NICE 3 Questions

dathi1

Query:

If the constitutional amendment prohibiting Ireland joining a common defence
pact without a further referendum, is worth putting in place, surely it is
worth putting in place irrespective of whether Nice is adopted or not? Why
is the Government blackmailing the Irish people by making it conditional on
a yes vote on NICE. Why are the Government not proposing to put this (or a
better) amendment in the Constitution any way?

Query:

With the adoption of the "Enhanced CO-operation" provisions of the NICE
Treaty,permitting EU sub-groups to be set up and to use the EU institiutons
for their special purposes, is not this referendum effectively the last one
in which the Irish people will have the opportunity to shape the future
direction of Europe as a whole, with the sole exception of a narrowly
defined common defence policy?

Query:

If the Irish people are morally obliged to follow the wishes (dictats) of
the other EU Governments (as distinct from its own people) by voting Yes to
Nice,why will we not be morally obliged to follow their dictats on any
issue in
the future?



NO2NICE

Meh

Originally posted by dathi1
If the constitutional amendment prohibiting Ireland joining a common defence pact without a further referendum, is worth putting in place, surely it is worth putting in place irrespective of whether Nice is adopted or not?

Because of all the no2nice people complaining that Nice was going to have us all drafted into a EU army, the government decided to add in this amendment. If the anti-Nice neutrality arguments are true, why do we need this amandment if Nice is rejected?

With the adoption of the "Enhanced CO-operation" provisions of the NICE Treaty, permitting EU sub-groups to be set up and to use the EU institiutons
for their special purposes, is not this referendum effectively the last one
in which the Irish people will have the opportunity to shape the future
direction of Europe as a whole, with the sole exception of a narrowly
defined common defence policy?

Hopefully, yes. It is undemocratic to let one tiny country veto the entire future of the EU. We should be able to decide if we want to take part or not in future EU initiatives; we shouldn't be able to act as the "dog in the manger" and veto these initiatives for everyone else.

If the Irish people are morally obliged to follow the wishes (dictats) of the other EU Governments (as distinct from its own people) by voting Yes to Nice, why will we not be morally obliged to follow their dictats on any issue in the future?

We're not morally obliged to follow the wishes (dictats) of the other EU Governments.

Cork

If the constitutional amendment prohibiting Ireland joining a common defence pact without a further referendum, is worth putting in place, surely it is worth putting in place irrespective of whether Nice is adopted or not? Why is the Government blackmailing the Irish people by making it conditional on
a yes vote on NICE. Why are the Government not proposing to put this (or a better) amendment in the Constitution any way?



With the adoption of the "Enhanced CO-operation" provisions of the NICE Treaty,permitting EU sub-groups to be set up and to use the EU institiutons for their special purposes, is not this referendum effectively the last one
in which the Irish people will have the opportunity to shape the future direction of Europe as a whole, with the sole exception of a narrowly defined common defence policy?

If the Irish people are morally obliged to follow the wishes (dictats) of the other EU Governments (as distinct from its own people) by voting Yes to Nice,why will we not be morally obliged to follow their dictats on any issue in the future?

I would like to ask IBEC...........why are their posters so misleading?

A leading Euroepan fund manager has dismissed claims by government ministers that a "No" vote in the Nice referendum would damage Ireland in the eyes of overseas invesors.

NO" VOTE ON NICE WILL MAKE "NO DIFFERENCE" TO INVESTMENT by Michael Murray, Markets Editor, SUNDAY BUSINESS POST. . . today, Sunday 22 September

I know IBEC hashad trouble in the past with issues like the mimimum wage but will they try and steady on there. Are they not looking after No. 1 always?

Biffa Bacon

If the constitutional amendment prohibiting Ireland joining a common defence pact without a further referendum, is worth putting in place, surely it is worth putting in place irrespective of whether Nice is adopted or not?

Yes it is, although personally I don’t believe it is worth putting in place.

Why is the Government blackmailing the Irish people by making it conditional on a yes vote on NICE. Why are the Government not proposing to put this (or a better) amendment in the Constitution any way?

Because it’s simply a cynical gimmick aimed at getting idiots to vote Yes.

With the adoption of the "Enhanced CO-operation" provisions of the NICE Treaty,permitting EU sub-groups to be set up and to use the EU institiutons for their special purposes, is not this referendum effectively the last one in which the Irish people will have the opportunity to shape the future direction of Europe as a whole, with the sole exception of a narrowly defined common defence policy?

Not necessarily. It’s entirely possible that some projects will still go ahead with the involvement of all member states. Treaty changes will also still require the assent of all member states.

If the Irish people are morally obliged to follow the wishes (dictats) of the other EU Governments (as distinct from its own people) by voting Yes to Nice,why will we not be morally obliged to follow their dictats on any issue in the future?

No one is obliged to vote Yes to Nice.

Shazbat

Would we actually need the neutrality amendment in our constitution if the Nice treaty was rejected?

I had to laugh after reading through the 'Treaty of Nice and seville declarations 2002 information guide' Its a bit of a one sided affair. An example of this is when it gives us a break down the votes we would have if the treaty is passed without giving a comparison to what the vote weights are at present(of all the other countries). What kind of crap is that? How are people supposed to make a decision on our giving away of power(as in less voting power) if they haven't got all the facts?

It is pro-nice and I really hope that nobody is going to have the brass neck to say otherwise. As far as I'm concerned the government is spending the tax money of an electorate who rejected the nice treaty to promote it? How fuked up is that?

Shazbat

Originally posted by Biffa Bacon
No one is obliged to vote Yes to Nice.

