The Lisbon Treaty Referendum Oct 2nd

[Zapatista]

I believe you are clued up in most things politic, so I can only take it that you are being deliberately misleading.

Comparing a TD to a commissioner is absolute nonsense. Its MEPs who are supposed to be like TDs, i.e. who represent the interests of their constituents. Commissioners are unelected appointees and they represent the interest of the EU as whole and a specific part of their job spec is not only to be not biased towards their home country, but to be seen to be not biased. But you already know that, maybe you just forgot.

Perhaps it would be better to compare them to top civil servants, If the Cabinate was made up of Civil servant (rather than elected reps). In that case it would be like one sector (say our health sector) not having any top civil servants to have their say. If for example Mary Harney had no say regarding Health at the cabinate table as for now this sector isn't being represented. The job of the cabinate is to run the country on a whole but Harney is minister for health and will push her agenda at the cabinate. It is then up to the others to counter and push their own agenda all on which Cowen must make his decision. Impartiality is a myth and can best be reached if there are equal partners.

[Gnevin]

I believe you are clued up in most things politic, so I can only take it that you are being deliberately misleading.

Comparing a TD to a commissioner is absolute nonsense. Its MEPs who are supposed to be like TDs, i.e. who represent the interests of their constituents. Commissioners are unelected appointees and they represent the interest of the EU as whole and a specific part of their job spec is not only to be not biased towards their home country, but to be seen to be not biased. But you already know that, maybe you just forgot.

Perhaps it would be better to compare them to top civil servants, If the Cabinate was made up of Civil servant (rather than elected reps). In that case it would be like one sector (say our health sector) not having any top civil servants to have their say. If for example Mary Harney had no say regarding Health at the cabinate table as for now this sector isn't being represented. The job of the cabinate is to run the country on a whole but Harney is minister for health and will push her agenda at the cabinate. It is then up to the others to counter and push their own agenda all on which Cowen must make his decision. Impartiality is a myth and can best be reached if there are equal partners.

A myth! Typical of the no side it would easier to argue with POG and the moonlandings . What contracdicts your opinion you just ignore.


I'm going to start up a Yes lobby group . What do you think of these posters

A Yes vote for Lisbon is a Yes vote of a United Ireland?
If you vote no the Germans will invade?
All the cool kids are voting YES ?

[magpie seanie]

I gave my answer to this question last year. Nothing meaningful has changed (except possibly more people realise how utterly incompetant our politicians, who stand to gain more decision making powers, are). Same answer coming. NO.

[lynchbhoy]

I gave my answer to this question last year. Nothing meaningful has changed (except possibly more people realise how utterly incompetant our politicians, who stand to gain more decision making powers, are). Same answer coming. NO.

have to agree seanie. My fear for corporation tax while addressed in the 'guarantees' leaves out normal political manouvering from the equation.
The EU wont change Irelands taxation rules, but they say nothing about threatening to veto other portfolio areas infrastructure/agriculture/fishing/fuel/R&D to reduce funding /help etc for these - so we will be left with a choice - a no win situation for the Gov/polititians/country - so we will have to choose between cutting corporate taxation rates or losing prob more in combined other areas.
It will be made to look like its our own country's/politicians fault whatever choice is made.

My resoning for this is that the larger powers in EU have been making a lot of noise prior to last Lisbon vote, but went overly quiet on their complaints about the 'unfair' Irish corporate taxation which they were shouting loudly about for a long time.
To think that France/Germany et al have forgotten about this and are happy that a third rate nouveau riche country like Ireland are getting more than their fair share of services jobs etc is naive in the extreme.
So I firmly believe that once we have signed up we will be reeled in.
Unfortunately I feel this is inevitiable whatever we do. A no vote will just push this out a little further. Maybe long enough though to retain the return from downturn.
A lot of higher IQ's are well intentioned but naive.

Another thing that Zap beat me to mentioning, the MEP's like the TD's here are more or less the figureheads. Its the Gov departments /civil servants that call the shots in reality.
the TD's usually with no exp in their appointed portfolio take their lead from these departmental advisors and not much changes.
These civil servants are generally faceless and self serving. I dont trust that they have the countrys best interest at heart. Some may, but a lot - as we have seen from fas etc are only out for themselves.

So I'd take a hit in the amount of MEP's for retention of a full time commissioner - not the 2/3's of the time model offered. That shows the level of rating the EU has for Ireland and the smaller member countries. The EU can vote to  increase commissioner size. So why dont they !

