europe, where workers will work, cheap, it is bad enough that so many have moved to the far east, already, And also the E.U will expect Ireland to contribute heavily to the E.U budget, and not recieve from it,

Vote No, Vote for Democracy And Ireland,

Regards netwhizkid

Bard

What an impartial thread!

"I THINK YOU SHOULD VOTE NO! I THINK YOU SHOULD VOTE NO! I THINK YOU SHOULD VOTE NO! I THINK YOU SHOULD VOTE NO! ... so... how are you going to vote, eh?"

(talk about a loaded question!!!)

I don't yet plan on voting at all, to be honest. Haven't had the interest or the inclination required to form an opinion on the mtter.

DadaKopf

I'm currently voting no because it's the way I voted the last time. I find the Nice Treaty to be fundamentally undemocratic.

I'll be voting no because, like the last time, I want the treaty to be renegotiated, and simplified.

I'll be voting no because nothing has changed - if I voted yes at this point, I'd be a hypocrite.

However, I'll be attending a Nice Treaty discussion in Trinity next month but if I change my mind it'll be because the substance of treaty has convinced me and not the opinions of a biased politico. And not some scaremongerer.

PH01

It's so easy to campaign for a 'No' vote. All you have to do is spew out some drivel like what netwhizkid has just posted, and you sound like you have something to say. The No2Nice campaign might pretend that they have the interests of this country at heart, but they don't. They don't have one argument that's plausible - if they do name it and explain it?

Typedef

In fact I will be voting No as I did last time.
I understood the issues the first time I voted on it and I regard revoting as an anthema to democracy.
To save repeating this point I will refrain from doing that here yet again so here is a link where the former Attorney General supports my view point on this.

http://www.tax-news.com/asp/story/story.asp?storyname=9411

I intend to vote on what I think is right for this country, that is my decision as a voter and rather then trying to debase the 'entire' no side I believe the Taoiseach should be attempting to sell the merits of the Treaty.

Thus since his campaign seems to focus on undermining the campaign, the people and the manner of conduct of the no 'side' I must assume that the Taoiseach in fact does not find any merit in the Treaty save some scaremongering about "Irish jobs going" with another No vote. Strangely I would proport that Irish democracy will "go" with a Yes vote as I believe it will set a precedent whereby the government of this country will have refused to abide by a Plebiscite in favour of electoral malleability.

bugler

I'm as yet undecided, but probably leaning towards a no vote. I actually need to have a good think about it one of these days

And Bard, the actual poll question wasn't loaded whatsoever. "How will you be voting in the Nice Treaty?" is hardly a trick question. Funnily enough, stating your own opinion along with starting a thread is actually encouraged on the Politics board. Would you rather he contravened one of the basic rules of the board and didn't give any opinion?

gandalf

PH01 if you actually bothered to check out the other threads on this board about the Nice treaty you will notice that alot of people we are pushing for a no vote have backed up what they say with quotes from the treaty and well thought out arguements to supports their views (as have some of the yes camp). I agree that netwhizkid has not really backed up his views and fired out a fair few soundbites something that some (if not most) of the yes camp have been guilty of as well.

Gandalf.

Hobbes

I voted no in the poll above... but after finding CB's private message (after so long) I actually bit the bullet and read the whole treaty, along with the Irish governments flyer (which syncs up with what is written).

After reading it, I can't see anything questionable about it, in fact I can see parts which will hurt Ireland if it does vote no. So I'll be voting yes.

I would like to see those who are voting no point out what they have a problem with, with the reference to part of the treaty (so I can read it), rather then quoting news sites.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

dathi1

I'll be be voting no primarily on the power issue. I very worried about the LARGE STATES calling the shots and the smaller states being marginalized in a two tier Europe. Even though I'm an employer, the exemption clause has me bothered also as a lot of my friends and relations work in the IT sector. more about this here

irishguy

I was all for the yes campaign until I actually read the information about it. It has some very good ideas i.e. expansion, brining Europe closer together but this isn’t right for Ireland at the moment we need to develop more we need at least 5 to 10 years of investment and expansion [near the level of England], then expansion would benefit us as we would be able to stand our ground against the other members and attract business without tax incentives currently we cant. Think about these two situations:

Situation 1.
Imagine if you were an international manufacturing company [such as DELL who employ about 4,500 staff in Ireland most unskilled or semi-skilled] would you move to Ireland where you would pay €7.80 per hour for a factory worker [starting rate of pay in DELL €.50 margin of error] or would you move to Poland where you will be able to get all the same facilities and access to the European market plus you will receive many government and EU incentives which you would no longer be able to receive in Ireland on top of this you can get people to work for around €3.00 per hour [which is a fare wage in Poland]

Situation2.
Imagine if you were an international high technology company would you locate in Ireland where you would have expensive and sporadic access to broadband/phone calls, very poor public transport/roads/rail or you could locate in another EU member states such as Germany or France where you would receive cheap access to broadband/cheaper phone calls and an have access to extremely good services and transport, all this and it will cost you the same wages [the biggest single cost to high technology companies] you would also have the same company tax rate.
If the niece treaty goes ahead in its current form this is what you will have plus there will be 1 million more farmers producing cheap food which will price Irish farmers out of the market and they will be thousands of migrant workers moving here as early as 2004

Greenbean

I voted no last time. That was my chance to beat the government over the head with a stick. This time, I think the government is making the same blunders - but not through arrogance this time, but bloody desperation. They are frightened that if they tried to argue the treaty on its own merits they might fail, so they've taken things to the lowest level and are scaremongering similar to the no side.

