Lisbon Treaty?

Heineken Helen

Anybody have a clue what the fuck it is and why the fuck we're supposed to vote yes for it? All these politicians telling us a no vote will be a disaster have me convinced that a no vote is the way I'm gonna go.

I'm more and more disliking this whole 'European' bullshit and think we should just get the fuck out of it while we still can.

My3rdEye

Heineken Helen wrote:

Anybody have a clue what the fuck it is and why the fuck we're supposed to vote yes for it? All these politicians telling us a no vote will be a disaster have me convinced that a no vote is the way I'm gonna go.

I'm more and more disliking this whole 'European' bullshit and think we should just get the fuck out of it while we still can.

http://europa.eu/lisbon_treaty/index_en.htm

Depends what you think of the EU. At a glance it looks like you lose more sovereignty.

Heineken Helen

My3rdEye wrote:

http://europa.eu/lisbon_treaty/index_en.htm

Depends what you think of the EU. At a glance it looks like you lose more sovereignty.

Thank you and that's what I'd been thinking too. I just don't like how they're trying to turn us into a united states of europe... maybe not yet and they'll do it very very very slowly which is why I'm gonna vote against everything! I think more and more people are getting disillusioned with the whole thing also. We fought long enough for our independence and now we're just gonna hand it over and let central europe control us? :eek:

You know it's a bad sign when all the political parties agree for once and tell you that a no vote would be a disaster and that we must vote yes.

Heineken Helen

Hmm... I found this towards the bottom:

http://www.lisbontreaty2008.ie/lisbon_treaty_changes_gov.html

The Lisbon Treaty also proposes to give the European Council the power to amend the Treaties so as to allow Qualified Majority Voting to operate in certain areas where unanimity is now required. It will also give them the power to apply the Ordinary Legislative Procedure in certain areas where a Special Legislative Procedure applies at present. Any such proposals must be agreed unanimously by the European Council.

This means that any national government may veto such a proposal. If the European Council does agree a proposed change, any national parliament may prevent these changes coming into effect. Under the proposed amendment to the Constitution of Ireland the approval of the Dáil and Seanad will be required for Ireland to agree to such proposed changes. Such changes would not require a referendum in Ireland.

so now I know why the government want us to vote yes... basically any future amendments to the treaty, we won't get to vote on them and the government can decide for us :mad: . Fuck that! Although most of the other stuff doesn't sound so bad... there usually is something hidden in these things!

spiral out

At least you get to vote for it, we were not given the choice.

Heineken Helen

spiral out wrote:

At least you get to vote for it, we were not given the choice.

I know but now it seems they want us to vote for REMOVING our vote

Am I reading it right?

JordyWordy

Heineken Helen wrote:

I know but now it seems they want us to vote for REMOVING our vote

Am I reading it right?

Yeah. The overall idea of the treaty is to overcome this stumbling block that currently exists.

At the moment certain countries (ie Ireland!!) have constitutions which require public vote to change the national constitution. Many EU members do not have constitutions (eg UK)...so if Ireland didnt have constitution the EU could just go ahead and make this change without requiring national votes. It is also worth noting that for the last major treaty (The Nice Treaty) the irish people did vote NO, leading to major talks between the EU and Ireland, and a more open, informative, and unbiased campaign before the second Irish referendum (which you will remember all too well).

In plain english, the irish people would have had to revote over and over again until a yes vote was achieved (thankfully just twice that time)...in order to allow the EU to make changes to its Primary source of law (EU & EC Treaties).

It is worth noting that while we lose Soveirgnty, in practice many of the changes that are contemplated by Lisbon are aimed at integrating the new 13 members.

i dont really see what the problem is. Those countries are in the exact same position Ireland was in in 1973. If we hadnt gotten so much funding and development aid imagine how much of a backwards shithole this country would be!

if you dont like the decisions your EU representatives are making and supporting then lobby them

Heineken Helen

'i dont really see what the problem is. Those countries are in the exact same position Ireland was in in 1973. If we hadnt gotten so much funding and development aid imagine how much of a backwards shithole this country would be!'

