gaaboard.com

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2008/1117/1226700659487.html

A SECOND referendum on the Lisbon Treaty has a chance of being carried, according to the Irish Times/TNS mrbi poll which shows a swing to the Yes side since the referendum defeat last June.

The poll shows a change in public attitudes since June with 43 per cent now saying they would vote Yes, 39 per cent No and 18 per cent having no opinion.

Quote from: Zapatista on November 17, 2008, 10:26:04 AM
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2008/1117/1226700659487.html

A SECOND referendum on the Lisbon Treaty has a chance of being carried, according to the Irish Times/TNS mrbi poll which shows a swing to the Yes side since the referendum defeat last June.

The poll shows a change in public attitudes since June with 43 per cent now saying they would vote Yes, 39 per cent No and 18 per cent having no opinion.

Well the last No vote won us so much ! ::)

Quote from: Gnevin on November 17, 2008, 11:51:12 AM

Well the last No vote won us so much ! ::)

I don't get it?

I'd vote no to unhold the democratic decision of the people. You can't keep re-running a referendum until you get the result you want.

QuoteI'd vote no to unhold the democratic decision of the people.

What's the point of referenda if people won't vote on the substantive issue - it's not a forum for expressing dissatisfaction with something entirely unrelated.

Quote from: Billys Boots on November 17, 2008, 01:11:10 PM

What's the point of referenda if people won't vote on the substantive issue - it's not a forum for expressing dissatisfaction with something entirely unrelated.

Such as?

Quote from: Billys Boots on November 17, 2008, 01:11:10 PM

QuoteI'd vote no to unhold the democratic decision of the people.

What's the point of referenda if people won't vote on the substantive issue - it's not a forum for expressing dissatisfaction with something entirely unrelated.

And you know that for a fact! Are you a mind reader? Would there be a re-run if the vote had narrowly been carried but opinion polls showed that some voters just voted yes because their party told them to and therefore did not understand the "substantive issue".

Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 17, 2008, 01:08:19 PM
I'd vote no to unhold the democratic decision of the people. You can't keep re-running a referendum until you get the result you want.

But you're not re-running the same referendum. A lot of people said they voted No, because they were worried about Tax, Abortion or Conscription. Now it has been clairfied that these will not be affected. Lisbon I was not acceptable to the majority. Its not in the least bit undemocratic to try and find out if Lisbon II will be acceptable.

I think the point is that if the referendum is re-run with amendments to deal with the major issues people seemed to have with the last poll, for example with safeguards for the EU Commissioner, neutrality, abortion and taxation, then the referendum should be voted on, on it's own merits.

Surely that would be a fine example of democracy. People say no. Goverment studies why. People say why. Government proposes a new referendum with the main concerns addressed.

That's the way it's supposed to work.

Just voting no again, for the sake of sticking up two fingers at the government, would not seem to be very productive.

Vote No if you are still unhappy with the detail, by all means, but don't vote no just because you are being asked to vote on an amended failed proposal.

Quote from: Zapatista on November 17, 2008, 11:52:03 AM

Quote from: Gnevin on November 17, 2008, 11:51:12 AM

Well the last No vote won us so much ! ::)

I don't get it?

The no side promised us the sun, moon and stars would be delivered with a No. They achieved nothing since and the only way will get any concessions is with Lisbon Mark 2

I dont see the issue, its not the same treaty we would be voting for and the issues which prevented people from voting yes due to lack of info would be clarified.

I dont know how many people who voted no did so because they didnt understand it. Surely its only fair to clarify the issues to these people so they can make an informed decision, which countless people admit they did not do at the time of the last vote?

Yes the people said no, and that is to be respected, thats why if the same treaty with the same info was being suggested the poll would still be in favour of the no side. But this isnt the case.

On a side note I see Libertas are against clarfying the issues so people can make an informed vote.
Quite clear that they think that if the fears that were put into peoples heads last time round are clarified as downright lies, then they might lose this time round.

If a Lisbon II referendum does deal with most people's concerns significently then fair enough, that's as should be - as AZ says we'd be in a poor situation if every proposition in life, once rejected, was abandoned, rather than seeking a compromise.

If there aren't significent differences then I think it would be pretty insulting to the electorate, and given the current climate would be rejected by people making protest votes rather than dealing with the substantive issue - I can't see many voting for it becuase their party tells them to right now.