[Gnevin]

I gave my answer to this question last year. Nothing meaningful has changed (except possibly more people realise how utterly incompetant our politicians, who stand to gain more decision making powers, are). Same answer coming. NO.

have to agree seanie. My fear for corporation tax while addressed in the 'guarantees' leaves out normal political manouvering from the equation.
The EU wont change Irelands taxation rules, but they say nothing about threatening to veto other portfolio areas infrastructure/agriculture/fishing/fuel/R&D to reduce funding /help etc for these - so we will be left with a choice - a no win situation for the Gov/polititians/country - so we will have to choose between cutting corporate taxation rates or losing prob more in combined other areas.
It will be made to look like its our own country's/politicians fault whatever choice is made.

My resoning for this is that the larger powers in EU have been making a lot of noise prior to last Lisbon vote, but went overly quiet on their complaints about the 'unfair' Irish corporate taxation which they were shouting loudly about for a long time.
To think that France/Germany et al have forgotten about this and are happy that a third rate nouveau riche country like Ireland are getting more than their fair share of services jobs etc is naive in the extreme.
So I firmly believe that once we have signed up we will be reeled in.
Unfortunately I feel this is inevitiable whatever we do. A no vote will just push this out a little further. Maybe long enough though to retain the return from downturn.
A lot of higher IQ's are well intentioned but naive.

Another thing that Zap beat me to mentioning, the MEP's like the TD's here are more or less the figureheads. Its the Gov departments /civil servants that call the shots in reality.
the TD's usually with no exp in their appointed portfolio take their lead from these departmental advisors and not much changes.
These civil servants are generally faceless and self serving. I dont trust that they have the countrys best interest at heart. Some may, but a lot - as we have seen from fas etc are only out for themselves.

So I'd take a hit in the amount of MEP's for retention of a full time commissioner - not the 2/3's of the time model offered. That shows the level of rating the EU has for Ireland and the smaller member countries. The EU can vote to  increase commissioner size. So why dont they !

If your so concerned about the commissioner you'd vote yes and the commissioner  are not meant to favour their home nation where as MEP's are .

And there is nothing to stop France and Germany doing what you say  and still forcing us to change our Rate of corporation tax even if we vote no so why isolate our self of something you consider will happen soon or later

[lynchbhoy]

I gave my answer to this question last year. Nothing meaningful has changed (except possibly more people realise how utterly incompetant our politicians, who stand to gain more decision making powers, are). Same answer coming. NO.

have to agree seanie. My fear for corporation tax while addressed in the 'guarantees' leaves out normal political manouvering from the equation.
The EU wont change Irelands taxation rules, but they say nothing about threatening to veto other portfolio areas infrastructure/agriculture/fishing/fuel/R&D to reduce funding /help etc for these - so we will be left with a choice - a no win situation for the Gov/polititians/country - so we will have to choose between cutting corporate taxation rates or losing prob more in combined other areas.
It will be made to look like its our own country's/politicians fault whatever choice is made.

My resoning for this is that the larger powers in EU have been making a lot of noise prior to last Lisbon vote, but went overly quiet on their complaints about the 'unfair' Irish corporate taxation which they were shouting loudly about for a long time.
To think that France/Germany et al have forgotten about this and are happy that a third rate nouveau riche country like Ireland are getting more than their fair share of services jobs etc is naive in the extreme.
So I firmly believe that once we have signed up we will be reeled in.
Unfortunately I feel this is inevitiable whatever we do. A no vote will just push this out a little further. Maybe long enough though to retain the return from downturn.
A lot of higher IQ's are well intentioned but naive.

Another thing that Zap beat me to mentioning, the MEP's like the TD's here are more or less the figureheads. Its the Gov departments /civil servants that call the shots in reality.
the TD's usually with no exp in their appointed portfolio take their lead from these departmental advisors and not much changes.
These civil servants are generally faceless and self serving. I dont trust that they have the countrys best interest at heart. Some may, but a lot - as we have seen from fas etc are only out for themselves.

So I'd take a hit in the amount of MEP's for retention of a full time commissioner - not the 2/3's of the time model offered. That shows the level of rating the EU has for Ireland and the smaller member countries. The EU can vote to  increase commissioner size. So why dont they !

If your so concerned about the commissioner you'd vote yes and the commissioner  are not meant to favour their home nation where as MEP's are .

And there is nothing to stop France and Germany doing what you say  and still forcing us to change our Rate of corporation tax even if we vote no so why isolate our self of something you consider will happen soon or later

my poor illiterate shadow
if you could read, you will see that I have already mentioned that in my post above.

as for your first part (not in bold) - is that a direct translation from swahili ?