I have to admit I was fairly appalled to be associated in my no vote with all the lechers, neysayers and people with political agenda's outside of the treaty who claimed a huge victory for themselves when they won. I sincerely believe alot of people wanted to give the government a lesson in controlling their own apathy and overconfidence; they couldn't give a **** about everything the No camp was claiming it meant. I don't think the current government has learned its lesson, instead it feels hard done by, but nor do I think this is the time to set them straight.

The way I see it, voting yes is a lesser of two evils. Ok so Nice treaty removes a heafty amount of power away from Ireland in terms of Europe, and gives Europe some more power to control the member states. But sure we've been having an unfair and disporportionate chunk of the vote; this redresses that by making voting based on population. Less power to us, but more fair to everyone in Europe. The current government was happy enough to do this, because Ireland was still coming out on top with plenty of commissioners and general political savey/tactics and sway. Alot of that goodwill is damaged; the government is bending over backwards to keep it in place "yes, we will sort out our stupid voters" etc. Also does anyone think that holding back the treaty is going to stop things changing anyway. More states are going to join, more workers are going to exists, (from those news paper clippings) Ireland is still going to allow them all to come here (why not if they want to work and pay taxes) and farming is still going to goto ****. Europe is going to keep moving towards the goals it has, with or without Ireland. Am I arguing that we conceed to Europe to keep ourselves in better terms with Europe? I suppose I am, and although unprincipaled, its no less unprincipaled that anyone else arguing we should hold out against Europe because it will benefit us too.

Voting no means desirision around Europe. Ok you might argue that if we hold out and (maybe) force a change to the treaty we will end up doing good for Europe; but I don't really believe it - since most of the issues against are not about whats good for Europe as a whole, but whats good for Ireland. I'm not sure we even know what we're voting against, mostly we're voting against being told what to do. The two tier Europe thing, happened by the fact that those larger countries are much more powerful, have large populations and significant economies. The new eastern european addittions will become much more important than Ireland: they arrive with large populations, cheap economies and over time they will probably come to match the first tier of europe for might - and it will only be then that someone can validly point out that there is an elitist set of European countries. But since the nice treaty supports power by population the newer countries should get their fair share of say.

Lets look at the scenario where we do vote about our concerns with the treaty and get a no result. Europe treats it like a grave insult, unfairly or not. To most people the mild hatred of the "selfish" Irish is water off our backs; but I know Denmark is only now washing of the stigma of being "those selfish **** who tried to hold things back" by us over taking them. Everyone at a government level in Europe wants to punish us, if only midly, and some sensationally want to eject us from Europe. We even wonder ourselves if we want to leave, maybe build ties with America or something. Europe continues towards its goals, Ireland's ability to veto further treaties is removed as much as possible, Ireland not consulted or included in anything - our position is as weak as it might have been with a Nice treaty, but also our voice has gone from "worthy" to "ignored".

With a No vote I can't really see the scenario where we come out winning, without any stigma and without being politically undermined for many years. I certainly don't think anyone can guarantee it.

bonkey

Originally posted by netwhizkid
ask yourself, do you go swimming somewhere ? the pool was propaply part financed by the E.U, do you drve to work on a very good road, again alot of E.u money went into that road probally, no more money, coming here, if people votes, Yes,

Dont forget to mention that there is no more money coming here if people vote no either. It has nothing to do with the Nice treaty.

Maybe you should go read it. You might be able to come up with a realistic explanation of how we will become second class then.

Of course, if you'd like to claim you have read it, maybe you'd like to justify your "no more cash if you vote yes" crap instead.

Personally - I wont be voting. Technically being an emigrant an all, I dont get a say.

jc

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

sceptre

Originally posted by Greenbean
I have to admit I was fairly appalled to be associated in my no vote with all the lechers, neysayers and people with political agenda's outside of the treaty who claimed a huge victory for themselves when they won.

Bloody hell, so was I.

I've had some previous experience of that though - I voted no in the 1995 divorce referendum because I didn't agree with the actual wording of the amendment (notably the hot-wiring of the number of years into the constitution). On the whole I was pleased that that particular referendum was passed - on a personal basis I couldn't agree with the actual amendment and hence voted no.

The fact that Youth Defence (or whatever PR-happy name they're using these days) seem to be campaigning for a no vote won't be affecting my decision in any way. I won't be voting no to spite Fianna Fail and I won't be voting yes to spite Youth Defence.

Kalina

I will be voting as the government has finally seen sense and planned the voting for a Saturday so students and people who live away from home can have a say.
As of yet I don't know which way I'll vote cos tbh I really haven't read much information about it.

Cork

Imagine if you were an international manufacturing company [such as DELL who employ about 4,500 staff in Ireland most unskilled or semi-skilled] would you move to Ireland where you would pay €7.80 per hour for a factory worker [starting rate of pay in DELL €.50 margin of error] or would you move to Poland where you will be able to get all the same facilities and access to the European market plus you will receive many government and EU incentives which you would no longer be able to receive in Ireland on top of this you can get people to work for around €3.00 per hour [which is a fare wage in Poland]

I thgink that we as a rich nation will be expected to build motorways out in these countries. This is a a time when we have not a decent health or transport system.