What I would say is let's see if those concerns are dealt with before making our own minds up - right now there isn't even a proposition.

Quote from: Hound on November 17, 2008, 01:21:40 PM

But you're not re-running the same referendum. A lot of people said they voted No, because they were worried about Tax, Abortion or Conscription. Now it has been clairfied that these will not be affected. Lisbon I was not acceptable to the majority. Its not in the least bit undemocratic to try and find out if Lisbon II will be acceptable.

People voted no for many reasons. I don't believe the reasons given are the reasons people voted No. If you asked me directly was I concerned that Lisbon would effect corp tax I would have said yes. That was not why I voted No though. I wonder how many were asked if they were concerned that the Lisbon mandated Ireland to increase military spending, If they were concerned about giving more Power to Europe or that the competition laws would effect public services?

The Yes side in the campaign latched onto the abortion thing during the last campaign. Some looney from coir said it would legalise abortion and the Yes campaign brought it up at every debate that the No side were all liars. The Yes side played this card everytime the were in public which worked against them as it only hightend fears. It was one of the few areas they seemed confident and it almost became their only argument. Must of the No side said it wouldn't effect abortion. Now we have them saying it was why referendum was lost ::) There are many people in Ireland who would support abortion yet no one asked did they vote yes in the hope the EU would legalise abortion.

If there is another referendum the Yes side will take the debate away from the treaty again. They make it about our attitude to the EU and the electorate in general as they have no way of winning a debate about the merits of the treaty. They will say we voted on something other than the treaty and we were wrong to do that.

The treaty was put to the people not a Government satisfaction poll. The people voted on the treaty.

Quote from: Gnevin on November 17, 2008, 01:28:16 PM

The no side promised us the sun, moon and stars would be delivered with a No. They achieved nothing since and the only way will get any concessions is with Lisbon Mark 2

What were the promises? What haven't they achieved?

I agree with most of that Zap, I thought the Yes side ran an almost comically inept campaign, as if it were going to be passed simply because Cowen had huge popularity at the time.

*But* if there is a new proposal, with significant changes in those areas which seem to be the most contentious, such as the Irish EU Comissioner being retained, then it's a worthwhile debate again.

Hopefully this time the Yes side will be able to deal with issues thrown up. If they aren't then it deserves to fail again, on it's own merits.

Zap, there was widespread confusion as to what the treaty was about, full stop.

Since the referendum many reasons have been given for voting one way or another, a huge amount of these are actually lies. I dont see the harm in clarifying the position of these issues, then letting people vote again, without fearmongering being spread.

I know 4 different people who voted no because they believed it would lead to abortion as campaigners who called to their door suggested was the case.

Quote from: AZOffaly on November 17, 2008, 01:52:11 PM
I agree with most of that Zap, I thought the Yes side ran an almost comically inept campaign, as if it were going to be passed simply because Cowen had huge popularity at the time.

*But* if there is a new proposal, with significant changes in those areas which seem to be the most contentious, such as the Irish EU Comissioner being retained, then it's a worthwhile debate again.

Hopefully this time the Yes side will be able to deal with issues thrown up. If they aren't then it deserves to fail again, on it's own merits.

Fair enough but the Government are saying we voted no for reasons which are not effected by the treaty. How can we vote on a different treaty if what we want removed isn't even there?

Quote from: Zapatista on November 17, 2008, 01:54:57 PM

Quote from: AZOffaly on November 17, 2008, 01:52:11 PM
I agree with most of that Zap, I thought the Yes side ran an almost comically inept campaign, as if it were going to be passed simply because Cowen had huge popularity at the time.

*But* if there is a new proposal, with significant changes in those areas which seem to be the most contentious, such as the Irish EU Comissioner being retained, then it's a worthwhile debate again.

Hopefully this time the Yes side will be able to deal with issues thrown up. If they aren't then it deserves to fail again, on it's own merits.

Fair enough but the Government are saying we voted no for reasons which are not effected by the treaty. How can we vote on a different treaty if what we want removed isn't even there?

