Lisbon vote October 2nd - How do you intend to vote? - Page 68

darkman2 · 2009-07-08 14:42:35

October 2nd is the date - how do you intend to vote?

#2012 02-09-2009 09:23PM

Spiritoftheseventies

Closed Accounts Posts: 12,082 ✭✭✭✭

Join Date: July 2009

Posts: 11809

netron wrote: »

respectfully i disagree.

getting to a position of power and sheer bloody mindedness like O'Leary has does NOT suggest a "love/hate" relationship.

the only conclusion i can draw from his endorsement of the Yes campaign is that he has been bought out. plain as that.

O'Leary is certainly not the kind of person to have a "love/hate" undecided opinion - and the ONLY thing that matters to him is the future profitability of Ryanair.

That is the ONLY thing he is considering.

To confirm O Leary voted Yes the last time too. So don't think a deal was done. Read back on Kerrigan piece from a a page or two back.

0

#2013 02-09-2009 09:43PM

Irish and Proud

Closed Accounts Posts: 1,735 ✭✭✭

Join Date: May 2007

Posts: 1699

ranmac wrote: »

I totally agree with FutureTaoiseach if only for the proposed insertikon of the following Clause

"ARTICLE 5b
In defining and implementing its policies and activities, the Union shall aim to combat
discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation."

To me this clause s totally abhorrent and anti-christian

I'm certainly voting NO!, but I'd like to express my disgust that religion is being brought into the argument regarding the Lisbon Treaty. Most of us voting NO to Lisbon are doing so on the grounds of either democracy or national interest.

My concerns would relate mainly to Commerce (privatisation), Defence, Social Affairs, Ireland's place in the EU, Ireland's Industry and Resources, Ireland's connections with the US etc. I'm not here to argue any of these points (I'm already decided), but mainly to express where I think religion stands on this forum.

Regards!

0

#2014 02-09-2009 11:02PM

ei.sdraob

Closed Accounts Posts: 9,364 ✭✭✭

Join Date: July 2009

Posts: 9121

Irish and Proud wrote: »

My concerns would relate mainly to Commerce (privatisation)

privatization of what exactly?

as a business owner i would like to hear more

0

#2015 02-09-2009 11:06PM

D.Harry

Closed Accounts Posts: 24 ✭

Join Date: March 2008

Posts: 24

It's No from me.
I want to see the EU built from the ground up, on a foundation of democracy and accountability.
This Lisbon EU is being imposed from the top down by pigs at a trough, with contempt for the people.
Ireland is not a pawn to be traded in the selfish interests of political parties and corporations. The people come first. We just have to make ourselves heard.

0

#2016 02-09-2009 11:10PM

ei.sdraob

Closed Accounts Posts: 9,364 ✭✭✭

Join Date: July 2009

Posts: 9121

D.Harry wrote: »

I want to see the EU built from the ground up, on a foundation of democracy and accountability.

oh? please describe and outline your vision for EU

D.Harry wrote: »

This Lisbon EU is being imposed from the top down by pigs at a trough, with contempt for the people.

these "pigs" get voted in by the people, if you don't like it do something about it by voting the "pigs" you like, thats democracy for you

D.Harry wrote: »

Ireland is not a pawn to be traded in the selfish interests of political parties and corporations. The people come first. We just have to make ourselves heard.

what exactly is being traded in in selfish interest of parties and corporation?

seriously, the NO side logic is getting worse day by day, please expand on the points your brought up

as otherwise they are nothing more than empty slogans

0

#2017 02-09-2009 11:15PM

Kev_ps3

Closed Accounts Posts: 3,604 ✭✭✭

Join Date: January 2004

Posts: 3476

No the first time, No the second, and if they ask me a third time it will be another No.

0

#2018 02-09-2009 11:21PM

ei.sdraob

Closed Accounts Posts: 9,364 ✭✭✭

Join Date: July 2009

Posts: 9121

Kev_ps3 wrote: »

No the first time, No the second, and if they ask me a third time it will be another No.

dont get your hopes up, there wont be a 3rd one and there is no precedent either

0

#2019 02-09-2009 11:21PM

Bannana

Closed Accounts Posts: 52 ✭✭

Join Date: May 2009

Posts: 47

I voted yes to the treaty initially and I was going to vote no this time as I felt that it's fundamentally wrong to go back to the people because the government were not happy with the decision we made i.e We are not a democracy if the government disregards what the people, as a majority, vote for.