We have voted No to this treaty already. We need to do so again.

How much are IBEC, FF, FG spending on this campaign?

Will FF be using the same tactics as the general election?

Its show time folks!

G

As we know one of the biggest reasons the big fish are located in Ireland (eg Dell) is because of the tax incentives. If we get sucked into Nice they will eventually regulate these taxes and then Ireland will lose out to cheaper labour on the mainland.

That's just one of many reasons that have been discussed, there may be some reprocussions in voting no but that's not a certainty.

I'm voting no.

Typedef

Certainly I am of the opinion that "Tax harmonisation" will have disasterous effects for the Irish economy in terms of competitiveness with Ireland's Continental counterparts.

With a single tax rate across Europe (as has been called for by the French, and has been suggested to be "indensible" in certain areas subservient to Qualifed Majority Voting), Ireland will be at a disadvantage due to the location of Ireland to "core" European markets. With transportation costs ostensibly being higher and a largely inferior and under invested in internal transportation infrastructure to Ireland's continental counterparts, it would make more sense in a Europe of Uniform tax rates to simply locate production facilities on the Continent itself. So since Ireland would no longer be a tax haven, a large impetus to invest in this country would be totally negated, thus affecting competitiveness and the affluence of the nation.

From http://www.cps.org.uk/eurotax.htm
While it remains the Commission's view that a move to qualified majority voting at least for certain tax issues is indispensable, the legal basis will, for the present, remain unanimity.

But here is a quote from the French Prime Minister Lionel Jospin in March of this year.

http://www.examiner.ie/pport/web/opinion/Full_Story/did-sg1P6sOjgLu0s.asp

(2) Lionel Jospin, French Prime Minister: 'I propose, in terms of corporate tax, that the tax bases should be harmonised and that a minimum rate should be fixed. This would be the first step towards a European tax furthermore, I propose that, Internal Market should be made by QMV [Qualified Majority Voting] and not by unanimity'.

(Election manifesto, March, 2002).

Thus I propose that increased European integration will infact imply a higher rate of taxation in Ireland and that enhanced co-operation is a device to that end.

From http://www.cps.org.uk/eurotax.htm
We must finally take action to stop any behaviour detrimental to the general European interest.

This attitude perpetraded by the staunch European Federalists effectively explains how it is the European Federalists have pressurised Ireland into abrogating it's own democracy by a re-run of the Nice Treaty, at least in my opinion said re-run is an abrogation.

To my mind it is a fallacy of logic it proport that the Treaty of Nice is all about equating greater democracy into the European Union, whilst flatly refusing to accept the democratic decision of a member state. I have said it before so I won't bang on about it in perpetuity.

What I must take issue with Greenbean specifically on is the notion that 'somehow' a vote is a form of tender to 'beat' the government with. To my mind such notions are an utter nonsense. Vote on the treaty on it's merits, not because you want to put Youth Defence's nose out of joint or stick it to the man and upset the Taoiseach.

I fundamentally believe that as a nation Ireland's best interests are not served by entering into an embryonic Federalist arrangement that will allow for a two tiered European model where a so called "Avant Garde" of Federalism may effectively create a European Army, "Harmonise" tax, or draft a Constitution and enact courts to enforce that Constitution that supercedes the authority of the participant nations, and then pressurise non participant countries to acquiece to join at a later date.

If you really think about how much say over the governance of this country the Irish voter will have in a Federal Europe as opposed to a Europe of participant nation states who reatin control of key areas such as taxation, foreign policy and which courts and laws the nation is ultimately subservient to, I think you will find that being a mere four million in a Supra Nationalist State of five hundred million will not give Ireland effective control over the method, machisma and process of governance that a nation in fact needs.

Meh

Originally posted by Typedef
Certainly I am of the opinion that "Tax harmonisation" will have disasterous effects for the Irish economy in terms of competitiveness with Ireland's Continental counterparts.

And what exactly is your point? Tax harmonization is specifically excluded from qualified majority voting under the Nice Treaty. More FUD from the No side (not that the yes side haven't been guilty of this as well).

Thus I propose that increased European integration will infact imply a higher rate of taxation in Ireland and that enhanced co-operation is a device to that end.

Nonsense. The only way taxes can be harmonized under the Nice Treaty is if the Irish government agrees to it.

a two tiered European model where a so called "Avant Garde" of Federalism may effectively create a European Army, "Harmonise" tax, or draft a Constitution and enact courts to enforce that Constitution that supercedes the authority of the participant nations, and then pressurise non participant countries to acquiece to join at a later date.

More FUD. The Nice Treaty has nothing to do with a common defence,tax harmonization or a European constution. Some EU members would be able to proceed with enhanced cooperation in these areas, but there is no way for them to coerce Ireland into joining them.

dathi1

Nonsense. The only way taxes can be harmonized under the Nice Treaty is if the Irish government agrees to it.

Like fishing rights in our own water.

And of course judging by the Irish Governments past history on European dictates (i.e.: We don't care how your people voted run that ref again to until you get the right result!) they will agree to anything Prodi and Brussels tells them to do.That's were the future fat Euro pensions lie for all FF, FG Labour members. Gravy train first......everybody else second.



Protect Your Job and everybody elses NO TO NICE

Meh

And remind me again how a no vote to Nice will protect us from the venality of our own politicians?

