Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

YES/NO Lisbon Treaty - In simple terms

  • 21-05-2008 10:03AM
    #1
    Chong
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,681 ✭✭✭


    I am not politically minded, can some one please explain to me in simple terms what the Lisbon treaty is.


«134567

Comments

  • #2
    chopperbyrne
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,143 ✭✭✭✭chopperbyrne


    You'd probably be best off posting in the politics forum if you want a serious response.


  • #3
    connundrum
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,563 ✭✭✭connundrum


    No means the end of Eurovision. Vote No!


  • #4
    Chong
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,681 ✭✭✭Chong


    Nah they are too serious over there, I want a simple explanation.


  • #5
    Bard
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,311 ✭✭✭✭Bard


    From what I'm told a Yes vote is more Europe friendly, allows for a better run Europe, is better for Irish jobs and is fairer to other member states (allowing them all the chance to have a commissioner - we'd have one 10 out of every 15 years instead of every year).

    A No vote is the opposite,- less inclusive, less productive and more selfish.

    ... from what I'm told anyway.


  • #6
    Z
    Closed Accounts Posts: 119 ✭✭Z


    Yes is just another small step in a long road to the USE that I don't really want to go down tbh...


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    kryogen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,953 ✭✭✭✭kryogen


    if you want to accept a european constitution replacing our own then vote yes by all means,we fought long enough for independance but we are slowly but surely giving all power to Brussels willingly anyway. if you value some of the independance/soverignty we still have and would like to keep our own constitution, make our most important decisions ourselves, then vote no

    its all irrelevant anyway, this will be passed, one way or the other.

    democracy is becoming the illusion of choice imo, rather then actual choice. i only say this because of a referendum we had once, where the country voted no, then the politicians said they would vote on it again (and again) until it passed. is that democracy?


  • #8
    biko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 81,060 ✭✭✭✭biko


    More in this forum. Also see the link in my signature.
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=1069
    Country's largest craft union urges 45,000 members to vote No

    The national executive of the Technical Engineering and Electrical Union is advising members to vote 'No' in the referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. General Secretary Designate Eamon Devoy says, "The TEEU favours a social Europe but unfortunately recent key judgements by the European Court of Justice show that the pendulum has swung against workers' rights and in favour of big business. In the circumstances it would be foolish to provide the institutions of the European Union with more power."


  • #9
    leninbenjamin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,983 ✭✭✭leninbenjamin


    Z wrote: »
    Yes is just another small step in a long road to the USE that I don't really want to go down tbh...

    this is mentioned where in the treaty? attitudes like that are just the result of scaremongering by the no campaign.


  • #10
    Winters
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,762 ✭✭✭✭Winters


    I'll be voting Yes as I am not a (complete) idiot.

    The scaremongering of the No vote campaign posters with their clear lack of knowledge on the treaty annoys me.

    Although, I did find this to be somewhat interesting


  • #11
    Sherifu
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,727 ✭✭✭✭Sherifu


    Cruijff wrote: »
    I am not politically minded, can some one please explain to me in simple terms what the Lisbon treaty is.
    This looks simple enough.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    biko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 81,060 ✭✭✭✭biko


    I'll be voting No as I am not a (complete) idiot.

    The scaremongering of the Yes vote campaign posters with their clear lack of knowledge on the treaty annoys me.


  • #13
    Lockstep
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,024 ✭✭✭Lockstep


    I'll be voting no, due to the European court Justice decision on the Laval Vaxholm case.

    http://www.etuc.org/IMG/pdf/Facts_memorandum_detailed1.pdf

    Essentially the lisbon treaty views freedom of competition as more important than a workers right to strike.

    I am unable to support anything that does that.


  • #14
    Ciaran500
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,225 ✭✭✭Ciaran500


    I haven't seen any scaremongering from the yes side...


  • #15
    ScumLord
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,787 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    The Man from del monte, he say yes to Lisbon. That's good enough for me. Voting yes just feels right.