I have nothing wrong with this at all and can completely understand that. However, I see it all in a much bigger picture... I don't like globalisation at all. In fact I see no need for it... it scares the fuck out of me and I see very little positives to living in that kinda world.

I was surprised when reading about the treaty that it's not all that bad... BUT the fact that we're voting only to allow the politicians make any future decisions for us... THAT'S where I have the problem. There's a reason we have a vote at the moment so we can decide on any amendments. If we vote yes, we will no longer have the choice and the choice will be in the hands of our politicians... who I wouldn't trust really have our best interests at heart.

Heineken Helen

JordyWordy wrote:

At the moment certain countries (ie Ireland!!) have constitutions which require public vote to change the national constitution. Many EU members do not have constitutions (eg UK)...so if Ireland didnt have constitution the EU could just go ahead and make this change without requiring national votes. It is also worth noting that for the last major treaty (The Nice Treaty) the irish people did vote NO, leading to major talks between the EU and Ireland, and a more open, informative, and unbiased campaign before the second Irish referendum (which you will remember all too well).

In plain english, the irish people would have had to revote over and over again until a yes vote was achieved (thankfully just twice that time)...in order to allow the EU to make changes to its Primary source of law (EU & EC Treaties).

Unfortunately I DO remember voting twice for the Nice treaty... it was worth voting no the first time cos for the second vote they DID amend it to 'protect our neutrality' which will now be out of our hands if we give the politicians the power.

JordyWordy

Heineken Helen wrote:

Unfortunately I DO remember voting twice for the Nice treaty... it was worth voting no the first time cos for the second vote they DID amend it to 'protect our neutrality' which will now be out of our hands if we give the politicians the power.

i think the upshot of the Nice Treaty rejection was that Irelands stance as being neutral (and retaining the right to vote on issues affecting) had to be factored into the new EU leegislation. Consequently, the Lisbon Treaty continues the policies laid down for Ireland. I dont think theyre casting that aside just yet....but i could be misinterpreting that?

LisbonTreaty.ie
"E. Mutual Assistance
The Treaty provides that Member States have an obligation to aid and assist another Member State which is the victim of armed aggression. This assistance is to be in accordance with the UN Charter. The type of aid and assistance that is required is not specified. Mutual assistance is expressly stated not to compromise the specific character of the security and defence policy of certain Member States which includes Ireland’s policy on neutrality. "

JordyWordy

"D. Common Foreign and Security Policy
Common Foreign and Security Policy covers foreign policy and defence policy. The main decisions in this area must be made unanimously. The proposed change to the Constitution would continue the present arrangements for Ireland’s military neutrality. "

F. Solidarity Clause
This is a clause in the Treaty which states that Member States are obliged to assist each other if one is the victim of a terrorist attack or a natural or man made disaster. The precise details of this co-operation would have to be agreed unanimously by the Council.

Heineken Helen

JordyWordy wrote:

i think the upshot of the Nice Treaty rejection was that Irelands stance as being neutral (and retaining the right to vote on issues affecting) had to be factored into the new EU leegislation. Consequently, the Lisbon Treaty continues the policies laid down for Ireland. I dont think theyre casting that aside just yet....but i could be misinterpreting that?

LisbonTreaty.ie
"E. Mutual Assistance
The Treaty provides that Member States have an obligation to aid and assist another Member State which is the victim of armed aggression. This assistance is to be in accordance with the UN Charter. The type of aid and assistance that is required is not specified. Mutual assistance is expressly stated not to compromise the specific character of the security and defence policy of certain Member States which includes Ireland’s policy on neutrality. "

did you read in the link I posted... where each issue would go to a vote... Ireland has the option to opt out of anything that would effect our neutrality... I wanna keep that vote in OUR hands! Not have the government have the ultimate say. How great is it being part of a country where our government cannot get us involved in a war? Unless we change that by vote. If we vote yes to the lisbon treaty our government can vote on our behalf whatever way they see fit... and who knows what conflicts will arise in the near future. I just wanna keep that option in my hands, that's all. At the moment our constitution prevents them from getting us involved... but this is essentially overriding our constitution.