If Bertie wanted to sell us out so he could retire in Brussels, he could do it under the existing treaties. Nice won't make it any easier or any more difficult.

dathi1

If Bertie wanted to sell us out so he could retire in Brussels, he could do it under the existing treaties. Nice won't make it any easier or any more difficult.

Are you for Real?
You think FF, Fg, Labour are doing this for the good of our own country? Nice will make a very good EU Superstate with Germany and France at the helm. Lets face it as we have seen here power corrupts. More centralized power with Nice will make Main Party Politicians mouths water.

NICE=
Ibec: .cheap labour influx
Church: Poland joins. Loves poverty.
Unions: more subs more money power for Gegarty et al.
FF: were there's power and money for the boys.
FG: as above and the "military co-operation NATO MONEY NATO woops no.. EU rapid reaction force" they've always wanted.
Labour: hopefully a "Socialist" Europe like Proncias always wanted...oh yeah with the Mercs too!
Irish Citizen???? Job security down the drain. American investment going east. A massive loss of Power. No say in Europe except through our very trustworthy Irish Political reps.

NO to Nice=

Germany, France.....Deutschland / Franc uber alles!! Ve have Vays of Meeking you Vote Yez!!

Re-negotiation for Ireland and the smaller states for a better and more representative Europe. As should have been the case last year. But Bertie just couldn't say no.

swiss

How many times are you going to post this picture on politics daithi1? Does posting it a second (or even third, fourth, fifth) time make it's effect any more or less pronounced. Do you think that voting no to nice will stop immigration and an influx of workers into ireland for political and/or economic reasons?

More centralized power with Nice will make Main Party Politicians mouths water.

Would you care to explain this statement? No politician wishes to abrogate his/her power to anyone, least of all 'establishment' politicians who oftentimes appear ineffectual and inept when dealing with many issues that pertain to the Irish people. (I presume by centralised, you mean centralised in Europe btw).

Ve have Vays of Meeking you Vote Yez!!

Indeed. When I was up in Dublin yesterday I saw the no posters which depicted someone who had a gun held to their head with the slogan "don't be bullied into voting yes" and so on. Interesting that some elements among the no side should try to sell their side, not based on the treaty itself, but on the perceived scaremongering of the yes side. Of course these wouldn't be the same elements that accuse the yes camp of not trying to sell the treaty based on its merits, but on scaremongering?

I think that both sides have resorted to scaremongering and 'dirty tactics' to try to acheive the desired result. This has led to a lot of bitter contention between both sides in the debate.

dathi1

How many times are you going to post this picture on politics daithi1? Does posting it a second (or even third, fourth, fifth) time make it's effect any more or less pronounced. Do you think that voting no to nice will stop immigration and an influx of workers into Ireland for political and/or economic reasons?

Brian Cowen at the behest of his IBEC (Berties best pal is Ibec frontman) counterparts negotiated this exemption plan to allow Ireland now to be the only country (Sweden, Denmark and Netherlands are now chaing their stance) to let up to 80 million or more workers to walk in to this country unrestricted to work. Germany, France and others have blocked the same workers from entering their jurisdiction from the Jan 1st 2004 date because it will cause major unemployment in their service and It sector industries THEY SAID. We on the other hand have our IRISH POLITICAL REPS so called negotiating on our behalf in Europe whilst really their they're paying of their mates in IBEC with cheap labour and forcing Irish people with €280,000 mortgages to compete with people who will sleep 20 to a room in substandard accommodation for the opportunity to earn more than the €45 a week they get back home in Check republic or Poland. COMMENCEMENT DATE 01/01/04 /
Voting NO TO NICE will make Irish Politicians and the Eurocrats more accountable to the European People (weather it be the subject above or others) by getting politicians to re-negotiate the Treaty for Irish People and the other smaller states.
NOW..if there was overall access by the new member states to EU states it would lessen the impact on our economy and in the long run (yes I agree) probably even help it... But Cowen, Harney and Bertie can't wait to bankroll their pay master packaging, construction company owners which I wont mention here.
And I don't post the picture I provide a link to it as I think its very important.

On European federal centralized power yes I do think it has great financial rewards for any Irish MEP who can jump on the Gravy Train. I remember one guy back during the Mastrict referendum with large bus posters sayin Frank says no to Mastrict! He then under Democratic Left went for a job in Europe and got it. Now he's sitting pretty and calling for a yes to Nice...Twice!

When I was up in Dublin yesterday I saw the no posters which depicted someone who had a gun held to their head with the slogan "don't be bullied into voting yes" and so on.

Calling another referendum within 12 months on the same Treaty after the decision has been made by Irish people couldn't be called anything else!! but Bullying!

Cork

Originally posted by Meh
And what exactly is your point? Tax harmonization is specifically excluded from qualified majority voting under the Nice Treaty. More FUD from the No side (not that the yes side haven't been guilty of this as well).Nonsense. The only way taxes can be harmonized under the Nice Treaty is if the Irish government agrees to it.More FUD. The Nice Treaty has nothing to do with a common defence,tax harmonization or a European constution. Some EU members would be able to proceed with enhanced cooperation in these areas, but there is no way for them to coerce Ireland into joining them.

I agree - that the EU could never bully or coerce Ireland. Even without vetos in certain areas or without an automatic right to a commissioner.

