nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

People like SF candidates but won't vote for SF

frillyleaf

I’ve heard people saying multiple times that they like certain SF candidates but they won’t vote for them as they are Sinn Fein. Trying to understand why there is such opposite to Sinn Fein? Have looked up online but not getting good info. Surely if someone likes a candidate and what they stand for they should vote for them? Please explain

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

JohnnyFlash

Matt Barrett wrote: »

TBF, some balls. Could have easily got a lackey to do it. He obviously wanted to be seen.
You never addressed the actual conversation, but hey...

The thread is about SF, dude. Not FG. SF are the lads who had Ferris pick up a few cop killers, had a leader who sent his brother over the border so he could continue to fiddle with kids, and who had a sitting TD steal printer ink so his auld fella could continue to print An Poblacht. That party.

FrancieBrady

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

They all pale into insignificance into having a TD who hopped into a clapped out van and drove to a prison to pick up the men who shot a Garda dead. That’s thuggery, Matt. That’s the sort of thing that people don’t forget.

There were many things done in the conflict/war that were detestable and hard to forgive or forget.

There were many things done to achieve the peace that were not easy to take either.

However, the establishment of a network of support for released prisoners was a necessary aid to that process and stabilisation.

The crime committed by those who killed a garda was a travesty and wrong, but making sure all prisoners came out to a stable, supportive environment ensured the peace we have had and was right if not inspirational tbh. It simply had to be done on both sides.

There is no doubt in my mind about that.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

They're all in SF, (issue was other parties having thugs) and despite the tax avoidance, slab isn't in FG AFAIK, but I can see the reason for the confusion.

I think the point being made is that thugs from other parties get expelled and shunned, in Sinn Fein, they are embraced and promoted.

A big difference.

SEPT 23 1989

FrancieBrady wrote: »

There were many things done in the conflict/war that were detestable and hard to forgive or forget.

There were many things done to achieve the peace that were not easy to take either.

However, the establishment of a network of support for released prisoners was a necessary aid to that process and stabilisation.

The crime committed by those who killed a garda was a travesty and wrong, but making sure all prisoners came out to a stable, supportive environment ensured the peace we have had and was right if not inspirational tbh. It simply had to be done on both sides.

There is no doubt in my mind about that.

How did Pearse get on after his release was the “stable supportive environment” of much benefit to him?

FrancieBrady

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

How did Pearse get on after his release was the “stable supportive environment” of much benefit to him?

No it wasn't. When you have the issues Pearse has no 'stable supportive environment' will help sadly.

But ignore the general point if you wish. I seen with my own eyes what was done and achieved by it after being initially skeptical when they set a centre up here in my town.

I know you guys live in an absolute world where the shinners can do no right, but they got that right imo and the program deserves praise.

Akabusi

It's quite simple even ignoring the past troubles, if you are not good with basic budgeting and think the world owes you then SF is the party for you.

If you work, have bettered yourself through hard times and made necessary sacrifices then SF is not the party for you.

James Brown

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

The thread is about SF, dude. Not FG. SF are the lads who had Ferris pick up a few cop killers, had a leader who sent his brother over the border so he could continue to fiddle with kids, and who had a sitting TD steal printer ink so his auld fella could continue to print An Poblacht. That party.

Hey buddy, I was directly responding to a particular quote man.
Who picked up who in a what now?

blanch152 wrote: »

I think the point being made is that thugs from other parties get expelled and shunned, in Sinn Fein, they are embraced and promoted.

A big difference.

Yes that's a point you and Johnny are making. I was talking on other parties as per the quote I was responding to.

Lowery shunned or courted?
Not all of them

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Hey buddy, I was directly responding to a particular quote man.
Who picked up who in a what now?

Yes that's a point you and Johnny are making. I was talking on other parties as per the quote I was responding to.

Lowery shunned or courted?
Not all of them

Yes, and by bringing other parties into the discussion, you were able to clearly demonstrate the difference between Sinn Fein and normal political parties.

All parties have their thugs, we get that, we accept that, but what makes Sinn Fein different is that their thugs are part of what they are, part of who they are. In other parties, the thugs get expelled.

tjhook

I have a funny feeling there's a large overlap between those saying "The IRA murders are in the past, get over it" and those getting all bitter and emotional over commemoration of the RIC, which was disbanded a century ago.