JordyWordy

Heineken Helen wrote:

did you read in the link I posted... where each issue would go to a vote... Ireland has the option to opt out of anything that would effect our neutrality... I wanna keep that vote in OUR hands! Not have the government have the ultimate say. How great is it being part of a country where our government cannot get us involved in a war? Unless we change that by vote. If we vote yes to the lisbon treaty our government can vote on our behalf whatever way they see fit... and who knows what conflicts will arise in the near future. I just wanna keep that option in my hands, that's all. At the moment our constitution prevents them from getting us involved... but this is essentially overriding our constitution.

thats very fair. its also disturbing that the nice language of all the official summaries of the Treaty seem to have this reassuring tone regarding keeping power with the people, etc.

the more i read it the more disturbing i find it that the EU treaties are now going to supercede our own constitution in general. there seem to be massive exceptions, but for that to be the general rule is kinda weird...(obviously it only applies in cases of EU law anyway but still)?

...im REALLY confused now and have a headache. im lying down for a while. PHEW!

Heineken Helen

JordyWordy wrote:

thats very fair. its also disturbing that the nice language of all the official summaries of the Treaty seem to have this reassuring tone regarding keeping power with the people, etc.

the more i read it the more disturbing i find it that the EU treaties are now going to supercede our own constitution in general. there seem to be massive exceptions, but for that to be the general rule is kinda weird...(obviously it only applies in cases of EU law anyway but still)?

...im REALLY confused now and have a headache. im lying down for a while. PHEW!

sorry! Lol

It's just when you read so much about conflicts in other parts of the world and I always think 'how the fuck did the people hand over the power so easily?' or 'did they not notice what was going on?', I just tend to be very suspicious of anything like this... Our government already have too much power over certain things, we don't wanna turn into another USA where we slowly hand it all over to them. I mean all we hear are the government telling everyone 'a no vote will be a disaster' but not ONE of them have said why... they all put a no vote in the same category as recession and starving kids... but that's NOT gonna happen if we vote no :rolleyes: how fucking stupid do they think we are? The EU in some cases is a nice idea... like with the new member states and helping them out and stuff... we should know! But they really don't need to push it any further, not now. Especially with the world being as unstable as it is, it makes me wonder what their motives really ARE! When it comes to politics, if something smells wrong it usually is

lgt

Heineken Helen wrote:

Anybody have a clue what the fuck it is and why the fuck we're supposed to vote yes for it? All these politicians telling us a no vote will be a disaster have me convinced that a no vote is the way I'm gonna go.

I'm more and more disliking this whole 'European' bullshit and think we should just get the fuck out of it while we still can.

Hi Helen,

Why would you want to get out of Europe when Ireland has been one of the key success stories of the European Union and has benefited so much from the funding and EU budget?

You still have a say on the European Union by electing representatives to the European Parliament. Your voice can be heard through them. You delegate power to your Irish Parliament representative and to your Irish European Parliament representative. If you do not approve of their conduct and voting record, you cast your vote to someone else at the next election.

The Nice Treaty is mainly due to the enlargement towards eastern Europe and how you can make decision with 20 plus countries all carrying veto power, regardless of size, population, etc. It's a move towards qualified-majority voting, without creating a two-speed Europe, thereby alienating even more the smaller countries.

Hope this makes sense! [am in a rush!]

Carlos D

I'm voting no.Yes the EU's done a lot for us,it doesn't mean we've to give them total power over us though.

Another reason is that in our college the only posters campaining for a yes vote have a large picture of a women's breasts or a man's crotch beside some crappy innuendo about getting 'a packageful' or some crap.Any campaign that condescending can't be worth voting for.

lgt

Heineken Helen wrote:

sorry! Lol

It's just when you read so much about conflicts in other parts of the world and I always think 'how the fuck did the people hand over the power so easily?' or 'did they not notice what was going on?', I just tend to be very suspicious of anything like this... Our government already have too much power over certain things, we don't wanna turn into another USA where we slowly hand it all over to them.

