andrew wrote: » So, who want's to have a go at summing up the last 781 posts for me then?
the-island-man wrote: » 1) The E.U has three main bodies the commission, the council of ministers and the E.U parliment! We get to vote in members of one of these bodies, the E.U parliment! The others get appointed by our goverment, that is not direct democracy and should not be the case! I watched Dick Roche during and after the last referendum and i felt that he spoke with contempt for the irish people and i feel if he had to answer to us the irish citizens he would not be so quick to forget about us and care more about his european pals!
the-island-man wrote: » In my opinion we should break from the E.U altogether and try to get back to the stage where we were!
Darragh29 wrote: » It's much harder for the yes side to lie on this debate because as I understand it, the Lisbon Treaty is so opened ended, that nobody on the yes side or the no side could envisage exactly what problems might arise in the future for us, on the basis of the Lisbon Treaty being in force for EU decision making purposes. This is the main problem I have with the treaty and nobody has been able to answer this question for me and I've not been able to answer it for myself. As I understand it, and I could be a little shaky on this as I haven't kept track of the debate since June, where the EU has a competence, we will never be asked for an opinion by way of a referendum in Ireland again... Correct me if I'm wrong here, as I said, I could be on shaky ground here...
walshb wrote: » Ok, to affirm my position; This second VOTE really is not about Lisbon to ME. It is about democracy and respect and for that, I would urge the people to vote NO. Yes, even those who voted YES in the first election should change the vote to NO to send a clear message that the electorate should never ever be disrespected and ignored. If we had/have any respect for each other and our right to democracy, we should stand side by side on this and VOTE NO It is the fundamental basis of democracy!
anonymous_joe wrote: » You're being given the chance to exercise your democratic right. How is that ignoring the electorate?
walshb wrote: » What??? The govt ignored the vote earlier this year Did you not know that?
Darragh29 wrote: » Can the "yes" side and the "no" side give their opinions on this... I posted this comment earlier and would like to know whether I have the right take on this...As I understand it, if we ratify the Lisbon Treaty and after that ratification, where the EU has a competence, we will never be asked for an opinion by way of a referendum in Ireland again...
andrew wrote: » Elections serve to promote the public's intrests in government. We have elections every 5 years because people's opinions change, and they need the chance to elect a new government to represent these new changes. Similarly, if the government's 'reassurrances' were to change public opinion, do you think that another vote on it would be undemocratic? You said that the government 'ignored' our vote. Surely ignoring our vote would mean pushing it through anyway, not giving us another chance to vote.
thelordofcheese wrote: » Until the government ratifies lisbon in spite of a No vote, it's still democracy. You mightn't think it's fair to have a second vote in such a short timespan, but it's still democratic. You really need to learn the difference between somehting you think is against the spirit of democracy and what democracy actually is.
ben bedlam wrote: » Ive heard suggestions from places such as the Oirechteas that perhaps the coverage for Lisbon 2 should not give equal time to both the yes and no sides. I was just wondering has this proposal been given the go ahead? If so, it seems like a complete attack on democracy and freedom of speech
cooperguy wrote: » You really havent being paying attention have you. They have addressed the main reasons people voted no in the first place. Namely the loss of a commissioner, abortion, conscription and taxes. Now they want to do a revote after these concerns have been addressed. How is that undemocratic? Is that not the very point of democracy?
walshb wrote: » C'mon now, you are being rather pedantic and technical for the sake of it and I am in no doubt that if they somehow could, they damn well would IGNORE the vote. That's the point; by asking so so so soon for another VOTE, it is nothing but crystal clear, that they do not respect their electorate, nor accept their right to vote the way they feel. Man, this to me is so so clear. Listen, this has happened before with Nice, and now again they are at it. When will folks call a spade, a spade? What does it take to get the message thru that this govt and the Nice govt did not accept a vote by the people? And make no mistake about it, it will continue to happen as long as we accept these disgracefully low standards and contempt
andrew wrote: » You didn't answer my question though. What's the difference (other than the timespan) between this and having frequent general elections. And don't just ignore the question by saying I'm being pedantic - it's a valid question.
the-island-man wrote: » Here are two reasons i would vote NO and other people can say what they like: 1) E.U is not fully democratic
2) We have lost a lot of sovereignty by changing years ago from the E.E.C to the E.U in my opinion
1) The E.U has three main bodies the commission, the council of ministers and the E.U parliment! We get to vote in members of one of these bodies, the E.U parliment! The others get appointed by our goverment, that is not direct democracy and should not be the case!