Then the Yes side have to deal with those issues, which were cited in studies after the referendum. The Yes side were always saying that things like abortion were a red herring. Now they might get a chance to address all of the issues raised by Libertas et al. After all, if these reasons are not actually affected by the referendum, then there is a reason why people thought they were, and that reason is Libertas.

So, the Yes side gets a chance to launch a proposal which deals, explicitly, with these concerns, relevant and irrelevant, and the people get a chance to see their concerns are catered for. The No side will raise other issues, and it's up to the Yes side to deal with them better, and with much more clarity.

Then the people can decide, again.

It's all good as far as I'm concerned.

A rerun will probably get through this time. So many people worrying about their futures that the inevitable scaremongering by the Govt will have more receptive ears.

Quote from: Canalman on November 17, 2008, 02:00:48 PM
A rerun will probably get through this time. So many people worrying about their futures that the inevitable scaremongering by the Govt will have more receptive ears.

Countering that this is the most unpopular FF have been since 1929 - it all depends when they run it. The most convenient time is during the euro elections next summer, but you can bet your ass it won't be then, as FF, as things stand now, are in for a tonking, and a rerun referendum would suffer the same fate. Timing could be vital on this one. To be honest there is no way they could convince me that economically this treaty would benefit me - all the free market proposition and powers are in place already within the commuunity, what extra provisions are in this treaty?

My understanding (admittedly cobbled together from various sources as it was very hard get a straight answer from anywhere I looked it up) was that the crux of the Lisbon treaty was that while it didn't alter any of the substantive issues right now, it did allow the Irish Government to push through any of those issues in the future by way of a Dáil vote without having to go to a constitutional referendum again. Put simply, it was a situation whereby "voting through the Lisbon treaty doesn't really change anything now, but when a big issue does come up, it'll be the Dáil who decides, rather than the public."

Now as I said, I'm not sure of that, but I even emailed the referendum commission looking for a straight answer on this and they couldn't give it to me. Yes campaigners said that it wasn't the case, but couldn't specify exactly the extra powers that Lisbon did confer, while no campaigners happily tried to enccourage my belief and said it was the case but couldn't flesh it out with any further detail - probably meaning that they didn't know.

This was the issue that really bugged me - even if you went out of your way to try and find out the detail of the treaty, you couldn't. Which is why I went with an "if in doubt, leave it out" policy. And I will do so again until people make the hard facts a lot more freely available. Saying that the text of the treaty is available to download is not much good unless someone can point you to the relevant sections, plus offer you a solicitor to help translate the legalese.

I think it is article 48you are refering to LS?

I thought this was a good piece -


http://www.openeurope.org.uk/research/irelandbriefing.pdf

Fact: The latest poll showing Ireland would vote no revealed that the reasons for
their planned rejection of the Lisbon Treaty were primarily to "keep Ireland's power
and identity" and "to safeguard Ireland's neutrality". It was also clear that they voted
no because they "don't like being told what to do/forced into voting yes". Abortion did
not appear anywhere in the top ten reasons for voting no. (Irish Times/TNS mrbi poll
6 June 2008)


Tax did indeed feature in the campaign, driven by ongoing moves towards a common
corporate tax base. On 9 June, during the campaign, the Irish Independent had a
scoop on plans which will be presented by Taxation Commissioner Laszlo Kovacs on
2 July. Even the Irish business organisation IBEC, which was campaigning for the
Treaty, described the proposal as "a Trojan horse to bring in common tax rates." The
issue was linked to the Treaty because one proposal is to introduce the common tax
base under enhanced cooperation, which the treaty enabled. So tax did feature in
the campaign, and for good reason.

Exactly LS. This Treaty is a trojan horse. Fair enough - there is nothing per se about losing powers over taxation, neutrality, European Army etc. we will retain a veto in these area but crucially our govt may decide not to exercise that veto. Obviously, with the brillaint decision making they have displayed over the years and most recently and their uncanny knack of resprenting the people so well we should have no issues....

That is the major problem and why this Treaty must be consigned to the bin. The opinion poll and subsequent media coverage was disingenuos at best. There's no way we will be guaranteed a commisioner - that has already been conceded in Nice (when we got it "right" the second time).