"They (i.e. the other EU States) are fully entitled to continue their own ratification procedures and IT WOULD HAVE BEEN WRONG FOR ME to go to Gothenburg and try to press them to stop." (Dail Debates, 21 June 2001Vol.358, Col. 1011)

This is what Taoiseach Bertie Ahern told the Dail after getting back from the EU summit in Gothenburg, Sweden, following Ireland's No to Nice on 7 June last year.

Meh

Originally posted by dathi1
people who will sleep 20 to a room in substandard accommodation for the opportunity to earn more than the €45 a week they get back home

Wow, and to think it was only ten years ago when the same xenophobic stereotypes were applied to Irish people seeking work in other countries. How quickly we forget.

If the rest of the EU had shared your attitude of "Keep the poor people out" back in the eighties, it's pretty sure that we'd still be in the economic dark ages.

As for your allegations that immigration will destroy the Irish economy, look at the US. Despite having much more lenient immigration and naturalization procedures than the EU, the US economy has seen faster growth and dramatically lower unemployment than the EU over the past few decades.

Biffa Bacon

We already rejected it before, why should we vote again ?

The government is elected to serve the people’s interests.
The government believes it is in the people’s interests for this country to ratify the Nice Treaty.
Therefore it is right and proper for the government to hold another referendum to try to get this country to ratify the Nice Treaty.

The Nice Treaty was rejected in the previous referendum because of the sheer laziness and arrogance of the Yes campaign combined with the brazen mendacity of the No campaign. It is not unreasonable to believe that if the Yes campaign treat the electorate with respect this time, the result will be reversed.

Strangely I would proport that Irish democracy will "go" with a Yes vote as I believe it will set a precedent whereby the government of this country will have refused to abide by a Plebiscite in favour of electoral malleability.

Typedef, is it “democratic” to deny the electorate the right to change their minds?

PH01 if you actually bothered to check out the other threads on this board about the Nice treaty you will notice that alot of people we are pushing for a no vote have backed up what they say with quotes from the treaty and well thought out arguements to supports their views (as have some of the yes camp).

Really? I’ve checked out the other threads on Nice and couldn’t find a single well thought out anti-Nice argument. Would you care to point one out?

I would like to see those who are voting no point out what they have a problem with, with the reference to part of the treaty (so I can read it), rather then quoting news sites.

I think we both know that ain’t gonna happen.

My only major reservation about voting Yes is the exemption clause that some of the other countries have that we don't.

You do realise that this has nothing to do with the Nice Treaty itself? The best you could possibly hope to achieve by voting No would be to slow down the enlargement process, which would be a pretty stupid reason to vote No.

Re-negotiation for Ireland and the smaller states for a better and more representative Europe.

And how exactly would you like to see the Nice Treaty changed? Specifically that is, not “I want Europe to be more accountable to the people” kind of ****e.

When I was up in Dublin yesterday I saw the no posters which depicted someone who had a gun held to their head with the slogan "don't be bullied into voting yes" and so on.

It just shows you the mentality of the No to Nice shower doesn’t it? Absolutely brain-dead.

"They (i.e. the other EU States) are fully entitled to continue their own ratification procedures and IT WOULD HAVE BEEN WRONG FOR ME to go to Gothenburg and try to press them to stop." (Dail Debates, 21 June 2001Vol.358, Col. 1011)

This is what Taoiseach Bertie Ahern told the Dail after getting back from the EU summit in Gothenburg, Sweden, following Ireland's No to Nice on 7 June last year.

So?

G

Originally posted by Meh
As for your allegations that immigration will destroy the Irish economy, look at the US. Despite having much more lenient immigration and naturalization procedures than the EU, the US economy has seen faster growth and dramatically lower unemployment than the EU over the past few decades.

What are you talking about? How can you possibly compare the Irish and US economies when it comes to immigration? To put it into perspective, the US has a $300 billion/yr defence budget. The Irish Government have plans to slash Public spending by €1Billion this year.

Ireland is in trouble with immigration. The influx of (mostly unskilled) refugees over the last few years will cost the government big money in welfare payments and seriously damage the Irish economy.

Wow, and to think it was only ten years ago when the same xenophobic stereotypes were applied to Irish people seeking work in other countries. How quickly we forget

As far as I was aware the majority of Irish emmigrants were skilled, hard-working people seeking a better life elsewhere because they didn't have the oppertunities here. Now I'm all for letting skilled people into Ireland to better their chances in life but ffs we shouldn't be waving a green card at everyone in the EU with the state of the economy at the moment.

Cork

If the Irish people are bullied and deceived into voting Yes in October to exactly the same Nice Treaty as they rejected in June last year, it will devalue referendums not only in Ireland but in every European country. Itwill show that a people's democratic decision can be ignored and overthrown
. . . That a people's No to an EU Treaty changes absolutely nothing.


Thr purpose of this is to clear the way for massive advertising by privateinterests in the Nice Repeat, who will have vastly greater money than the No side. Unlike the Referendum Commission's publicly funded advertisements, moroever, such private advertising need not be grounded in the facts of the
Nice Treaty. We can expect the Yes-side advertisements to concentrate on irrelevant material - for example that a rejection of Nice will imperil Irish membership of the EU,when of course it does no such thing

dathi1

xenophobic stereotypes

My best friend is a Malaysian Doctor. Most of my friends are immigrants living and working here. I am a purveyor of ethnic and world music. I am against deportation but in favour of strict immigration control. I'm sorry but I cant fit neatly into your stupid stereotypes.

