Red Herrings and Reasons for Voting NO

national | miscellaneous | news report

Saturday September 28, 2002 16:35

by Alan Warren - Green Party

alan.warren at breathemail dot net

Like 98% of EU citizens, I have no vote on this treaty. But if I did...

Being in NI, like most of the citizens of Europe, I can not vote for or against this treaty. I have no say. Perhaps due to family background I am very pro Europe, pro further integration, and pro the euro etc. I firmly believe we need a strong grouping (and not exclusively European) to act as a counter balance to the excesses of US foreign policy. However if I had the opportunity I would vote against this treaty and without hesitation.

The reasons;

1 I don't sign contracts I do not understand. The Nice treaty cannot be picked up and readily understood, at least not by me. If politicians want our support they should set the proposal out clearly. If that means printing the previous treaties with the proposed amendments and additions included so be it. In my experience when people do not make their intentions clear it is worth taking the time to examine the detail.

2 To run the same referendum twice shows utter contempt for the wises of the electorate and for this reason alone, even if I was fairly neutral, I would register a protest.

3 There should be more to Europe than economics and trade. Somewhere there needs to be a vision of people united for their common good, in a society with high standards of accountability and ethical conduct. A Europe based on sound democratic principles locally and regionally. I do not care if our Nation states survive or dwindle as long as matters local are decided locally and pan European considerations are decided in a clear transparent and democratic matter. The current vision of Europe with its competing interest groups, petty national considerations, and secretive decision making process leaves me cold. There is nothing in this treaty that aids progress towards the type of Europe I would like to see.

4 There should be much greater emphasis towards promoting an understanding of each others cultures, history and background.

5 Article 133 and the whole liberalisation and privatisation agenda needs to be reversed. There are things that need to be done in society that should not be decided on the bottom line of a balance sheet. Concepts like quality of service and reliability are just as important as economic efficiency. Equally if we set higher standards for production than elsewhere we should be able to ban products that are produced in a manner that causes us offence.

6 The question of neutrality is an interesting one. Given a democratic Europe I would have no hesitation in relinquishing the neutrality of Ireland providing Europe itself developed a more independent and neutral position. It is not and frankly I do not want to be associated with some pro US block.

7 This treaty is about changing the decision making process in Europe. Ireland looses real influence and I see no corresponding gain towards more accountable structures.

Red herrings abound in this debate.

A Enlargement can happen without this treaty.

B Enlargement and not the treaty will be increase immigration into Ireland. This is inevitable whilst we are comparitatively wealthy and others are down right poor. Immigration for me increases diversity and enriches society and is to be welcomed.

C Enlargement will offer inward investors into Europe much cheaper alternatives to Ireland. New employment opportunities and existing employers will move to central Europe where it is desperately needed. I welcome this along with B above, but I doubt if most of the electorate would.

D Enlargement will require a radical reappraisal of the Common Agricultural Policy.

The above are all considerations of enlargement and not the Nice treaty.

This referendum will be won on public mood and gut instinct and not the finer points. Flood has given us a good background. The line "would you buy a second hand treaty from Bertie," was good and taps into current sentiment.

I would plead for anyone to vote NO. Send this treaty back to the smug, unaccountable, bullying, conniving, b******* (not sure how to spell bureaucrats of course) who wrote it.

save preference

Comments (2 of 2)

Blocs

by Des

Sat Sep 28, 2002 20:21

The emergence of two capitalist blocs instead of one is not a positive development. All the Nice treaty will entail for working people is Privitisations, Exploitation and Militarisation.

eu bosses are really on our side, you silly easterners

by rebel

Sun Sep 29, 2002 00:22

you say that you are pro further integration, and pro the euro! and want to vote no!
This is illogical, if the eu is shite (and it is)
then why do you want to extend the empire and inflict it on the unfortunate eastern europeans? Is it because you are confused by the fake lefties who oppose Nice and still want mindless eastwards expansion and exploitation?

There were similiar 'socialists' in colonial France and Germany, who believed that colonialism was progressive and helped the natives! I suppose these modern lefties are their political descendants, and are equally bankrupt.

As for being pro the euro! All this has done is make this outpost the 2nd most expensive place in the eu and hurt the poor and that is why many people will vote against Nice, a fact not suprisingly missed by most out of touch 'lefties'

Upcoming Events

New Events

Other Press

User Preferences

Feeds

Blog Feeds

The Saker

Public Inquiry

Human Rights in Ireland

Lockdown Skeptics

Red Herrings and Reasons for Voting NO

Comments (2 of 2)