Quote from: magpie seanie on November 18, 2008, 12:30:32 PM
Exactly LS. This Treaty is a trojan horse. Fair enough - there is nothing per se about losing powers over taxation, neutrality, European Army etc. we will retain a veto in these area but crucially our govt may decide not to exercise that veto. Obviously, with the brillaint decision making they have displayed over the years and most recently and their uncanny knack of resprenting the people so well we should have no issues....

That is the major problem and why this Treaty must be consigned to the bin. The opinion poll and subsequent media coverage was disingenuos at best. There's no way we will be guaranteed a commisioner - that has already been conceded in Nice (when we got it "right" the second time).

Our veto on the Lisbon treaty isn't working out to well for the Government.

Quote from: magpie seanie on November 18, 2008, 12:30:32 PM
Exactly LS. This Treaty is a trojan horse. Fair enough - there is nothing per se about losing powers over taxation, neutrality, European Army etc. we will retain a veto in these area but crucially our govt may decide not to exercise that veto. Obviously, with the brillaint decision making they have displayed over the years and most recently and their uncanny knack of resprenting the people so well we should have no issues....

Exactly. The theory of democracy is that you vote in the guys who represent your views - however with so few choices, many of which are ostensibly offering the same thing, it is impossible to get a political representative who shares anything more than 50% of your views. As such I would prefer to keep the power within the Irish people and the constitution. The fact that the country voted 49-51 on an issue where Dáil representatives were well over 90% in favour says it all about how reflective they are of the Irish people.  

Article 48 is indeed the section, but it's very difficult to get a clear answer about what would happen in the event that any revisions of existing EU treaties run counter to the Irish constitution. Until I get someone I trust saying that the Irish constitution wins out in that instance, it's a no all the way for me.

Quote from: Lone Shark on November 18, 2008, 12:46:12 PM

Article 48 is indeed the section, but it's very difficult to get a clear answer about what would happen in the event that any revisions of existing EU treaties run counter to the Irish constitution. Until I get someone I trust saying that the Irish constitution wins out in that instance, it's a no all the way for me.

48.5 - If, two years after the signature of a treaty amending the Treaties, four fifths of the Member States have ratified it and one or more Member States have encountered difficulties in proceeding with ratification, the matter shall be referred to the European Council.

It could be -

If there are revisions or add ons and we have not ratified those either by Dail or referendum we will have given the power to the European Council to ratify for us.

QuoteHopefully this time the Yes side will be able to deal with issues thrown up. If they aren't then it deserves to fail again, on it's own merits.

Well, this time they'll have half of Brussels scrutinising every press release they write - maybe our European friends can make professionals (alright, alright competents) of our politicos.

Quote from: Billys Boots on November 18, 2008, 01:23:39 PM

QuoteHopefully this time the Yes side will be able to deal with issues thrown up. If they aren't then it deserves to fail again, on it's own merits.

Well, this time they'll have half of Brussels scrutinising every press release they write - maybe our European friends can make professionals (alright, alright competents) of our politicos.

Do ye think they will ask Cowen to read it?

Quote from: Zapatista on November 18, 2008, 01:24:36 PM

Quote from: Billys Boots on November 18, 2008, 01:23:39 PM

QuoteHopefully this time the Yes side will be able to deal with issues thrown up. If they aren't then it deserves to fail again, on it's own merits.

Well, this time they'll have half of Brussels scrutinising every press release they write - maybe our European friends can make professionals (alright, alright competents) of our politicos.

Do ye think they will ask Cowen to read it?

Well at least say he read it anyway.

Quote from: mylestheslasher on November 17, 2008, 01:08:19 PM
I'd vote no to unhold the democratic decision of the people. You can't keep re-running a referendum until you get the result you want.

course you can! otherwise we'd still have a ban on divorce ;D

Poll shows shift in support for Lisbon
watch Sunday, 15 February 2009 21:58

There has been a significant shift in support for the Lisbon Treaty according to the latest opinion poll.

The TNS/mrbi poll, in tomorrow's Irish Times, shows that a new referendum on the Treaty with guarantees on key Irish concerns has the backing of a clear majority of voters.

This latest poll taken among 1,000 voters around the country, suggests the economic crisis has shifted the public mood back into the 'Yes' camp.
Advertisement

The poll shows that 51% of respondents would vote 'Yes' in a second referendum with commitments for Ireland to keep its EU Commissioner and with legal guarantees on neutrality, abortion and taxation.