I'm not a soldier or a guard, but I would have great sympathy for one who might some day have to salute a Sinn Fein minister for justice. It'd give me sleepless nights.

I think SF will do well this year. FF are still tainted from breaking the country, and FG sat on their hands when they had a great opportunity to make things better. I think this will be "Peak SF".

Honesty, I think keeping SF away from power is the only strong reason I'll be voting at all. I'd rather live in a country crippled by debt than in a country run by supporters of thugs/murderers, with who-knows pulling the strings in the background. But then, I'm old enough to remember the pain and fear they inflicted on so many people.

And that's all before even considering their economic policies, if I voted for them I'd be a turkey voting for Christmas.

blanch152

tjhook wrote: »

I have a funny feeling there's a large overlap between those saying "The IRA murders are in the past, get over it" and those getting all bitter and emotional over commemoration of the RIC, which was disbanded a century ago.

I'm not a soldier or a guard, but I would have great sympathy for one who might some day have to salute a Sinn Fein minister for justice. It'd give me sleepless nights.

That is a very good point about those with an ambiguous relationship to history.

Not only would they want to forget the deeds of the 70s and 80s, while remembering what the RIC did, they also crticise unionists for celebrating William of Orange.

tjhook wrote: »

I think SF will do well this year. FF are still tainted from breaking the country, and FG sat on their hands when they had a great opportunity to make things better. I think this will be "Peak SF".

I think we hit Peak SF a couple of years ago, but the RIC issue may give them a little bounce this time out, yet they will be below the time they got three seats in the Euros which was when we saw peak SF.

tjhook wrote: »

Honesty, I think keeping SF away from power is the only strong reason I'll be voting at all. I'd rather live in a country crippled by debt than in a country run by supporters of thugs/murderers, with who-knows pulling the strings in the background. But then, I'm old enough to remember the pain and fear they inflicted on so many people.

And that's all before even considering their economic policies, if I voted for them I'd be a turkey voting for Christmas.

I share your sentiments on the type of people that are Sinn Fein. Most people do, for example, there are very few people on here prepared to actually admit that they are supporters of Sinn Fein.

efanton

blanch152 wrote: »

That is a very good point about those with an ambiguous relationship to history.

Not only would they want to forget the deeds of the 70s and 80s, while remembering what the RIC did, they also crticise unionists for celebrating William of Orange.

I think we hit Peak SF a couple of years ago, but the RIC issue may give them a little bounce this time out, yet they will be below the time they got three seats in the Euros which was when we saw peak SF.

I share your sentiments on the type of people that are Sinn Fein. Most people do, for example, there are very few people on here prepared to actually admit that they are supporters of Sinn Fein.

Sinn Fein to be fair have never criticised the Unionists for celebrating William of Orange. They certainly dont agree with it, but have always been careful to make it clear that both unionist and nationalist have different views and a totally different culture and each should be respected equally.
They certainly got very vocal when the apprentice boys parade decided it would be a totally great idea to route their march directly through a Nationalist area, an area they normally wouldnt go individually into for any circumstance on any other day, when there were various other routes they could have chosen.
That was the Unionists being deliberately and totally provocative.
Thats not to say some actions by nationalists haven't been provocative too. Removing the Queens picture from Stormont was to some degree quite petty.

Personally I would like to see a United Ireland achieved some time in my lifetime. That's never going to happen until both unionists and nationalists are happy and comfortable respecting each others traditions. If a United Ireland was achieved and the Unionists decided they wanted to march down O'Connell Street on the 12th July I personally wouldn't have a problem with that and I think it's fair to say the younger more moderate SF TD's and party members would feel the same. Political change takes time, certainly where violence and aggression was equally apparent on both sides, but it will inevitably happen. Hopefully most on this forum will get to see it.