You strengthen the powers of the European parliament, which has been the trend recently to counteract the European Council [the national voice of governments pushing for national self-interest] and the European Commission [traditionally more oriented towards a communitarian, federalist view]

You do not hand over all power. You exercise power in the European elections and nationally in your own political elections.

Heineken Helen wrote:

:

I mean all we hear are the government telling everyone 'a no vote will be a disaster' but not ONE of them have said why... they all put a no vote in the same category as recession and starving kids... but that's NOT gonna happen if we vote no :rolleyes: how fucking stupid do they think we are? The EU in some cases is a nice idea... like with the new member states and helping them out and stuff... we should know! But they really don't need to push it any further, not now. Especially with the world being as unstable as it is, it makes me wonder what their motives really ARE! When it comes to politics, if something smells wrong it usually is

A No vote will derail the European agenda. It will have repercussions on the Euro, etc etc. Just think how the national currencies would have been coping in this turbulent time? It will ultimately affect people in their daily lives.

Btw, it's not just politicians, it's corporations, lobbies, not for profit organisations... all are involved in this. And you as a citizen of the European Union are also involved with this referendum, which is the attempt to continue with the European agenda after the European constitution was scrapped.

lgt

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6901353.stm

Q&A about the Lisbon Treaty.

JordyWordy

lgt wrote:

You do not hand over all power. You exercise power in the European elections and nationally in your own political elections.

The point is that the new treaty has the potential to dictate what terms are in our national constitution, and that those terms can be established by the EU (regarding certain areas) even if we reject them... i know that this is not the case for key areas, but still.

lgt wrote:

A No vote will derail the European agenda. It will have repercussions on the Euro, etc etc. Just think how the national currencies would have been coping in this turbulent time? It will ultimately affect people in their daily lives.

Btw, it's not just politicians, it's corporations, lobbies, not for profit organisations... all are involved in this. And you as a citizen of the European Union are also involved with this referendum, which is the attempt to continue with the European agenda after the European constitution was scrapped.

the no votes in Holland and France didnt affect the euro. all they did was strengthen the cause to have properly-constructed legislation presented to the people.

Because everyone is involved, does it not make sense that everyone will want to ensure their interests are upheld? but it cant be surprising. If legislation is drafted that could potentially go over the heads of national governments will that not affect the daily lives of people? ....i know they can lobby the EU courts, but in practice that is far more difficult than applying to a national court.

I cant see enough of a difference between the Lisbon Treaty and the Constitution to understand why people will vote for it...with the more I read about it - im getting lots of reading done today!

JordyWordy

Carlos D wrote:

I'm voting no.Yes the EU's done a lot for us,it doesn't mean we've to give them total power over us though.

Another reason is that in our college the only posters campaining for a yes vote have a large picture of a women's breasts or a man's crotch beside some crappy innuendo about getting 'a packageful' or some crap.Any campaign that condescending can't be worth voting for.

what college is that? havent seen those posters myself, but thats mad!

lgt

JordyWordy wrote:

The point is that the new treaty has the potential to dictate what terms are in our national constitution, and that those terms can be established by the EU (regarding certain areas) even if we reject them... i know that this is not the case for key areas, but still.

How can it dictate your national constitution?

JordyWordy wrote:

the no votes in Holland and France didnt affect the euro. all they did was strengthen the cause to have properly-constructed legislation presented to the people.

It had a huge political impact, and the implications could have been pretty severe, hence second try with the Lisbon treaty. And no referendum except for Ireland, which holds the fate of this treaty because if the No wins this Treaty will have to be rejected thus one country deciding for all. And it was the Irish government to decide for a referendum, no EU imposition.

JordyWordy wrote:

Because everyone is involved, does it not make sense that everyone will want to ensure their interests are upheld? but it cant be surprising. If legislation is drafted that could potentially go over the heads of national governments will that not affect the daily lives of people? ....i know they can lobby the EU courts, but in practice that is far more difficult than applying to a national court.

