Irexit Freedom Party

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Good news: Dr Brown - Last Activity: Today 13:11

We might get some proof!




*Holds breath*

ted1 wrote: »

They wanted independence from Britain, an EU exit round pretty much put us back under their reign.


There is no possible way for us to introduce our own currency without being crucified on the market

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

There is very little factual evidence that this is true; furthermore, all economic facts point to the opposite... particularly jumping ship from a stable currency. This isn't even touching on the macroeconomic realities such as currency pinning and devaluation.

It's just pure, unadulterated, unsupported, non-factual, nonsensical and unrealistic nonsense.

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

We would still bring in asylum seekers, this isn't some EU thing as you're implying.

But, turning to the money, I wonder why we spend so much - it's really not that much actually - "in a five year period from 2005 to 2009, the government spent a total of more than €1.27 billion on asylum seekers €424 million was spent on direct provision" http://www.thejournal.ie/asylum-seekers-cost-1670088-Sep2014/

Immigration Control Platform opposes the Lisbon Treaty because of its implications for asylum and immigration.

Most of our worries centre around the Charter of Fundamental Rights which is absolutely sweeping in its scope [“The Charter represents a quantum leap in the formulation of rights...” Prof. Dermot Walsh, School of Law, University of Limerick].

Unlike any other international rights convention it has no denunciation or “opt-out” clause. Speaking at a seminar on another convention in NUI, Galway, Prof. Schabas of the Human Rights Centre said all conventions have this opt-out clause without which no country would sign them.

This leaves us open for all time to the interpretations of the European Court of Justice on nearly everything.

Article 18 of the Charter binds us to asylum in a way which could and surely would be interpreted by the ECJ as removing the right we currently have to opt out of the Geneva Convention on Refugees. This is a right since we signed it in 1954 before the EU even came into existence. The British government, some time ago, suggested it might have to implement that opt-out clause.

Article 18 might also be interpreted as imposing “burden-sharing” of refugees on us on the basis that if one imposed a right of asylum on a member state the quid pro quo would have to be burden-sharing (cf. the pressures on Malta).

Catherine Costello, legal expert, has suggested that Article 15 could necessitate the right to work for asylum seekers – a huge pull factor. She has also suggested that Article 35 could undermine even the EU’s own directives on health entitlements for asylum seekers.

Several articles in the Charter are so broad in scope as to allow for an interpretation that at a certain point (after x years) one could not deport an illegal, thereby necessitating amnesties (e.g. Article 1 on “human dignity” or Article 4 on “inhuman treatment”).

The 4th Protocol to the Amsterdam Treaty may not protect us. It currently gives us an exemption from rules on asylum and immigration. The ECJ could well argue that the 4th Protocol has been hollowed out because we have chosen to opt in to almost all directives and could declare us now bound by the common asylum policy. The same could eventually apply to immigration. Or it could declare the Charter to be more “fundamental” than anything else such as the 4th Protocol and therefore binding. We are at the mercy of the ECJ for all interpretations and the “European Project” will be its overriding concern.

Following from the above, we would also be very worried about the move to Qualified Majority Voting (loss of veto) in the area of asylum and immigration because of its potential future inclusion of us.

In a volatile and speedily changing world we would be mad to sign the blank cheque with no exit clause that is the Charter of Fundamental Rights. That is why Britain has opted out of it.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Yep.

I never got this sort of weird Europhobia but true to form there's no evidence for it.

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I'd love to hear what provisions in the Treaty of Nice you believe caused this influx of "East Europeans flooding into Ireland"

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

That doesn't really answer the question though does it?