However, considering the full changes, such as The Council of Ministers meeting in public over proposed changes in law, The European Council will have a more precise "mission statement" and the fact that Ireland have an option to opt in or out of the more debated issues have convinced me to vote yes.

Also, the ridiculous scare mongering tactics that the no side have implemented has also pushed me away from a no vote

My two cents anyway...

0

#2020 02-09-2009 11:27PM

D.Harry

Closed Accounts Posts: 24 ✭

Join Date: March 2008

Posts: 24

ei.sdraob wrote: »

please expand on the points your brought up..

Not Lisbon - how's that?

0

#2021 02-09-2009 11:29PM

Scofflaw

Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭

Join Date: January 2006

Posts: 21354

D.Harry wrote: »

Not Lisbon - how's that?

Inadequate...

cordially,
Scofflaw

0

#2022 03-09-2009 07:54AM

Spiritoftheseventies

Closed Accounts Posts: 12,082 ✭✭✭✭

Join Date: July 2009

Posts: 11809

Okay this from Patricia McKenna who at this stage looks to be one of the main No voters. A lot of her arguments so far are down to lack of transparency and fairness and I think they need to be recognised.
This morning on Morning Ireland from an Interview at press conference she mentioned that there was a lack of transparency over who is exactly funding the yes campaigns.
Clip below is in reference to lack of balance in booklet sent out recently by Referendum commission.
To quote from article
"Ms McKenna, who resigned from the Green Party earlier this year, said it fails to point out that Ireland's vote in the Council of Ministers decreases by over 50pc.

The booklet also fails to mention the loss of the veto, which means moving to majority voting in a whole range of new policy areas.

"These two changes are of crucial importance but the Referendum Commission has basically ignored them," Ms McKenna said last night."

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/mckenna-threatens-court-action-over-partisan-booklet-1875174.html

0

#2023 03-09-2009 08:09AM

ei.sdraob

Closed Accounts Posts: 9,364 ✭✭✭

Join Date: July 2009

Posts: 9121

bayviewclose wrote: »

that there was a lack of transparency over who is exactly funding the yes campaigns.

as opposed to complete lack of information as to whom funded Libertas and funds Coir

0

#2024 03-09-2009 08:22AM

Spiritoftheseventies

Closed Accounts Posts: 12,082 ✭✭✭✭

Join Date: July 2009

Posts: 11809

ei.sdraob wrote: »

as opposed to complete lack of information as to whom funded Libertas and funds Coir

Well this is a new campaign. Can we expect fairness on ALL sides this time. If one side can claim a lack of transparency, the other side can too.
Think its valid point if Referendum Commission who after all are supposed to be partisan here send out a booklet without these two fairly key issues included you have to ask questions.

0

#2025 03-09-2009 08:29AM

ei.sdraob

Closed Accounts Posts: 9,364 ✭✭✭

Join Date: July 2009

Posts: 9121

bayviewclose wrote: »

Well this is a new campaign. Can we expect fairness on ALL sides this time. If one side can claim a lack of transparency, the other side can too.
Think its valid point if Referendum Commission who after all are supposed to be partisan here send out a booklet without these two fairly key issues included you have to ask questions.

from what im aware all the parties on the YES side are bound by funding laws, where theres a max limit on donation and a list is kept, maybe the lawyers among us can clarify about this

Libertas on the other hand spend millions and not a word of where it came from as under Lisbon 1 they were registered as private company not a party more info @ http://www.cro.ie/search/ type in libertas

are they referring to his guide? or something else

http://www.lisbontreaty2009.ie/lisbon_treaty_guide.pdf

qmv and vetoing is mentioned in

http://www.lisbontreaty2009.ie/lisbon_treaty_extended_guide.pdf

0

#2026 03-09-2009 08:35AM

Spiritoftheseventies

Closed Accounts Posts: 12,082 ✭✭✭✭

Join Date: July 2009

Posts: 11809

ei.sdraob wrote: »

from what im aware all the parties on the YES side are bound by funding laws, where theres a max limit on donation and a list is kept, maybe the lawyers among us can clarify about this

Libertas on the other hand spend millions and not a word of where it came from as under Lisbon 1 they were registered as private company not a party more info @ http://www.cro.ie/search/ type in libertas

are they referring to his guide? or something else

http://www.lisbontreaty2009.ie/lisbon_treaty_guide.pdf

qmv and vetoing is mentioned in

http://www.lisbontreaty2009.ie/lisbon_treaty_extended_guide.pdf

No sorry I think you are misreading the post. Never mentioned Libertas. Talking about booklet Referendum Commission sent out. Its all mentioned in link posted above.