That's my point - everyone can have their say and ensure their interests are heard and safeguarded. There are different mechanisms. It's not just politicians. And the EU is comprised of the Parliament, the Council, the Commission. Why do you think it would be more difficult to go to the European Court of Justice than a national court to hear your case?

JordyWordy wrote:

I cant see enough of a difference between the Lisbon Treaty and the Constitution to understand why people will vote for it...with the more I read about it - im getting lots of reading done today!

Making an informed decision will be best, I agree

Carlos D

JordyWordy wrote:

what college is that? havent seen those posters myself, but thats mad!

NUI Maynooth.The posters are done by Fine Gael

http://yfg.ie/modules.php?set_albumName=album21&id=Lisbon_female&op=modload&name=NS-gallery&file=index&include=view_photo.php
http://yfg.ie/modules.php?set_albumName=album21&id=Lisbon_male&op=modload&name=NS-gallery&file=index&include=view_photo.php

I think the whole campaign of not explaining the treaty to us and just urging us to vote because they know what's best smacks of something sinister.WE decide in this case what's best,not the government.

JordyWordy

lgt wrote:

That's my point - everyone can have their say and ensure their interests are heard and safeguarded. There are different mechanisms. It's not just politicians. And the EU is comprised of the Parliament, the Council, the Commission. Why do you think it would be more difficult to go to the European Court of Justice than a national court to hear your case?

Taking cases to the european courts requires more finances, thats why its more difficult.

Our (Irish People's) interest are safeguarded by the Irish Constitution (Bunreacht na hEireann). For The Lisbon Treaty to be legally effective in Ireland requires changing our national Constitution...this referendum is not being held by the government here by choice - they have to do it for the Treaty to be legal here.

I have no problem with the structure of the EU or the idea of a European Constitution - but why is there so little information about this? the Irish government have legal duty to inform both the positive and negative sides of a vote. for the second referendum on Nice Treaty there was very accurate information available. For this referendum there is very little ACCURATE or SPECIFIC information available.

The information says our neutrality will be maintained, but provides no answers as to how they will do it as far as i can see. (it just talks in buzz-words - no hard evidence or structures of processes).

If this Treaty leads to a situation where the EU can require Ireland to assist other nations in wartime then it will have overridden our national constitution which states we are a neutral nation.

Make sense?

JordyWordy

lgt wrote:

It had a huge political impact, and the implications could have been pretty severe, hence second try with the Lisbon treaty.

The Lisbon Treaty seems to be the same document with a different name. If Holland and France rejected the old one, why so few changes in the new one?

lgt wrote:

And no referendum except for Ireland, which holds the fate of this treaty because if the No wins this Treaty will have to be rejected thus one country deciding for all. And it was the Irish government to decide for a referendum, no EU imposition.

Irish Constitution requires it. Not the government. The Government here want it to succeed - holding a referendum is making this more difficult for them! not their choice!

JordyWordy

Carlos D wrote:

NUI Maynooth.The posters are done by Fine Gael

http://yfg.ie/modules.php?set_albumName=album21&id=Lisbon_female&op=modload&name=NS-gallery&file=index&include=view_photo.php
http://yfg.ie/modules.php?set_albumName=album21&id=Lisbon_male&op=modload&name=NS-gallery&file=index&include=view_photo.php

I think the whole campaign of not explaining the treaty to us and just urging us to vote because they know what's best smacks of something sinister.WE decide in this case what's best,not the government.

wow, thats a weird and dodgy angle to take. i wonder what genius thought those posters were a good idea, aswell as not providing any information - especially after the whole Nice episode?

i havent seen any posters of notice at all for it on campus here (UCD), which is strange too. maybe its there, but it sure aint noticeable if it is!

Rhinocerous Surprise

Carlos D wrote:

NUI Maynooth.The posters are done by Fine Gael

http://yfg.ie/modules.php?set_albumName=album21&id=Lisbon_female&op=modload&name=NS-gallery&file=index&include=view_photo.php
http://yfg.ie/modules.php?set_albumName=album21&id=Lisbon_male&op=modload&name=NS-gallery&file=index&include=view_photo.php

I think the whole campaign of not explaining the treaty to us and just urging us to vote because they know what's best smacks of something sinister.WE decide in this case what's best,not the government.