[Gnevin]

I gave my answer to this question last year. Nothing meaningful has changed (except possibly more people realise how utterly incompetant our politicians, who stand to gain more decision making powers, are). Same answer coming. NO.

have to agree seanie. My fear for corporation tax while addressed in the 'guarantees' leaves out normal political manouvering from the equation.
The EU wont change Irelands taxation rules, but they say nothing about threatening to veto other portfolio areas infrastructure/agriculture/fishing/fuel/R&D to reduce funding /help etc for these - so we will be left with a choice - a no win situation for the Gov/polititians/country - so we will have to choose between cutting corporate taxation rates or losing prob more in combined other areas.
It will be made to look like its our own country's/politicians fault whatever choice is made.

My resoning for this is that the larger powers in EU have been making a lot of noise prior to last Lisbon vote, but went overly quiet on their complaints about the 'unfair' Irish corporate taxation which they were shouting loudly about for a long time.
To think that France/Germany et al have forgotten about this and are happy that a third rate nouveau riche country like Ireland are getting more than their fair share of services jobs etc is naive in the extreme.
So I firmly believe that once we have signed up we will be reeled in.
Unfortunately I feel this is inevitiable whatever we do. A no vote will just push this out a little further. Maybe long enough though to retain the return from downturn.
A lot of higher IQ's are well intentioned but naive.

Another thing that Zap beat me to mentioning, the MEP's like the TD's here are more or less the figureheads. Its the Gov departments /civil servants that call the shots in reality.
the TD's usually with no exp in their appointed portfolio take their lead from these departmental advisors and not much changes.
These civil servants are generally faceless and self serving. I dont trust that they have the countrys best interest at heart. Some may, but a lot - as we have seen from fas etc are only out for themselves.

So I'd take a hit in the amount of MEP's for retention of a full time commissioner - not the 2/3's of the time model offered. That shows the level of rating the EU has for Ireland and the smaller member countries. The EU can vote to  increase commissioner size. So why dont they !

If your so concerned about the commissioner you'd vote yes and the commissioner  are not meant to favour their home nation where as MEP's are .

And there is nothing to stop France and Germany doing what you say  and still forcing us to change our Rate of corporation tax even if we vote no so why isolate our self of something you consider will happen soon or later

my poor illiterate shadow
if you could read, you will see that I have already mentioned that in my post above.

as for your first part (not in bold) - is that a direct translation from swahili ?

I understood what you said .I just asked you a question about why you said it . I know you don't like having to explain yourself .

1) Since you consider the forced change of corporation tax enviable why vote no ? Because it might delay it some what?

2) Nice removes the commissioner if your so worried about keeping a commissioner a yes vote is the way to go or am I missing something?

[Tankie]

I believe you are clued up in most things politic, so I can only take it that you are being deliberately misleading.

Comparing a TD to a commissioner is absolute nonsense. Its MEPs who are supposed to be like TDs, i.e. who represent the interests of their constituents. Commissioners are unelected appointees and they represent the interest of the EU as whole and a specific part of their job spec is not only to be not biased towards their home country, but to be seen to be not biased. But you already know that, maybe you just forgot.

Perhaps it would be better to compare them to top civil servants, If the Cabinate was made up of Civil servant (rather than elected reps). In that case it would be like one sector (say our health sector) not having any top civil servants to have their say. If for example Mary Harney had no say regarding Health at the cabinate table as for now this sector isn't being represented. The job of the cabinate is to run the country on a whole but Harney is minister for health and will push her agenda at the cabinate. It is then up to the others to counter and push their own agenda all on which Cowen must make his decision. Impartiality is a myth and can best be reached if there are equal partners.

A myth! Typical of the no side it would easier to argue with POG and the moonlandings . What contracdicts your opinion you just ignore.


I'm going to start up a Yes lobby group . What do you think of these posters

A Yes vote for Lisbon is a Yes vote of a United Ireland?
If you vote no the Germans will invade?
All the cool kids are voting YES ?

classic stuff

[Zapatista]

A myth! Typical of the no side it would easier to argue with POG and the moonlandings . What contracdicts your opinion you just ignore.


I'm going to start up a Yes lobby group . What do you think of these posters

A Yes vote for Lisbon is a Yes vote of a United Ireland?
If you vote no the Germans will invade?
All the cool kids are voting YES ?

We have to speculate. We have to make assumptions and decide if we agree with them or not. For example, the Yes side claim we will be shunned by our partners. This is not what they are supposed to do, they are supposed to address our concerns. I don't believe we will be shunned. For some reason it seems ok to speculate about the reaction of the EU partners and our position in the EU if we vote No but not about the role of a commissioner. It's a double standard.