In my opinion we should break from the E.U altogether and try to get back to the stage where we were!
I think this would be more beneficial to us than a lot of people think! For a start if we got back our own currency and had our own central bank again we firstly would be able to set our own interests rates giving people payin back loans even more breathing space!
Secondly our currency would weaken against the Euro, us dollar, Great Britain pound etc!
Coupled with our low corporation tax it would mean that it would be a more attractive place for a company to set up than it is at the moment!
We would also be exporting even more products!
Imports would cost more! Oil, coffee, tea, cars etc!
walshb wrote: » At least I have the guts to be honest and not hide behind words. They had a vote, they didn't get the answer THEY wanted and now, another vote is being put to us on the SAME treaty, no matter what spin is put on it, assuranceS etc etc. Feck sake, am I alone in thinking that this is just not democracy and that the standards are simply LOW?
walshb wrote: » 4 years for one! Oh, and the LAW states that we have to have a general election after 5 years! This is easy!
walshb wrote: » Again, hiding behind a technicality and simple semantics. Be honest and be truthful, call a spade, a spade. If this is NOT an example of a lack of democracy, I don't know what is; unless of course they simply tell us that we CAN only vote YES, there is no NO option!
andrew wrote: » Ok. So you accept that there needs to be a time difference between elections. So do you think that it'd be ok to have another Lisbon vote after a period of years? How long do you think we should wait for it not to be 'undemocratic'?
the-island-man wrote: » Here are two reasons i would vote NO and other people can say what they like: 1) E.U is not fully democratic...... 2) We have lost a lot of sovereignty by changing years ago from the E.E.C to the E.U in my opinion....... 3) In my opinion we should break from the E.U altogether and try to get back to the stage where we were!
andrew wrote: » Ok. So you accept that there needs to be a time difference between elections. So do you think that it'd be ok to have another Lisbon vote after a period of years? How long do you think we should wait for it not to be 'undemocratic'? The reason that Law exists (and i presume you agree with it) is to prevent dictatorships and whatnot. And dictatorships are bad, because they don't represent public opinion (amongst other crap things).Similarly then, whats the problem with voting on lisbon again if assurances change public opinion, because not representing public opinion is bad. And i'm not being pedantic, just logically following through your arguments.
walshb wrote: » I believe for the sake of democracy and for not just democracy, but GOOD democracy, we should be afforded respect, and a poxy year sends out nothing but a message of disrespect! Andrew, that is just a belief of mine that I am passionate about. You mentioned dictators. I tell you, the way Lisbon and Nice were handled, they weren't bloody far off. Off topic, when Mary McAleese was voted in unchallenged for her second term, IMO, democracy was not in play and it was wrong. No matter what, some vote should have taken place and this country should have seen to it that NO person could take office in this country without ELECTION. I wonder were our laws broken by this example? Call me precise or even awkward, but at least I want efficiency and law and procedures and above all, respect!
ShooterSF wrote: » I have yet to meet a No voter who would have a problem if the government tried to work with a no vote for 5 years and then IF it was unworkable came back to us. Atleast they'd you know try. So maybe that'd be a starting point?
walshb wrote: » I believe for the sake of democracy and for not just democracy, but GOOD democracy, we should be afforded respect, and a poxy year sends out nothing but a message of disrespect! Andrew, that is just a belief of mine that I am passionate about. You mentioned dictators. I tell you, the way Lisbon and Nice were handled, they weren't bloody far off.
andrew wrote: » So the problem isn't so much that we're having another vote then, but that we're having another vote so soon, which tbh I think isn't that unreasonable. I think it's the no.1 problem people have. But how long have we to wait then? If the governments assurances were to allay everyone's fears by next October, then would there really be a problem with running it again so soon?
Dankoozy wrote: » but what do you do if nobody runs for election? send someone like Mr. Tayto in?
