Rb wrote: » If this forum represents the people of Ireland, I am terrified for its future.
conchubhar1 wrote: » the veto is the only through safeguard or power we have in the eu we loose it in many areas
Ellie The Mess wrote: » nobody had really told me what the reasons for a no vote were yet.
Ellie The Mess wrote: » So I'm asking you, people of Ireland, why should an Irish person go and vote no in October even when the protocol is passed?
RandomName2 wrote: » Voting no because this constitutional ammending treaty has been rejected in three referenda (and would be rejected in a fourth if UK got a vote)
P. Breathnach wrote: » When I see some of the arguments advanced here and elsewhere by the "no" camp, I become more and more convinced that some of them are on a kind of perverse power trip: they want a no vote because it would have a big impact, and the possibility that the consequences might be bad are less important than the fact that the consequences would be large.
turgon wrote: » People here have said to vote No because we have been asked to vote twice. Or vote No because another EU Treaty was rejected. Well them voting No will not change this at all. They have effectively wasted their vote. The irony is, of course, that these people champion themselves as defenders of democracy, yet the attitude they take towards voting (ie not voting in an informed manner on relevant issues) is arguably the greatest failing of democracy.
Ellie The Mess wrote: » Yes, I know, there are probably about a million other threads on this subject but, indeed, I do feel the need to start a new one because, well, I started getting a little bit confused after, having read the 100th page on other threads, nobody had really told me what the reasons for a no vote were yet. So I'm asking you, people of Ireland, why should an Irish person go and vote no in October even when the protocol is passed?
ro09 wrote: » I am voting no because I love my Country, I dont want to be Part of a United States of Europe where I will get very little say in the way my country is run or what laws are introduced. People who are making Plenty of money out of Europe will of course vote Yes to everything. The more Treaties that are passed the more we loose control of our own affairs. Remember all EU law supersedes our Constitutional Law. I dont think our Founders who gave their lives so we could have independance would be happy with us throwing this very independance away! There are Plenty of Countries out there who are not in Europe and are individually doing very well indeed! Lets keep our traditions and our way of life by saying no to the EU.
P. Breathnach wrote: » What happens when we run out of turf?
I am voting no because I love my Country, I dont want to be Part of a United States of Europe where I will get very little say in the way my country is run or what laws are introduced. People who are making Plenty of money out of Europe will of course vote Yes to everything. The more Treaties that are passed the more we loose control of our own affairs. Remember all EU law supersedes our Constitutional Law. I dont think our Founders who gave their lives so we could have independance would be happy with us throwing this very independance away! There are Plenty of Countries out there who are not in Europe and are individually doing very well indeed! Lets keep our traditions and our way of life by saying no to the EU.
The Mustard wrote: » http://www.dfa.ie/home/index.aspx?id=73360. The Minister remarked that the survey shows that people felt they did not have enough clear information in the run-up to voting day. This lack of information was the single biggest reason given for the decision to vote No or to abstain on 12 June. For example, more than four in every ten people who voted against the Treaty said they had voted No due to a lack of information which gave rise to genuine concerns about what they were being asked to vote on. My opinion is that we were already asked to vote on this. We voted. We are now being asked to vote again. I don't think that it's very democratic to be made to vote again, until we vote the way the government wants us to vote. I am going to vote no for that reason.
Rb wrote: » What does that have to do with the Treaty?
cooperguy wrote: » All European law that we agree to with a referendum supersedes Irish law. So what specifically is your problem with these laws? And we have all made plenty of money from Europe whether it be through being employed in 1 of the thousands of jobs created by our membership of the EU or any one of the projects funded by EU grants that we use every day. Also where exactly does this change our traditions? Surely you have a better argument than misguided patriotism?
P. Breathnach wrote: » Quite a lot, really, albeit indirectly.
Rb wrote: » So you're admitting it has nothing to do with the text?
askitnice wrote: » Simply put another NO vote does NOT mean that we have to leave the EU or the Euro, it just means Lisbon can not be implemented and we use existing treaty's. .
askitnice wrote: » What is really starting to get to me is the amount of bulls**t and fear mongering being put out by the yes campaign, and its on this forum to. Simply put another NO vote does NOT mean that we have to leave the EU or the Euro, it just means Lisbon can not be implemented and we use existing treaty's. In fact at te moment there is no way we can be kicked out of EU without our Goverment specifically asking for it/voting for it which will not happen.
P. Breathnach wrote: » If we vote no to Lisbon, we will frustrate the ambitions of every other member of the EU. In a world where alliances are essential, it is not a good thing to be friendless. One of the reasons why Ireland has done so well out of membership of the EEC/EC/EU is that we have been (mostly correctly) seen as "good Europeans". It is an advantage that we should not throw away lightly. I have yet to see a downside to the Lisbon Treaty that outweighs the benefits to us of being an EU member in good standing.
Riskymove wrote: » there are always going to be issues raised that have nothing to do with treaty or misconstrued so as to cause fear in people In the last referendum a big fuss was made about Ireland not always having a commissioner..I mean..so what?...you'd swear it was some important position for Ireland with important repurcussions for Ireland rather than just a well-paid plum role for some political person I mean people voting no over this? ....can't understand it no, does our Governemnt try and defend the proposal (a good one imo)..no..lets just get the EU to scrap it and the other issues, taxation etc...last time they told us treaty has nothing to do with these issues, people still vote no...now we have them saying..look, they really have nothing to do with treaty, we swear and these EU heads agree and they swear too....what's the difference they are just going down the same route as far as i can see. No attempt to really explain the treaty or discuss issues..lets just get rid of issues people seemed to be concerned about last time
askitnice wrote: » More alarmist crap, the funding we recieve from EU is only dependent on us being members and having qualified infrastructure projects same as any other EU member. Not that we're seen as good europeans, what a childish argument, be a good country or else.. or else what? We can not be removed we still have veto powers etc...
You allude to funding being cut or us removed from EU, how exactly are the EU going to punish us, they cannot remove us, they cannot specifically target Ireland with cuts in funding unless its across the board throughout the EU.
Our refusal of this treaty did not and will not make us bad Europeans as you say, just democratic ones.
You sound very alarmist "what happens when turf runs out" blah blah blah... Turf!! what year do you think it is 1909.