As for your allegations that immigration will destroy the Irish economy, look at the US

The USA is a massive continent with 250 million people all of which are immigrants from all corners of the globe. They HAVE strict immigration control as we have seen with the deportation of 10 Irish Nationals last week.
Ireland is a small country on the northwest peripherals of Europe with a Native population of just under 3.9 million. we cannot afford to have the current illegal immigration influx of 10,000 a year from outside the EU at a cost to us of €450,000,000 a year and on top of that the EXCLUSIVE UNRESTRICTIVE ACCESS by workers of new member states on 01/01/04. I know that some No to Nice people disagree with me on immigration i.e. Typedef ect.. but having a legitimate concern for the security of peoples jobs and housing in this country is not a racist or xenophobic issue.

magner

Im voting no for one reason,,,,,
A positive vote will result in the Goverment changing Article 5 of the Constution
Which states among other things that Ireland is a Soverign State,,,
The Nice Treaty says we are not,,,,,
I want Ireland to remain a Soverign state,i do not want someone oin Brussels deciding what is best for my Country
Im all for free borders,im all for free trade,,,but i stop at any kind of Federal Europe,,,and the Nice treaty is leading us down this path,,I submit with respect

Cork

However, the facts are that all the big EU States, Britain, Germany,France, etc. have indicated that, because of fear of distabilization oftheir labour markets, they will operate a transition period of up to 7years. Are they guilty of "xenophobia" for this?

Ireland is the only country whose Foreign Minister, Mr Brian Cowen, has written personally to each Applicant State government stating that their citizens will have the
right to live and work in Ireland without work permits from the day their Accession Treaties come into force, expected to be January 2004

I know that some No to Nice people disagree with me on immigration

It is the people who urge for a YES vote who agree with the stance Britain, Germany,France, etc are taking.

I am voting NO - because this treaty is a mess - As such it should not be included in our constitution.

Meh

Originally posted by dathi1
[My best friend is a Malaysian Doctor. Most of my friends are immigrants living and working here. I am a purveyor of ethnic and world music. I am against deportation but in favour of strict immigration control. I'm sorry but I cant fit neatly into your stupid stereotypes.

xen·o·phobe Pronunciation Key (zn-fb, zn-)
n.
A person unduly fearful or contemptuous of that which is foreign, especially of strangers or foreign peoples.

ster·e·o·type Pronunciation Key (str--tp, stîr-)
n.
A conventional, formulaic, and oversimplified conception, opinion, or image.

I'd say that scaremongering about all foreign immigrants "sleeping 20 to a room" is definitely covered by these definitions.

we cannot afford to have the current illegal immigration influx of 10,000 a year from outside the EU at a cost to us of €450,000,000 a year and on top of that the EXCLUSIVE UNRESTRICTIVE ACCESS by workers of new member states on 01/01/04.

http://www.oasis.gov.ie/employment/working_in_ireland/coming_from_EU_to_work.html

If you are unemployed, you should claim unemployment benefit in the country you are leaving and then asked for it to be transferred to Ireland. You must, of course, comply with the rules for getting benefit in the country that you are leaving. Your benefit may be transferred after you have been receiving it for four weeks. When you arrive in Ireland, you should sign on at your nearest employment exchange. You will then receive your benefit for 13 weeks; you get the same benefit as you would get if you stayed in the country you have left.

After 13 weeks have expired, you return to the normal Irish social welfare system. In order to qualify for benefits in Ireland, you need to get a job and pay at least one Class A PRSI contribution.

We are not going to be overrun by a tidal wave of unskilled Latvians looking to get on the "generous" Irish social welfare system. We are not going to have thousands of illiterate Czechs walking off the boat straight into the dole office. The dole is barely enough to live on as it is; nobody is going to leave their home and family and travel thousands of miles for the Irish dole.

Originally posted by Cork:
However, the facts are that all the big EU States, Britain, Germany,France, etc. have indicated that, because of fear of distabilization oftheir labour markets, they will operate a transition period of up to 7years. Are they guilty of "xenophobia" for this?

Yes. All of those countries have sizeable right wing anti-immigration parties.

dathi1

I'd say that scaremongering about all foreign immigrants "sleeping 20 to a room" is definitely covered by these definitions.

its getting ridiculous at this stage....its funny my immigrant mate serge form Lithuania working for a IT re-work company warned me about the 20 to a bed situation....now the Dublin 4 heads are calling the immigrants xenophobic too.......gob****e!

dathi1

http://www.oasis.gov.ie/employment/...EU_to_work.html

Has absolulty no bearing on 10.000 illegal immigrants a year costing us €450 million.

We are not going to be overrun by a tidal wave of unskilled Latvians looking to get on the "generous" Irish social welfare system. We are not going to have thousands of illiterate Czechs walking off the boat straight into the dole office. The dole is barely enough to live on as it is; nobody is going to leave their home and family and travel thousands of miles for the Irish dole.

Weekly income eastern Europe €45-€79 a week
Ireland : €340 - €400
I'd travel!

Meh

Originally posted by dathi1
Weekly income eastern Europe €45-€79 a week
Ireland : €340 - €400
I'd travel!