0

#2027 03-09-2009 08:36AM

ei.sdraob

Closed Accounts Posts: 9,364 ✭✭✭

Join Date: July 2009

Posts: 9121

bayviewclose wrote: »

No sorry I think you are misreading the post. Never mentioned Libertas. .

i mentioned Libertas to remind you about their very dodgy existence that still no light has been shed on

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61929433&postcount=2023

0

#2028 03-09-2009 08:41AM

Elba101

Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 578 ✭✭✭

Join Date: March 2008

Posts: 534

free to prosper wrote: »

The Wall Street Journal was correct when it said (26/6/09), 'In some countries they rig votes, in the European Union they repeat votes to get the desired result.'

I'm voting NO for the democratic good of Ireland and of Europe.

The Irish people voted NO last time due to a lack of understanding about the Lisbon Treaty and because the usual sensitive issues eg abortion, conscription and neutrality where thought to be under threat.

We are voting again because the Irish Governemnt went and got legally binding guarantees that the above areas would not be affected. In other words, these areas are decided by the Irish people NOT the EU. The EU cannot implement abortion, higher tax rates or force our boys to war.

All member states, including the ECJ, are obliged to interpret the Lisbon Treaty in line with the Guarantees.

Vote whatever way you want, just make sure you are well enough informed!!

0

#2029 03-09-2009 08:49AM

Spiritoftheseventies

Closed Accounts Posts: 12,082 ✭✭✭✭

Join Date: July 2009

Posts: 11809

ei.sdraob wrote: »

i mentioned Libertas to remind you about their very dodgy existence that still no light has been shed on

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61929433&postcount=2023

Yes but we are not talking about Libertas. Im sure it was discussed at length after first treaty

0

#2030 03-09-2009 08:54AM

ei.sdraob

Closed Accounts Posts: 9,364 ✭✭✭

Join Date: July 2009

Posts: 9121

bayviewclose wrote: »

Yes but we are not talking about Libertas. Im sure it was discussed at length after first treaty

and no one is still any wiser where the money came from

also Coir guy refused to answer the funding question and who the members are when asked about it (several) times on Matt Cooper's show few days back

0

#2031 03-09-2009 08:58AM

Spiritoftheseventies

Closed Accounts Posts: 12,082 ✭✭✭✭

Join Date: July 2009

Posts: 11809

ei.sdraob wrote: »

and no one is still any wiser where the money came from

also Coir guy refused to answer the funding question and who the members are when asked about it (several) times on Matt Cooper's show few days back

Yes heard that. Not disputing that there were problems with funding on No side. But can we deal with the issue with Referendum commission for a moment.

0

#2032 03-09-2009 09:34AM

ei.sdraob

Closed Accounts Posts: 9,364 ✭✭✭

Join Date: July 2009

Posts: 9121

bayviewclose wrote: »

Yes heard that. Not disputing that there were problems with funding on No side. But can we deal with the issue with Referendum commission for a moment.

i did read the PDFs linked in my post earlier from their site

0

#2033 03-09-2009 10:31AM

marco_polo

Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 10,093 Mod ✭✭✭✭

Join Date: August 2006

Posts: 9880

bayviewclose wrote: »

Okay this from Patricia McKenna who at this stage looks to be one of the main No voters. A lot of her arguments so far are down to lack of transparency and fairness and I think they need to be recognised.
This morning on Morning Ireland from an Interview at press conference she mentioned that there was a lack of transparency over who is exactly funding the yes campaigns.
Clip below is in reference to lack of balance in booklet sent out recently by Referendum commission.
To quote from article
"Ms McKenna, who resigned from the Green Party earlier this year, said it fails to point out that Ireland's vote in the Council of Ministers decreases by over 50pc.

The booklet also fails to mention the loss of the veto, which means moving to majority voting in a whole range of new policy areas.

"These two changes are of crucial importance but the Referendum Commission has basically ignored them," Ms McKenna said last night."