I get the feeling that the goverment feels we are obliged and thats why they are holding the referendum a second time.

They are not going to take no for an answer no matter what the outcome of the treaty is.

I'm still gonna vote no though.

Typedef

If the constitutional amendment prohibiting Ireland joining a common defence
pact without a further referendum, is worth putting in place, surely it is
worth putting in place irrespective of whether Nice is adopted or not? Why
is the Government blackmailing the Irish people by making it conditional on
a yes vote on NICE. Why are the Government not proposing to put this (or a
better) amendment in the Constitution any way?

Persumably if the government attempts to conjoin the Nice Referendum with some superflous ammendment to the constitution it thinks the Nice Treaty will pass on the second sitting. However if the Rapid Reaction Force doesn't exist, the issue doesn't exist, thus whether the Nice Treaty is passed or not, Ireland will not be participating in a European Army.

With the adoption of the "Enhanced CO-operation" provisions of the NICE
Treaty,permitting EU sub-groups to be set up and to use the EU institiutons
for their special purposes, is not this referendum effectively the last one
in which the Irish people will have the opportunity to shape the future
direction of Europe as a whole, with the sole exception of a narrowly
defined common defence policy?

I believe that enhanced co-operation and qualified majority voting will create a structure within the European Union where ardently Federalist states like France and Germany can effectively create an avant garde United States of Europe and from there may pressure small states like Ireland to cede ever greater amounts of soveringty to this United States of Europe, or worse yet, Ireland may find itself so unable to resist the ferocious Federalist drive that Ireland itself may be in the avant garde of European Federalism, not by choice of it's people, but by the intransigence of it's government to recognise the wishes of the Irish people, as is examplafied by the Irish government's refusal to accept the result of the last Referendum on Nice, by having another Referendum (within a year) on exactly the same issue.

If the Irish people are morally obliged to follow the wishes (dictats) of
the other EU Governments (as distinct from its own people) by voting Yes to
Nice,why will we not be morally obliged to follow their dictats on any
issue in
the future?

Unfortunately I don't think morality is the issue, rather the Irish governmnet's refusal to represent the wishes of the Irish people in Europe, instead the government seems hell bent on representing the wishes of th European Federalists in Ireland, which is a wierd but moreover sinister role reversal. Thus from the moment the government of Ireland prefared to cast aside the Nice Referendum result and pefared to try and impose European opinion onto Ireland (which is not the government's function) as opposed to Irish opinion onto Europe (which is the government's function ie(repersentation of the Irish people)), the government became an appendage of the European Federalist drive, as opposed to the very vestige of democracy and representative governance in the Republic of Ireland.

Meh

Originally posted by Typedef
Ireland may find itself so unable to resist the ferocious Federalist drive that Ireland itself may be in the avant garde of European Federalism, not by choice of it's people, but by the intransigence of it's government to recognise the wishes of the Irish people

If we vote for a government that doesn't represent our interests properly, whose fault is that? (Hint: it's not the EU's fault.) "In democracy, the people get the government they deserve..."

Your problem appears to be with the present government, rather than with the EU itself or the Nice Treaty.

Typedef

Aside from the Treaty text which I have major problems with and aside from the relative loss of power and influence for Ireland in Europe (which was my original reason for voting against Nice) I believe that the government has refused to represent the views of the Irish people by attempting to impose European views onto Ireland rather then representing Irish's people's views on Nice (given via plebiscite) in Europe, so in that sense yes I have a problem with the government, however the components of my opposition to the Nice Treaty are not mutually exclusive.

Originally posted by Typedef
Persumably if the government attempts to conjoin the Nice Referendum with some superflous ammendment to the constitution it thinks the Nice Treaty will pass on the second sitting. However if the Rapid Reaction Force doesn't exist, the issue doesn't exist, thus whether the Nice Treaty is passed or not, Ireland will not be participating in a European Army.

The problem I have with that is, if the Nice treaty is passed with the Neutrality ammendment, how can Ireland get involved in a European war?
Surely because we have an army, we would continue to have international involvement limited to UN peacekeeping as it is now.

If Ireland were to send forces in on UN sanctioned missions with the E.U army, then would that be a breach of neutrality?

The unfortunate situation for those who feel passionately enough against any war activity is that the Union with which we are alligned and have gained so much from since we joined it, is broadly Nato friendly.

I believe that enhanced co-operation and qualified majority voting will create a structure within the European Union where ardently Federalist states like France and Germany can effectively create an avant garde United States of Europe and from there may pressure small states like Ireland to cede ever greater amounts of soveringty to this United States of Europe, or worse yet, Ireland may find itself so unable to resist the ferocious Federalist drive that Ireland itself may be in the avant garde of European Federalism, not by choice of it's people, but by the intransigence of it's government to recognise the wishes of the Irish people, as is examplafied by the Irish government's refusal to accept the result of the last Referendum on Nice, by having another Referendum (within a year) on exactly the same issue.

I agree, but you will have to convince the populations of these countries that such a drive is wrong.
If our Economy keeps contracting like it is at the moment, we could well continue to be net beneficiaries of EU money, with a little clever regionalisation.
The only sure fire way as I see it to avoid all of what you say is to leave, unless the people of Europe on whom we depend a lot are convinced that enough is enough-but doing that would leave us out of the expanded single market,close down Intel etc and be a general disaster for the governments coffers in terms of immigration, dole queues and government debt.

Regarding losing power within an enlarged Europe, surely thats inevitable , if we are to continue to be a member of the club in a democratic way, it's all some compromise.
mm