  • #16
    Winters
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,762 ✭✭✭✭Winters


    Ciaran500 wrote: »
    I haven't seen any scaremongering from the yes side...
    Either have I..

    Yet I would regard "They died for your freedom. Vote No" with a picture of the Irish proclamation to be a clear scaremongering tactic somehow implying that you are not Irish or stabbing the founders of the state in the back by voting Yes. Also the 'Libertas' (I see them on the Dart) "Europe's been good to Ireland. Lets keep it that way" is even funnier as by voting No we would probably no doubt loose out in Europe, particularly in the long run.

    I dunno, all the (real) Political Parties and IBEC supporting a Yes vote would lay more weight with me then some disillusioned republications and pictures of funny monkeys..


  • #17
    Lockstep
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,024 ✭✭✭Lockstep


    I've personally seen scaremongering (We'll be kicked outta the EU if we vote no....")


  • #18
    Ciaran500
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,225 ✭✭✭Ciaran500


    Winters wrote: »
    Yet I would regard "They died for your freedom. Vote No" with a picture of the Irish proclamation to be a clear scaremongering tactic somehow implying that you are not Irish or stabbing the founders of the state in the back by voting Yes.
    For anyone that hasn't seen it
    http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/395/17102008204rs3.jpg
    kickoutthejams wrote: »
    I've personally seen scaremongering (We'll be kicked outta the EU if we vote no....")

    I saw someone posting that on here, but its no where near the scale the no side is doing it.


  • #19
    biko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 81,060 ✭✭✭✭biko


    40% of farmers are likely vote Yes to the the Lisbon Treaty while 33% say they are likely to vote No, according to a new poll.

    However 27% farmers do not yet know which way they will vote on 12 June, according to the poll conducted by the Irish Farmers' Journal and RED C.

    Out of the 619 farmers questioned, 78% described themselves as either 'quite concerned' or 'very concerned' about EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson's handling of the WTO talks. rte


  • #20
    Lockstep
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,024 ✭✭✭Lockstep


    Ciaran500 wrote: »

    I saw someone posting that on here, but its no where near the scale the no side is doing it.

    *shrugs*

    TBH I'm guessing most people would be less likely to view something as scare mongering if they agree to the propaghanda's position.


  • #21
    biko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 81,060 ✭✭✭✭biko


    UK discussion
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXSo0RyDSsc


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    kodute
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 829 ✭✭✭kodute


    The Danish ratified it, thats good enough for me!
    They make really good butter biscuits! :pac:


  • #23
    Winters
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,762 ✭✭✭✭Winters


    Natural gas use has increased by 35 percent over the past ten years, and is projected to grow 45 percent by 2015.


    Biko, your implying in your random statistics that the majority of Farmers who have decided are in support of the Treaty and with a further 27% undecided.

    And you also say that a large majority who are concerned with an EU Trade Commissioner's handling of recent WTO talks. Their fears are for the existing EU reform of the Common Agricultural Policy are they not? And with a lot less to do with the Lisbon Treaty yet it seems simple to just mix the two together and urge a No vote by some campaigners.

    *alt-tabs back to work*

    Regardless of peoples own opinions on here, I would be more inclined for people to just read the information being sent out by the referendum committee and try and make their own mind up and see what is important to them. For me, myself I cannot see any benefits from a No vote, however I see many from a Yes vote and this is why I am voting Yes.


  • #24
    Lockstep
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,024 ✭✭✭Lockstep


    I see benifits in a yes vote.



    But with the Laval/Vaxholm case......

    I wouldn't be able to live with myself if I voted yes.


  • #25
    gizmo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,405 ✭✭✭gizmo


    Winters wrote: »
    Yet I would regard "They died for your freedom. Vote No" with a picture of the Irish proclamation to be a clear scaremongering tactic somehow implying that you are not Irish or stabbing the founders of the state in the back by voting Yes.
    Don't forget the fantastic "It'll cost you!" posters for the No campaign either.