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/mckenna-threatens-court-action-over-partisan-booklet-1875174.html

One is not true and QMV is mentioned in both the guide and the extended guide?

"More decisions would be made by QMV; for example, in the areas of energy, asylum and immigration."

0

#2034 03-09-2009 11:05AM

Spiritoftheseventies

Closed Accounts Posts: 12,082 ✭✭✭✭

Join Date: July 2009

Posts: 11809

ei.sdraob wrote: »

i mentioned Libertas to remind you about their very dodgy existence that still no light has been shed on

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61929433&postcount=2023

sorry did you post the right link there. That seems to be a link to post you already posted

0

#2035 03-09-2009 11:48AM

ei.sdraob

Closed Accounts Posts: 9,364 ✭✭✭

Join Date: July 2009

Posts: 9121

http://www.lisbontreaty2009.ie/

http://www.lisbontreaty2009.ie/lisbon_treaty.pdf

http://www.lisbontreaty2009.ie/lisbon_treaty_guide.pdf

http://www.lisbontreaty2009.ie/lisbon_treaty_extended_guide.pdf

0

#2036 03-09-2009 11:51AM

Keewee6

Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 287 ✭✭

Join Date: January 2007

Posts: 211

voting no myself

0

#2037 03-09-2009 11:55AM

ei.sdraob

Closed Accounts Posts: 9,364 ✭✭✭

Join Date: July 2009

Posts: 9121

Keewee6 wrote: »

voting no myself

good for you so

0

#2038 03-09-2009 12:46PM

Spiritoftheseventies

Closed Accounts Posts: 12,082 ✭✭✭✭

Join Date: July 2009

Posts: 11809

ei.sdraob wrote: »

from what im aware all the parties on the YES side are bound by funding laws, where theres a max limit on donation and a list is kept, maybe the lawyers among us can clarify about this

Libertas on the other hand spend millions and not a word of where it came from as under Lisbon 1 they were registered as private company not a party more info @ http://www.cro.ie/search/ type in libertas

are they referring to his guide? or something else

http://www.lisbontreaty2009.ie/lisbon_treaty_guide.pdf

qmv and vetoing is mentioned in

http://www.lisbontreaty2009.ie/lisbon_treaty_extended_guide.pdf

This is only mention of veto i could find in booklet
b)taxation
Ireland ’s policies on direct taxation cannot be changed by the EU unless there is
unanimous agreement in the Council of Ministers.
Ireland therefore has the power to veto any such change and the Lisbon Treaty does
not change this.
The European Council has stated that nothing in the Lisbon Treaty makes any change of
any kind for any member state in relation to the powers of the EU in respect of taxation.
From indepedent article
"The booklet also fails to mention the loss of the veto, which means moving to majority voting in a whole range of new policy areas".

0

#2039 03-09-2009 12:51PM

marco_polo

Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 10,093 Mod ✭✭✭✭

Join Date: August 2006

Posts: 9880

bayviewclose wrote: »

This is only mention of veto i could find in booklet
b)taxation
Ireland ’s policies on direct taxation cannot be changed by the EU unless there is
unanimous agreement in the Council of Ministers.
Ireland therefore has the power to veto any such change and the Lisbon Treaty does
not change this.
The European Council has stated that nothing in the Lisbon Treaty makes any change of
any kind for any member state in relation to the powers of the EU in respect of taxation.
From indepedent article
"The booklet also fails to mention the loss of the veto, which means moving to majority voting in a whole range of new policy areas".

This is in the slimmed down version, Council Changes?

Proposed changes

More decisions would be made bythe Council in co-operation with the European Parliament.

More decisions would be made by QMV; for example, in the areas of energy, asylum and immigration.

From 2014, a qualified majority would require that:
a) 55% of the member states agree;
b) those member states supporting the decision must represent 65%of the EU population.

0

#2040 03-09-2009 01:08PM

Keewee6

Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 287 ✭✭

Join Date: January 2007

Posts: 211

ei.sdraob wrote: »

good for you so

thanks:D

0

#2041 03-09-2009 01:15PM

Spiritoftheseventies

Closed Accounts Posts: 12,082 ✭✭✭✭

Join Date: July 2009

Posts: 11809

marco_polo wrote: »

This is in the slimmed down version, Council Changes?

Which in effect means the veto is lost?

0

Lisbon vote October 2nd - How do you intend to vote?

Comments