As things stand I think now that SF are firmly the 3rd placed party anyone who thinks their peak has come and gone is very much mistaken.
The more FF or FG governments that come and go with no real tangible benefits for most workers, the more scandals that occur, the more the vote will swing to SF. At the moment we are experiencing somewhat of a political experiment with so many independent TD's being elected. Most of them to be fair seem hard working and keen to work for their constituents. The problem is they will never get a serious say in any government policies and eventually their numbers in the Dail will drop off. At that point where are those votes going to go? Its SF and the smaller parties that will benefit most I think if that happened, although there's no doubt that some will return to voting FF or FG.
If FF or FG dont get their act together soon and actually deliver a program of government that they were elected to government to carry out I could see a slow but gradual growth of SF seats in the Dail.

Of course if FF or FG actually do get their act together and were to deliver the program for government that they were elected to carry out, even once, I could see that swing reversing rapidly and SF remaining more or less stationary, with 20 to 25 seats but never more.

With regards to the 'type of people' what ever that is supposed to mean, I know of a number of highly educated, well respected people that have switched to SF. A college professor, an accountant, someone who work in a bank, a shop keeper and a few more. None ever supported SF until recently (in last 10 years). To be honest I was quite surprised but it does show that SF are slowly widening their support. I wont mention names or give clue to their identity, that's for them to shout out or publicly declare themselves, but this old idea that it is only the unemployed, low educated, members of a minority group, or staunch republican SF families that support SF has changed and is changing steadily.

Whether you (we) like it or not politics is changing in this country, and hopefully that change will result in more inclusive governments or where parties learn to respect their differences but find a way to work together more.

JP Liz V1

I thought SF wanted to tax more the richer and bankers etc.,

James Brown

tjhook wrote: »

I have a funny feeling there's a large overlap between those saying "The IRA murders are in the past, get over it" and those getting all bitter and emotional over commemoration of the RIC, which was disbanded a century ago.

I'm not a soldier or a guard, but I would have great sympathy for one who might some day have to salute a Sinn Fein minister for justice. It'd give me sleepless nights.

I think SF will do well this year. FF are still tainted from breaking the country, and FG sat on their hands when they had a great opportunity to make things better. I think this will be "Peak SF".

Honesty, I think keeping SF away from power is the only strong reason I'll be voting at all. I'd rather live in a country crippled by debt than in a country run by supporters of thugs/murderers, with who-knows pulling the strings in the background. But then, I'm old enough to remember the pain and fear they inflicted on so many people.

And that's all before even considering their economic policies, if I voted for them I'd be a turkey voting for Christmas.

But it's okay for the government to tell the public without consultation in an arrogant way to get over the RIC/Tans, then ridicule anyone who had a problem with it telling them they aren't mature?

So you'd be against the RIC commemoration too? You can have issue with the IRA and the RIC. And of course there's overlap. You can hope for a UI and have no dislike for the British. People are complex.
FG and others trying to make it a black and white issue for their cause was dishonest.

We've still people bitter and emotional despite the IRA standing down and the GFA, which is totally understandable.

frillyleaf

Akabusi wrote: »

It's quite simple even ignoring the past troubles, if you are not good with basic budgeting and think the world owes you then SF is the party for you.

If you work, have bettered yourself through hard times and made necessary sacrifices then SF is not the party for you.

In fairness I’ve heard a lot of hard working people saying that they will be voting for SF and independents. There are a lot of hard working people who have bettered themselves and still can’t afford to buy or rent a home.

facehugger99

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

I thought SF wanted to tax more the richer and bankers etc.,

This post is a depressing insight into the standard of political analysis among some of the electorate.

efanton

Matt Barrett wrote: »

But it's okay for the government to tell the public without consultation in an arrogant way to get over the RIC/Tans, then ridicule anyone who had a problem with it telling them they aren't mature?

So you'd be against the RIC commemoration too? You can have issue with the IRA and the RIC. And of course there's overlap. You can hope for a UI and have no dislike for the British. People are complex.
FG and others trying to make it a black and white issue for their cause was dishonest.

We've still people bitter and emotional despite the IRA standing down and the GFA, which is totally understandable.

Why would an Irish state commemorate an organisation that did not even exist since the State was formed?

Seriously, I dont care what your particular brand of politics is be that FG FF SF Lab. It had no relevance whatsoever to the current state or the people that live or lived in this state since it was formed, and was totally ill conceived from the start, especially as it was on the cards that a general election would be called.