This represents an eight point rise on a comparable poll in November. 33% would vote 'No', down six points since November.

The 'Don't Knows' were down two points to 16%.

With the 'Don't Knows' excluded, the poll shows that the 'Yes' vote is 60.7% compared to 46.6%, while the 'No' vote is 39.3% compared to 53.4% in the Referendum last June.

Speaking on tonight's 'The Week in Politics' Minister of State Peter Power said the Government wanted to ensure previous concerns were addressed in advance of new campaign.

But Sinn Féin is still preparing to oppose the Treaty.

Cllr Tomás Sharkey, the party candidate for Europe in the Ireland East constituency said the Government has not secured commitments on key issues such as workers' rights.

Panic and the playing on peoples justifiable fears will probably produce a yes vote. Then stand by and watch the rapid privitisation of large areas of public services, particularly those which will be profitable. The tax gurantees will be quickly rolled back in the move towards harmonisation across the union, and there will be no effective means of protest. We have precious little accountability or decision making powers at present, if you think we should have less, vote yes, and your dreams will come true. I am strongly pro-europe, but this is a bad treaty

Quote from: Pangurban on February 15, 2009, 11:51:48 PM
Panic and the playing on peoples justifiable fears will probably produce a yes vote. Then stand by and watch the rapid privitisation of large areas of public services, particularly those which will be profitable. The tax gurantees will be quickly rolled back in the move towards harmonisation across the union, and there will be no effective means of protest. We have precious little accountability or decision making powers at present, if you think we should have less, vote yes, and your dreams will come true. I am strongly pro-europe, but this is a bad treaty

Nothing to do with concessions which have been achieved  on the issues  people said meant most to them?

A concession on Tax is meaningless as even the members of the commission concede that a challenge by another state in the europeans courts would probably succeed. As for the other concessions while they would be welcome, they still amount to only vague committments, lets wait until we see the revised draft, before forming a judgement, i suspect they will not fully address concerns. But all this aside, even if all committments are met, this will still be a bad treaty, because of the effect it will have on existing employment law, and its opening of the floodgates to priviatisation of vital services. Were it to be put too a vote of all the people of europe, rather than just the political elites, i am confident it would be resoundingly rejected. At least we have a plebiscite, and we should make it count

The Lisbon Treaty is a load of rubbish from start to finish. The Brits are allowed to operate a currency within the European Union that directly affects Ireland, a country that in real money terms, not worthless fictional share values that have been mooted as Ireland being a Celtic Tigar, is 40 years behind any country on the continent in terms of genuine wealth. Yet unlike here the Brits are not being shouted down as being untrue Europeans. The only way the Lisbon Treaty should be passed in Ireland is if the Brits join the Euro. Or better still if we concentrate on unifying Ireland first and tell Europe to take a running jump until that is achieved.

The last referendum was so badly worded and the text of the agreement so badly drawn up that not even the referendum commission could make head nor tail of it when questions were asked. I expect this time exactly the same thing will happen. Has no-one here ever heard of Lamb being dressed up as mutton?

Quote from: Eoghan Mag on February 16, 2009, 01:45:29 AM
The last referendum was so badly worded and the text of the agreement so badly drawn up that not even the referendum commission could make head nor tail of it when questions were asked. I expect this time exactly the same thing will happen. Has no-one here ever heard of Lamb being dressed up as mutton?

It won't be 'lamb dressed up as mutton' it will be mutton dressed as mutton. No wording has changed and no wording will be changed.


GNEVIN do you know what the questions posed in the poll were?

Quote from: Zapatista on February 16, 2009, 07:24:53 AM

Quote from: Eoghan Mag on February 16, 2009, 01:45:29 AM
The last referendum was so badly worded and the text of the agreement so badly drawn up that not even the referendum commission could make head nor tail of it when questions were asked. I expect this time exactly the same thing will happen. Has no-one here ever heard of Lamb being dressed up as mutton?

It won't be 'lamb dressed up as mutton' it will be mutton dressed as mutton. No wording has changed and no wording will be changed.


GNEVIN do you know what the questions posed in the poll were?

Yes, it was something along the lines of with the guarantees in place for tax,abortion and neutrality would you vote yes on Lisbon.

Is it not to early to say then when we haven't seen any guarantees?