I think they are great slogans

[Gnevin]

A myth! Typical of the no side it would easier to argue with POG and the moonlandings . What contracdicts your opinion you just ignore.


I'm going to start up a Yes lobby group . What do you think of these posters

A Yes vote for Lisbon is a Yes vote of a United Ireland?
If you vote no the Germans will invade?
All the cool kids are voting YES ?

We have to speculate. We have to make assumptions and decide if we agree with them or not. For example, the Yes side claim we will be shunned by our partners. This is not what they are supposed to do, they are supposed to address our concerns. I don't believe we will be shunned. For some reason it seems ok to speculate about the reaction of the EU partners and our position in the EU if we vote No but not about the role of a commissioner. It's a double standard.


I think they are great slogans

I can tell you we are already being shunned due to the first no.

[Tankie]

Can anyone actually say what the point is in voting NO and what it would achieve?

[Gnevin]

Can anyone actually say what the point is in voting NO and what it would achieve?

<typicial_idiot> It's a protest vote. I'll show FF what I think of them ! Even if I've voted 1,2 and 3 for them in every general election for the last 50 years and will vote for them at the next general election </typicial_idiot>

[Tankie]

Can anyone actually say what the point is in voting NO and what it would achieve?

<typicial_idiot> It's a protest vote. I'll show FF what I think of them ! Even if I've voted 1,2 and 3 for them in every general election for the last 50 years and will vote for them at the next general election </typicial_idiot>

But is there anything to be gained by voting No or is this just the super nationalist thing and Sinn Fein being anti Europe?

[Lone Shark]

I have one reason for voting no, and one reason only, which I am willing to change my mind over if anyone can convince me otherwise. This was why I voted no the last time, and why I will do again unless anyone can explain to me why I'm mistaken.

http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-european-union-and-comments/title-6-final-provisions/135-article-48.html

The above is the text for Article 48 of the Treaty. As with all parts of the treaty, it's difficult for a layman to understand, but I've been told by others who would be quite competent in this area, that this basically means that the Lisbon Treaty has the power to expand itself, so to speak.

Essentially, my concern is not what is in the Lisbon Treaty currently, but what they can choose to add in down the line, with only the say so of our national government. By installing the Lisbon Treaty into our constitution, are we essentially installing the Lisbon Treaty as it stands, or installing it in whatever shape or form it may take in time?

Put simply, I don't trust our government to uphold the will of the people on European matters - our politicians simply want a quiet life. I'm not sure why that is, whether they like the idea of the European parliament doing the dog's work behind legislating or they simply like being the nice guys at parties, but in every European referendum, we tend to vote something between 60% yes and 45% yes. In every European referendum so far, our elected TD's have been 90% yes more or less. They simply don't represent our wishes in this area - so I'm not willing to sign over competency from our constitution over to our government. I've been told that this is what I'm doing, can anyone tell me otherwise - or indeed confirm for everyone else out there?

[Hound]

I gave my answer to this question last year. Nothing meaningful has changed (except possibly more people realise how utterly incompetant our politicians, who stand to gain more decision making powers, are). Same answer coming. NO.

have to agree seanie. My fear for corporation tax while addressed in the 'guarantees' leaves out normal political manouvering from the equation.
The EU wont change Irelands taxation rules, but they say nothing about threatening to veto other portfolio areas infrastructure/agriculture/fishing/fuel/R&D to reduce funding /help etc for these - so we will be left with a choice - a no win situation for the Gov/polititians/country - so we will have to choose between cutting corporate taxation rates or losing prob more in combined other areas.
It will be made to look like its our own country's/politicians fault whatever choice is made.

My resoning for this is that the larger powers in EU have been making a lot of noise prior to last Lisbon vote, but went overly quiet on their complaints about the 'unfair' Irish corporate taxation which they were shouting loudly about for a long time.
To think that France/Germany et al have forgotten about this and are happy that a third rate nouveau riche country like Ireland are getting more than their fair share of services jobs etc is naive in the extreme.
So I firmly believe that once we have signed up we will be reeled in.
Unfortunately I feel this is inevitiable whatever we do. A no vote will just push this out a little further. Maybe long enough though to retain the return from downturn.
A lot of higher IQ's are well intentioned but naive.

Lynchbhoy, this is a discussion on voting for the Lisbon treaty. What you say may very well have merit, but voting Yes or No in Lisbon is totally irrelevant to it either way. I've no idea whether it will or won't happen, but voting Yes or No will neither increase the likelihood or timing nor decrease it.

As for your point on commissioners, as gnevin said it seemed more a push for a yes than a no vote. Though personally I wouldnt be in favour of increasing appointed representatives at the cost of reducing those elected by the people as you suggest.