How many people are their alive that served in the RIC?
I doubt there's more than a handful, possibly none, still alive whose father or mother served in the RIC.
So who are we commemorating and would they even know about it?
Obviously this had political undertones and as such should have been a private and privately funded commemoration. What would the Irish state say to funding the Wolfe Tone commemoration each year? I would think not, and for very good reason, it would be a commemoration targeted for a specific group of people not for the whole nation to celebrate. As such it should be funded, and is, by that group of people

If the government wanted to commemorate an organisation that has served the country for generations, who for the most part are totally forgotten by the general public, but yet still risk(ed) their lives serving the people of Ireland why not have a commemoration for those that have served, died, or still serve providing a national lifeboat service?

ohnonotgmail

efanton wrote: »

Why would an Irish state commemorate an organisation that did not even exist since the State was formed?

Seriously, I dont care what your particular brand of politics is be that FG FF SF Lab. It had no relevance whatsoever to the current state or the people that live or lived in this state since it was formed, and was totally ill conceived from the start, especially as it was on the cards that a general election would be called.

How many people are their alive that served in the RIC?
I doubt there's more than a handful, possibly none, still alive whose father or mother served in the RIC.
So who are we commemorating and would they even know about it?
Obviously this had political undertones and as such should have been a private and privately funded commemoration. What would the Irish state say to funding the Wolfe Tone commemoration each year? I would think not, and for very good reason, it would be a commemoration targeted for a specific group of people not for the whole nation to celebrate. As such it should be funded, and is, by that group of people

If the government wanted to commemorate an organisation that has served the country for generations, who for the most part are totally forgotten by the general public, but yet still risk(ed) their lives serving the people of Ireland why not have a commemoration for those that have served, died, or still serve providing a national lifeboat service?

you mean the ROYAL National Lifeboat Institute? talk about asking for uproar from the usual mob.

quokula

There's a wide difference between a party that supported commemorating Irish people who died over 100 years ago on the wrong side of a civil war (which is what the RIC thing was, it was a commemoration of those who died in service, not a big celebration of the organisation), and a party who actively supported organised crime and murderers in fairly recent living memory and can't be trusted not to still maintain lingering links to that world.

There are memorials and commemorations for german soldiers who lost their lives in WW2, I'm pretty sure nobody at those wants to bring Hitler back.

JP Liz V1

facehugger99 wrote: »

This post is a depressing insight into the standard of political analysis among some of the electorate.

Do fill me in so, as simple as possible

efanton

quokula wrote: »

There's a wide difference between a party that supported commemorating Irish people who died over 100 years ago on the wrong side of a civil war (which is what the RIC thing was, it was a commemoration of those who died in service, not a big celebration of the organisation), and a party who actively supported organised crime and murderers in fairly recent living memory and can't be trusted not to still maintain lingering links to that world.

There are memorials and commemorations for german soldiers who lost their lives in WW2, I'm pretty sure nobody at those wants to bring Hitler back.

But would you not agree the RIC was not anything to do with the State we have now?

The majority of Irishmen (people actually born here) left in droves during the civil war, some because of intimidation thats not to be denied, but most of their own volition. Many went on to serve in the Gardai. The reason we ended up with the black and tans, and nobody will deny they were thugs of the lowest order, is because Irish men would not serve in a police force that they saw as not being a true police force but an almost paramilitary organisation.

Given that the RIC became that, no longer a police force but an extension of military power, are you seriously suggesting that ordinary decent people today should somehow recognise that?
I'm sure there were a good few decent honest individuals still serving in the RIC when it was disbanded and was replaced by the Garda Siochana, but as an organisation it was definitely tainted and the commemoration planned was not to commemorate individuals but that organisation.

quokula

efanton wrote: »

But would you not agree the RIC was not anything to do with the State we have now?

The majority of Irishmen (people actually born here) left in droves during the civil war, some because of intimidation thats not to be denied, but most of their own volition. Many went on to serve in the Gardai. The reason we ended up with the black and tans, and nobody will deny they were thugs of the lowest order, is because Irish men would not serve in a police force that they saw as not being a true police force but an almost paramilitary organisation.