    To be quite frank the No side has yet to put forward any argument to which there is a shred of truth behind. Their claims of losing control of sovereignty, security, taxation (or to be specific, Corporation Tax) and neutrality have all been debunked and despite the fact that it is now public knowledge, they still insist on spinning the same lies.
    Winters wrote: »
    Regardless of peoples own opinions on here, I would be more inclined for people to just read the information being sent out by the referendum committee and try and make their own mind up and see what is important to them. For me, myself I cannot see any benefits from a No vote, however I see many from a Yes vote and this is why I am voting Yes.
    Couldn't agree more...


  • #26
    Lockstep
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,024 ✭✭✭Lockstep


    gizmo wrote: »
    To be quite frank the No side has yet to put forward any argument to which there is a shred of truth behind.

    Laval Vaxholm case?


  • #27
    Ciaran500
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,225 ✭✭✭Ciaran500


    kickoutthejams wrote: »
    Laval Vaxholm case?

    Can you explain how it ties into the Lisbon Treaty? Don't really have time to read through that report and the word Lisbon isn't in it.


  • #28
    Winters
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,762 ✭✭✭✭Winters


    kickoutthejams wrote: »
    But with the Laval/Vaxholm case......

    I wouldn't be able to live with myself if I voted yes.

    Can you please explain as to why this one case (dated 2006/2007) is causing you to vote no? Is it due to your belief that the Treaty does not do ENOUGH to protect rights? And surly is that not a reason to vote yes and have them build on that foundation as opposed to throwing away the benefits the treaty could bring and foundation is will lay for the future?

    Labour, a political party who are all know are a supporter of trade unions and workers right are campaigning for a Yes vote, maybe they can get past short-sightedness and see that the Treaty is an excellent building block to help fix what may not currently be inpalce due to various reasons


  • #29
    Lockstep
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,024 ✭✭✭Lockstep


    Summary of Laval Vaxholm case: In 2004 the firm Laval errected school buildings in Vaxholm near Stockholm and paid its Latvian employees according to Latvian rates. Because the enterprise refused to follow the Swedish industry-wide collective agreement, the trade unions organized industrial action and boycott measures. The lawsuit which was triggered off by this went up to the Swedish labour court of justice which called in the ECJ.

    On December 18th, 2007, the ECJ judged, that the actions of the Swedish construction trade union were disproportionately against the Latvian enterprise Laval.. In a preliminary ruling it should be cleared whether industrial actions are permitted according to EU legislation to force foreign companies to follow the Swedish industry-wide collective agreement for foreign workers on Swedish soil (see report in the EWC News 4/2005).
    This question is decided now. The judges confirmed the right to strike, but declared the actions taken against Laval as incompatible with the EU Posting Directive.

    The Laval case accepted that the right to strike is a fundamental right, but not as fundamental a right as that of businesses to supply cross-border services.



    While I think the EU has been a wonderfully progressive thing in the past, this ruling in ECJ makes me extremely wary of the direction the EU is going in.

    Given that Lisbon Treaty would give the EU full control of immigration policy (Art.79 TFEU), I'm wary of what could result from that.



    I've been an ardent Labour supporter since I was 15 but it baffles me as to why Labour are doing this given their history on the necessity of unions and striking.


  • #30
    Winters
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,762 ✭✭✭✭Winters


    kickoutthejams wrote: »
    The judges confirmed the right to strike, but declared the actions taken against Laval as incompatible with the EU Posting Directive.

    The Laval case accepted that the right to strike is a fundamental right, but not as fundamental a right as that of businesses to supply cross-border services.

    While I think the EU has been a wonderfully progressive thing in the past, this ruling in ECJ makes me extremely wary of the direction the EU is going in.
    So would you not agree that new rules and agreements to prevent this sort of thing and a foundation to build them on would be good for Europe?

    By blocking the Lisbon treaty are you not blocking a foundation to build on to prevent the above from happening again?


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    Lockstep
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,024 ✭✭✭Lockstep


    If the EU hadn't shown such an attitude to unions and striking, then I'd possibly be voting yes.


    Although I fail to see how voting yes will give it a better disposition towards a workers right to organise.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement
Advertisement