Wow, where is this magic dole office that pays €340 a week in social welfare? If someone earns €340 a week in this country, they work hard for it.

Make your mind up -- either the eastern europeans are coming here to cost us €450 million a year by sitting on their arse on the dole, or they're going to put us all out of our jobs by being too hard-working. You can't argue for both.

gandalf

Firstly I think we are all getting hung up on this immigration issue. We are all aware of the fact that the big countries are opting out of allowing workers migrating from the applicant countries for 7 years.

However this article appeared in the Sunday Business Post yesterday casting doubt over the governments NO will spell economic disaster (scaremongering).

'No' vote on Nice will make 'no difference' to investment


By Michael Murray
Dublin, Ireland, 22 September, 2002


A leading European fund manager has dismissed claims by government ministers that a `No' vote in the Nice referendum would damage Ireland in the eyes of overseas investors.


Andrew Koch, senior European equity fund manager at HSBC Asset Management and former director of European Equities at Phillips & Drew, said that while a No vote on Nice might result in a "knee jerk" reaction from investors, it was unlikely to have any long-term impact on international investors' perceptions of the Irish stock market.

Koch manages the multibillion euro HSBC European fund, and was speaking to Irish brokers last week on the outlook for European and global equities.

Koch manages €180 million of funds from Irish clients of Acorn Life. HSBC has substantial shareholdings in several bluechip Irish companies including the main banks -- AIB and Bank of Ireland -- as well as CRH, Jefferson Smurfit, Fyffes, IAWS, Kingspan and Ryanair.

Hobbes

I ask for one thing and no one does it.


For people voting Yes/No - How about reading the treaty and then when you say something like

"Voting yes will allow hoards of freeloaders to come into Ireland" you can add (Page 14, Point 3). So I can see how out of context or actually correct a person is (in this case it would be incorrect).

G

This talk about immigration is straying slightly OT but it's still very important (split the thread maybe?). Good quote from the Business post Gandalf.

Originally posted by Meh
Wow, where is this magic dole office that pays €340 a week in social welfare? If someone earns €340 a week in this country, they work hard for it.

He means the €340 is the 'incentive' for lower income europeans to come to Ireland you tit. Then if (when) they don't find work they end up on welfare, which I'd say is a tad higher than €79/week in total.

Yes the euro buys you less in Ireland than everywhere else but regardless, do you want to pay for other peoples welfare when they can't get jobs? Do you want to pay higher taxes as a result? I don't.

dathi1

ok...agreed lets veer away from the immigration slightly and concentrate on the other big issues affecting peoples decision to vote No or Yes. As a matter of interest is there anybody out there who is undecided on which way to vote and if so what's bugging you? lack of info? don't want to vote on something you're sure of etc..

Meh

Originally posted by G
He means the €340 is the 'incentive' for lower income europeans to come to Ireland you tit. Then if (when) they don't find work they end up on welfare, which I'd say is a tad higher than €79/week in total..

See my post from the governemnt information website above:

In order to qualify for benefits in Ireland, you need to get a job and pay at least one Class A PRSI contribution.

gandalf

Originally posted by Hobbes
I ask for one thing and no one does it.


For people voting Yes/No - How about reading the treaty and then when you say something like

"Voting yes will allow hoards of freeloaders to come into Ireland" you can add (Page 14, Point 3). So I can see how out of context or actually correct a person is (in this case it would be incorrect).

Yep Hobbes I plan to do this but I need time to.

In work I guerrila post, ie I sneak onto boards (using the alternative address) for a few minutes every now and then throughout the day (got complaints from the overseers over my non-business related net access). Recently I've actually been busy over the evenings and weekends as well but I will try and do it by the end of this week.

BTW I have read the treaty just not memorised it yet

Gandalf.

Hobbes

Originally posted by G
He means the €340 is the 'incentive' for lower income europeans to come to Ireland you tit. Then if (when) they don't find work they end up on welfare, which I'd say is a tad higher than €79/week in total.

Even with the minimum wage going up to €6.35 an hour your looking at over 53 hours a week to get that before tax.

Are the getting a special one time bonus or something? Do you have a link? Because they wouldn't get that if they qualified for unemployment.

Also if all these people are coming over will screw up the jobs, why the hell would they come over then? They will just be swapping one poverty for another, and while I don't know the living rates in those countries I'll take a good bet it's a heck of a lot lower then it is here.

bonkey

Originally posted by Cork
If the Irish people are bullied and deceived into voting Yes in October to exactly the same Nice Treaty as they rejected in June last year, it will devalue referendums not only in Ireland but in every European country.

Certainly. However, no-one has shown convincingly that Yes vote actually means the people were bullied and/or deceived.

Its like maths. "a implies b" does not necessarily equate to "b implies a".

Prove they're being bullied, and you have a point. From what I can see, there is a wealth of information, misinformation and all the rest coming from both sides.

At best, with a Yes result, you could say that the Yes bullying and deceiving turned out to be more efficient than its No counterpart, but that kinda invalidates the entire argument about what it spells for democracy.....

jc

PH01

I've read and re-read your posts and I'm not convinced, or do I accept your argument.

Typedef

Originally posted by bonkey


Certainly. However, no-one has shown convincingly that Yes vote actually means the people were bullied and/or deceived.

Its like maths. "a implies b" does not necessarily equate to "b implies a".