Given that the RIC became that, no longer a police force but an extension of military power, are you seriously suggesting that ordinary decent people today should somehow recognise that?
I'm sure there were a good few decent honest individuals still serving in the RIC when it was disbanded and was replaced by the Garda Siochana, but as an organisation it was definitely tainted and the commemoration planned was not to commemorate individuals but that organisation.

There's a whole other thread for the RIC. I'm just pointing that this was a commemoration of a bunch of Irish people who died over a hundred years ago, during the civil war, during a year of commemorations of the centenary of the state. Whether or not it's right to commemorate them is up for debate but this isn't the place for that debate.

I'm just pointing out that even if you come to the conclusion that it was a dreadful decision to commemorate them, it is still just a commemoration of a historic event, and there is no equivalence at all between that and the SF links to violent criminals that are in living memory and involve people who are around and active today, so "what about the RIC commemorations" is just not a valid deflection tactic.

Granny15

Akabusi wrote: »

It's quite simple even ignoring the past troubles, if you are not good with basic budgeting and think the world owes you then SF is the party for you.

If you work, have bettered yourself through hard times and made necessary sacrifices then SF is not the party for you.

SF had the backing and support of one of the greatest ever American Statesmen - Lyndon Larouche. (see below video)

For this reason they have my backing:

jimmycrackcorm

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

I thought SF wanted to tax more the richer and bankers etc.,

It's anyone over 100k. Which is a problem for example when it comes to trying to recruit hospital consultants to fix the health service.

I suspect that we will see a FF/SF 'republican' coalition. In which case SF will go the way of labour in the next election.

Labour promised their supporters the world but then reality struck when they were in government and had to compromise to the larger party of government.

For some strange reason Irish voters cannot fathom that of your choice is a minor coalition party then you cannot expect them to keep all the promises they make. Same happened the greens also.

facehugger99

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Do fill me in so, as simple as possible

Well if you're able to explain to me your understanding of what "tax more" entails, who specifically "the richer" are and how "the bankers" fit into it, I'm sure I'll be able to fill you in as simple as possible.

One would imagine you wouldn't be championing such a policy position unless you had an understanding of it so I'm sure your explanation will be comprehensive.

jimmycrackcorm

frillyleaf wrote: »

In fairness I’ve heard a lot of hard working people saying that they will be voting for SF and independents. There are a lot of hard working people who have bettered themselves and still can’t afford to buy or rent a home.

And they are blindly turning to the oil snake salesman promising free houses.

The idea that they can force banks to reduce the interest rate they charge is simply laughable and demonstrates that their core economic beliefs are Marxist.
Well bar the abolition of LPT which is bizarre for a left leaning party.

marieholmfan

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

And they are blindly turning to the oil snake salesman promising free houses.

The idea that they can force banks to reduce the interest rate they charge is simply laughable and demonstrates that their core economic beliefs are Marxist.
Well bar the abolition of LPT which is bizarre for a left leaning party.

We need a taxpayers alliance in this country!

I am going to write TAX CUTS NOW on my ballot!

seamus

FrancieBrady wrote: »

In fairness, SF had evolved into a party that supported EU membership long before Brexit was even a twinkle in Nigel's eye.

I think SF, like a lot of left-leaning parties, initially suspected the EU project of being the start of a globalisation attempt; the onward march of capitalist economics aiming to crush the worker and privatise everything, as was happening in the US.

Over time it became clear that while there were globalisation aspects to the EU, there was also a considerable socialist bias in the union that sought to protect individual rights and limit the control of big business over a society.

The EU became something of a lifeboat for left-leaning politics amidst the increasing capitalist control in the US, Russia and China

James Brown

quokula wrote: »

There's a whole other thread for the RIC. I'm just pointing that this was a commemoration of a bunch of Irish people who died over a hundred years ago, during the civil war, during a year of commemorations of the centenary of the state. Whether or not it's right to commemorate them is up for debate but this isn't the place for that debate.

I'm just pointing out that even if you come to the conclusion that it was a dreadful decision to commemorate them, it is still just a commemoration of a historic event, and there is no equivalence at all between that and the SF links to violent criminals that are in living memory and involve people who are around and active today, so "what about the RIC commemorations" is just not a valid deflection tactic.