It was getting one of those impossibly patronising leaflets that made me want to look deeper into the Lisbon Treaty, only to find that our government's doing a good job of obscuring the issue. A firm "No" vote from me and the rest of my family.

Cosmo

Lisbions need treaties?

Kann

JordyWordy wrote:

The Lisbon Treaty seems to be the same document with a different name. If Holland and France rejected the old one, why so few changes in the new one?



Irish Constitution requires it. Not the government. The Government here want it to succeed - holding a referendum is making this more difficult for them! not their choice!

Because the previous one was called a "constitution" and for some countries (france and holland for instance) a referendum was mandatory. With this treaty congressmen can vote it without asking the people. This is the most shameless antidemocratic shit that our parliament pulled on us. The people reject the first version so they come up with a new one that doesn't need popular vote.
So if you do have the opportunity to vote for it, please remember that diluting democracy is not a good idea.

JordyWordy

Kann wrote:

Because the previous one was called a "constitution" and for some countries (france and holland for instance) a referendum was mandatory. With this treaty congressmen can vote it without asking the people. This is the most shameless antidemocratic shit that our parliament pulled on us. The people reject the first version so they come up with a new one that doesn't need popular vote.
So if you do have the opportunity to vote for it, please remember that diluting democracy is not a good idea.

very well put. that was kinda my point...i was responding to (what i thought was) a suggestion that this treaty is realistically changed from constitution....except its really just a legal loophole to achieve the same result as the constitution.

i started out this thread not seeing the problem with the Treaty, and the more i read the more i dont like it

it really is crazy how theyre trying to hide what theyre doing.

"diluting democracy" - i like that phrase

Heineken Helen

lgt wrote:

Hi Helen,

Why would you want to get out of Europe when Ireland has been one of the key success stories of the European Union and has benefited so much from the funding and EU budget?

You still have a say on the European Union by electing representatives to the European Parliament. Your voice can be heard through them. You delegate power to your Irish Parliament representative and to your Irish European Parliament representative. If you do not approve of their conduct and voting record, you cast your vote to someone else at the next election.

The Nice Treaty is mainly due to the enlargement towards eastern Europe and how you can make decision with 20 plus countries all carrying veto power, regardless of size, population, etc. It's a move towards qualified-majority voting, without creating a two-speed Europe, thereby alienating even more the smaller countries.

Hope this makes sense! [am in a rush!]

It does make sense... but I disagree. I don't believe the EU is in it for the same reasons anymore... they're allowing other countries to join to make them more powerful. I don't understand why they don't leave it the way it is. I also don't believe any politician actually speaks on my behalf . Well there is one and I'll continue to vote for him... but the rest all speak gibberish. Veto power is great... BUT 4 countries need to veto something in order for it to actually BE vetoed... so basically, I have to elect a politician, more than likely NOT the one I want. A middle aged rich man will go to Europe to represent ME and my thoughts. If he (on behalf of me) disagrees with something... he will have to get 3 other countries to agree with him... and if not it will go ahead. I believe I've a VERY tiny voice in that process. If it ain't broken don't fix it. Yes, Ireland DID benefit very very much from the EU... under the 'broken' system? It doesn't seem very broken from where I am.

Hi by the way

Heineken Helen

Carlos D wrote:

I'm voting no.Yes the EU's done a lot for us,it doesn't mean we've to give them total power over us though.

Exactly! I mean the yes vote mainly point out how much we've gained from Europe and how it's only the people who want to deny that to other countries who would vote no. Believe me, that's sooooooooo far from my reasoning from voting no! I believe that it's actually a TINY part of what the Lisbon treaty entails. If they actually change it so that our constitution is still in one piece and so we still get to vote on every amendment... I probably WOULD vote yes. But handing all that power over to our government... the power literally to change our constitution without a vote :eek: why the fuck would I ever want to do that?