There has been no conclusive proof from IBEC for example that a rejection of the Treaty will in fact be detramental to investment or job creation in Ireland. Thus if one were to vote for the Treaty in fear of what IBEC has proported (without proof i.e. scaremongering), you would reasonably prove that eletor(x) has been decieved into voting Yes.

If this voter has switched sides then that voter has been bullied into voting yes.

I would submit that deciding that another 're-run' is in the best interests of the country (arbitrarily and co-incidentially in accordance with the government's own view) is in fact a heavy handed tactic akin to bullying.

Bonkey has argued in the past that a government is supposed to act in the best interests of the country and that 'best interests' should include re-running a Referendum, because that is one of the functions of government.

I would infer that a set aside is in fact an abuse of power and thus is akin to bullying because clearly the government has already lied to the electorate about the state of the public finances which is an abuse of power. I don't care that Canines in the street knew the government was lying, the government said things that turned out within three months to be an utter lie. Thus the government was acting in self interest by lying and can't be trusted.

Assuming the government have been proved to have been untrustworthy at least once and has acted in self interest as opposed to national interest the government cannot be trusted to act in the national interest before self interest ever! The exception invalidates the rule.

Lying and misinformation is akin to scaremongering and scaremongering is effectively bullying.

Perhaps the corollary is true for the "No side", however if the government is as I believe proved to be bullying the public and the decision on Nice is reversed, you could say that the government had bullied the public into voting Yes.

Q.E.D.

G

Originally posted by Hobbes
Even with the minimum wage going up to €6.35 an hour your looking at over 53 hours a week to get that before tax.

Are the getting a special one time bonus or something? Do you have a link? Because they wouldn't get that if they qualified for unemployment.

The €340 figure is not mine, I was just highlighting daithi's point to Meh.

Also if all these people are coming over will screw up the jobs, why the hell would they come over then? They will just be swapping one poverty for another, and while I don't know the living rates in those countries I'll take a good bet it's a heck of a lot lower then it is here.

The cost of living is comparitively low in those countries for obvious reasons; because they have such high unemployment rates and those that do have jobs earn FA.

The cost of living in Ireland is so high largely because the government didn't do enough to hold down inflation. Dispite this I'll bet they'll come flocking here anyway.

The government must fear that big-business will shift to the new EU member states after enlargement so to counteract this an influx of workers from those states would stabilise wage demands (increased labour market).

According to this article "tens of thousands" of immigrants are expected to move to Ireland from the EU in search of work. That is not good news.

Meh

Originally posted by Typedef
There has been no conclusive proof from IBEC for example that a rejection of the Treaty will in fact be detramental to investment or job creation in Ireland. Thus if one were to vote for the Treaty in fear of what IBEC has proported (without proof i.e. scaremongering), you would reasonably prove that eletor(x) has been decieved into voting Yes.

I agree that IBEC are scaremongering here. I'm voting Yes despite them, rather than because of them.

Lying and misinformation is akin to scaremongering and scaremongering is effectively bullying.

No it isn't.

scare·mon·ger Pronunciation Key (skârmnggr, -mng-)
n/
One who spreads frightening rumors; an alarmist.

bul·lied, bul·ly·ing, bul·lies
v. tr.
To treat in an overbearing or intimidating manner. See Synonyms at intimidate.
To make (one's way) aggressively.

Completely different meanings.

Perhaps the corollary is true for the "No side", however if the government is as I believe proved to be bullying the public and the decision on Nice is reversed, you could say that the government had bullied the public into voting Yes.

Only if you took an opinion poll which showed that the Yes majority was due to people being afraid of the government.

What exactly is your point anyway? Are you saying that I should vote No, not because of the shortcomings of the Treaty itself, but because the government is trying to get me to vote Yes? That seems to be a rather poor argument for No vote to me...

Typedef

Bah!

a·kin Pronunciation Key (-kn)
adj.

Of the same kin; related by blood.
Having a similar quality or character; analogous.
Linguistics. Sharing a common origin or an ancestral form.

Originally posted by Meh
What exactly is your point anyway? Are you saying that I should vote No, not because of the shortcomings of the Treaty itself, but because the government is trying to get me to vote Yes?

Nope I was rubuffing bonkey (that's why I quoted him).

I am voting No for my own reasons, but I was making a salient point that since bonkey believes that a government should act in the national interest always, even if that means re-run of a Referenda, that once the government can be shown to have acted in something other than the national interest that logically, it ceases to be an entity that can make judgements pertaining to the national interest.

Meh

Originally posted by Typedef
akin definition

I'm afraid I'm going to have to refer you back to your own post:

scaremongering is effectively bullying.

I am voting No for my own reasons, but I was making a salient point that since bonkey believes that a government should act in the national interest always, even if that means re-run of a Referenda, that once the government can be shown to have acted in something other than the national interest that logically, it ceases to be an entity that can make judgements pertaining to the national interest.

I would infer that a set aside is in fact an abuse of power and thus is akin to bullying because clearly the government has already lied to the electorate about the state of the public finances which is an abuse of power

So your argument as I understand it is:

1. The government abused its power by deceiving the electorate over the economy during the election campaign
2. Therefore, the rerun of the Nice referendum is also an abuse of government power

I think there's a step or two missing in your logic there -- could you fill it in please? Do the broken election promises mean that everything the government does is now an abuse of power?