Should it not be along the lines of 'if' rather than 'with'?

Quote from: Gnevin on February 15, 2009, 11:34:48 PM

But Sinn Féin is still preparing to oppose the Treaty.

Cllr Tomás Sharkey, the party candidate for Europe in the Ireland East constituency said the Government has not secured commitments on key issues such as workers' rights.

The only rights the BuilderFF Govt was or is interested in are those of Builders/Developers/Bankers/IBEC.
A big difference between now and last May is that last May we believed we were still the envy of Europe and we werent going to let that nasty EU stick their nose into our affairs.
Now that the real world has intervened we know that only for being in the EU and the Euro we'd be like Iceland.

Quote from: Rossfan on February 16, 2009, 06:27:55 PM

Quote from: Gnevin on February 15, 2009, 11:34:48 PM

But Sinn Féin is still preparing to oppose the Treaty.

Cllr Tomás Sharkey, the party candidate for Europe in the Ireland East constituency said the Government has not secured commitments on key issues such as workers' rights.

The only rights the BuilderFF Govt was or is interested in are those of Builders/Developers/Bankers/IBEC.
A big difference between now and last May is that last May we believed we were still the envy of Europe and we werent going to let that nasty EU stick their nose into our affairs.
Now that the real world has intervened we know that only for being in the EU and the Euro we'd be like Iceland.

The Euro is unrelated to the Lisbon Treaty.

Last May we wanted to give the EU the 2 fingers now we're glad to have them and their currency.
Abortion,conscription and a lot of other things had nothing to do with Lisbon but they still influenced people's voting.

Zapatista the fact that the issue of the Euro is not even part of the European debate shows how stupid the Lisbon Treaty is. The Euro to me is a far bigger issue and should be addressed long before any other treaty is passed. If I were in Government here I would make this one of the conditions that has to be fixed before we vote on any other European power grabbing agreements.

Quote from: Zapatista on February 16, 2009, 06:39:28 PM

Quote from: Rossfan on February 16, 2009, 06:27:55 PM
only for being in the EU and the Euro we'd be like Iceland.

The Euro is unrelated to the Lisbon Treaty.

Being in the EU is also unrelated to the Lisbon treaty. Roche was babbling this morning that it's more important than ever now to "remain a part of Europe". What can he mean by that? This is not a referendum even on EU membership, never mind a rearrangement of geography. Are they going to tow us into the South Atlantic or something if we give the "wrong" answer again?

Hardy the Atlantic would a dangerous place to be at the minute. Did you not hear about the 2 nuclear subs that crashed into each other out there?  :D

Yeah - there's a thread about things that scare you. Well a thing that scares me is that submarines are going around packed with nuclear weapons and nuclear reactors and it's only a matter of time before something awful happens. Especially when you learn that they're being driven by clowns who are reversing around in the dark trying to hide from each other, with their detection stuff turned off in case they WOULD see each other and end up crashing into each other in trillions of cubic metres of ocean.

What kind of mad bastards are running the world anyway?

Quote from: Hardy on February 16, 2009, 07:58:37 PM
Yeah - there's a thread about things that scare you. Well a thing that scares me is that submarines are going around packed with nuclear weapons and nuclear reactors and it's only a matter of time before something awful happens. Especially when you learn that they're being driven by clowns who are reversing around in the dark trying to hide from each other, with their detection stuff turned off in case they WOULD see each other and end up crashing into each other in trillions of cubic metres of ocean.

What kind of mad b**tards are running the world anyway?

This has been happening for 50 years , your only getting scared now?

What? Nobody tells me anything.

Quote from: Rossfan on February 16, 2009, 06:56:09 PM
Last May we wanted to give the EU the 2 fingers now we're glad to have them and their currency.
Abortion,conscription and a lot of other things had nothing to do with Lisbon but they still influenced people's voting.

Them and their currency is Us and Our currency!!!

Who do you think the EU are, 26 European countries who got together to try to help poor little Ireland?? We are the EU. I am as much the EU as Sarkozy is!!! What you are saying is the same as saying a vote against the Government is a vote against Ireland. If that is the case then there are 80% of Irish people currently giving the fingers to Ireland. I didn't want to give myself the two fingers and if you did then that's just weird.

Your last line sounds like an admission?