It's a valid comparison if you look at it from all sides. This came off a comment by someone suggesting some with issues, 'bitter and emotional' on the RIC commemoration would tell people with similar issues with the IRA to 'get over it'. It was condescending. People are complex. People have a right to feel a particular way. It's not right to tell people to consider one, but in the same breath tell them they are immature for not getting over the other.
This relates to having a dig at SF over the IRA. The RIC was used to make issue on that as it relates to the upcoming election and I agree, it's not relevant in this thread but FF/FG supporters can't help themselves, which is fine but let's not wallow in hypocrisy.

James Brown

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

It's anyone over 100k. Which is a problem for example when it comes to trying to recruit hospital consultants to fix the health service.

I suspect that we will see a FF/SF 'republican' coalition. In which case SF will go the way of labour in the next election.

Labour promised their supporters the world but then reality struck when they were in government and had to compromise to the larger party of government.

For some strange reason Irish voters cannot fathom that of your choice is a minor coalition party then you cannot expect them to keep all the promises they make. Same happened the greens also.

Some clarity, but we'll wait on the manifesto, not that they mean much IMO.

Some of the promised spends would be funded by an effective third rate of tax on higher earners. This proposed overall increase in the tax base will be unveiled when Sinn Féin publishes its full manifesto. This is expected to call for a 4.5% PRSI increase for those on incomes above €100,000.
https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/sinn-fein-reveal-plan-to-put-money-back-in-pockets-of-workers-and-families-977077.html

I think those far over and above 100,000 might get something too.

efanton

seamus wrote: »

I think SF, like a lot of left-leaning parties, initially suspected the EU project of being the start of a globalisation attempt; the onward march of capitalist economics aiming to crush the worker and privatise everything, as was happening in the US.

Over time it became clear that while there were globalisation aspects to the EU, there was also a considerable socialist bias in the union that sought to protect individual rights and limit the control of big business over a society.

The EU became something of a lifeboat for left-leaning politics amidst the increasing capitalist control in the US, Russia and China

In fact it became a lifeboat as well for the right-leaning or 'middle ground' parties as well. They had someone to blame or pass the buck to.
It's great when you can conveniently forget things or fail to mention them isn't it?

Do you honestly believe that the austerity measures imposed on this country was done by a left leaning EU?

SF's suspicion of the EU wasn't anything to do with left leaning or right leaning or any other stupid term. Did you pull that idea out of a hat or thin air?
They saw the benefits of the EU and agreed with its initial principals. But they saw treaties such as Nice and Maastricht as diluting Ireland's ability to determine it own laws and economic policy, as well as a potential impact on Irish Neutrality.

FG/FF told us we were so wrong in the first vote on Maastricht that they very generously offered a second one until we voted in the right way. Had there been a second no vote I would not have been at surprised at a third vote being taken.

Along with Nice and Maastricht we gave away our ability to veto any EU policy deemed by our government to not be in Ireland's interest. Our fishing industry has been totally decimated despite Ireland having one of the largest fishing territorial areas. With Maastricht we now have the crazy situation where the Czech Republic, which doesn't have any coast line whatsoever, has more of a say on fishing policy than Ireland does because another neat trick pulled in Maastricht was that votes in the EU parliament would now be directly linked to population size. (Czech Republic has a 10+ million population, and consequently more votes in the EU Parliament.)

SF had every right to be suspicious, an awful lot of people, parties and commentators were suspicious too. Sadly rather than the EU remaining as a club of EU states working together on the basis of mutual respect and benefit, Germany, France and the bigger industrial nations can now ram through policies without the smaller nations even approving. We have benefited greatly from being part of the EU but we gave far to much away in Maastricht for little or no benefit.

The EU before Maastricht was the best thing that ever happened to this country, and I think every single political party recognises that, but at the same time we gave far to much power to the larger EU states when we stupidly allowed ourselves to vote a second time on a treaty that was definitely not in Ireland's best interest.

Personally speaking if the clock could be wound back to before the Maastricht Treaty the EU I think would now be in a far better place, and we would never have seen issues like BREXIT. Maastrict was a very heavy handed and blunt instrument that could only have been of benefit to the bigger EU industrial countries. It prevented the endless delays caused by no agreement until all agreed, but at the same time it removed much of the smaller countries, such as Ireland, ability to shape EU policy.