85% vote NO on E.U. Treaty

by ex ex pat - plain people of ireland Mon Jan 14, 2008 09:36

don't we vote in MEPs?

besides, handing power to brussels at least takes the descisions out of the hands of tax-dodging bank-account-under-the-mattress brown-paper-envelope-botherers that we are beholden to at present .. :\

xxp

by Tom Paine Mon Jan 14, 2008 12:31

If a text poll could be taken at face value it would be a good start but what arguements are being made? Did anyone talk about fortress Europe or militarisation or was it a rightwing libertarian moaning about his right to make more money

by TaraTaraTara Mon Jan 14, 2008 16:42

Why vote yes for a Europe that is powerless to do anything to stop our Government from destroying a vast archaeological landscape that is Tara. Fines are not enough and will come too late to be of any help.

We are giving our gas away on the West coast and our Airports are being used to wage war in the Middle East.

VOTE NO! 3 good reasons, among many more. Make this a major PROTEST against this Corrupt Govt.

We can be a giant pain in the ass, until they LISTEN.

VOTE NO!

by M. Ni Bhrolchain Mon Jan 14, 2008 17:57

This is the organisation set up to organise the NO vote.
http://www.libertas.org/
If you google D Ganley you will see the range of his business.

by Muireann Ni Bhrolchain Mon Jan 14, 2008 22:29

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/gormley-attacks....html
Interesting, Gormley attacks Libertas in today's paper.
Irish Independent, Monday January 14 2008

Gormley attacks lobbyists as treaty row flares
By Ralph Riegel and Michael Brennan
Environment Minister John Gormley has warned "right-wing" lobby groups to stay out of the Green Party's internal debate on the EU Reform Treaty.

His comments came in advance of plans by all Green Party TDs and Senators to issue a collective statement in favour of a 'yes' vote this week.

Mr Gormley was scathing about attacks by Declan Ganley, the president of anti-treaty group Libertas, who last week binned a copy of the Green Party manifesto outside Government Buildings.

"So, for Mr Ganley, I think it is from Libertas, who are making these comments -- they are a right-wing group who have a totally different agenda, particularly in relation to the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which I have always supported.

"I have always supported the Charter of Fundamental Rights and I would like to hear what Mr Ganley and his people say about that."

He said the Green Party will decide its stance on the crucial EU treaty at a delegate conference in the Mansion House in Dublin next Saturday -- though he refused to predict the possible outcome.

"I would never say I am confident -- but I am advocating a 'yes' vote. But I don't know -- we require a two-thirds majority and at this stage I wouldn't like to pre-empt in any way what the debate will be or what the outcome will be," he added.

Criticised

The Environment Minister has been criticised by Libertas for deciding that the Referendum Commission will simply encourage people to vote on the EU Reform Treaty rather than carrying out its previous task of publicising the Yes and No' arguments.

The group is spending more than €100,000 to distribute its own information leaflets to nearly 1.5 million households.

Mr Gormley denied that the Green party had reversed its policy on EU treaties since it had entered into government.

"That would imply that we have to put policy in stone -- we were very clear in relation to this matter from the very outset.

"We would look at each treaty on its particular merits -- we did not comment on this particular treaty. We said we would wait to see what was in the treaty and that is what we have done."

Yesterday, Labour party TD Joe Costello called on the Government to publish the wording of the forthcoming referendum.

- Ralph Riegel and Michael Brennan

by C Murray Tue Jan 15, 2008 10:12

His party must institute protections for the two government TD's who are expected to take
the State line- thats cos the Greens are split, though Deirdre de Burca has been all over
the airwaves defending the Greens in government- saying its natural that since they are
no longer in opposition that they have a differing agenda- (one wonders if she has discussed
this with other women Greens, like Pat Mc Kenna?)

The charter on rights which John alludes to- FF signed onto the re-hashed Nice Treaty,
which forms a bi-lateral trade agreement with the US and had article 3.3 dropped from
the body of the treaty in favour of its attachment as protocol.

The arguments for and against have been doing the rounds in the state -sponsored
Forum on Europe, particular attention should be paid to Minister Roche's defence
of both Blair and Kazinisinsky's insistence on it's removal. Not all those opposed
to a right-wing europe with emphasis on defence are from the Irish Right and john is
using typical government spin to defend without debate the lack of info available to
people on Lisbon.

Finally NGO's from Africa are opposed to EU policy on bi-laterlism, they argue on
sustainability and community rights- they were kept away from The Bali conference
on climate change ,attended largely by suited representatives such as Gormley-
the NGO's were largely led by women from developing nations. This was then
spun on Newstalk as ffirst-world taking the lead on climate change in order
to assist developing countries (whoses carbon footprints are a lot less and economies
more sustainable than this blessed nation).

There is a severe lack of intelligent debate on what this government is planning and
how it will effect future generations.

by observer Tue Jan 15, 2008 12:06

It is not taking the Greens long to imbibe lessons in dirty politics from their new friends.

Libertas is not "THE organisation established to oppose the Treaty" as the Green poster above claims. There are many organisations from extreme left to right and in between that are opposed. The Greens are obviously aware of this given that a substantial part of their own support base is opposed! They hope that by portraying the opposition as "right wing" in Gormley's words that they will defeat the No side.

Bit ironic Gormley who is part of a Government denying public servants pay increases describing anyone as right wing!!

by MichaelY - iawm, IPSC and Campaign Against the Lisbon Treaty Tue Jan 15, 2008 13:02

As observer correctly states above, the Greens are taking a perilous route in attacking Libertas as "the organisation set up to oppose the Lisbon Treaty"!! To our knowledge in the Campaign Against the Treaty (CAEUC), there are at least four national organisationa, apart from Libertas, that are working to promote a NO vote from a progressive and left wing stance. There is Tony Coughlan and the National Platform, there is the Peoples Movement [meeting tomorrow in Liberty Hall 19.30 and on Thursday in Richardson's Bar, Galway 19.30], there is Kathy Sinnott's group that will be working nationally and our CAEUC, with affiliated organisations like PANA, the iawm, SWP, Sinn Fein, and many many independents. Our first Public meeting to launch the Campaign will be on Thursday February 7th in Dublin's Central Hotel. We've been meeting in small working groups since early November and we are ready to roll. Watch out Messers Gormley and Ryan!
Our friendly advice to our Green friends is to put their house in order, to decide how they will handle the 3-4 top opportunists who have made political zigzagging a new form of art, and to look deep into the conscience by examining the recycled EU Constitution that they, along with the French and Dutch voters opposed in 2005; to read carefully the Charter of 'Conditional' Rights in detail. I believe quite a number of them will end up voting NO despite what the heads may or may not do.
As for the Labour Party cabal, that should be the subject of another post

by Puzzled Tue Jan 15, 2008 13:41

The IAWM and IPSC are campaigns which have specific aims. Their remit does not cover the EU. I dont know about the IAWM but the IPSC certainly has members who would be supporting the Yes side. Therefore I am puzzled as to why Mr Y puts IPSC after his name.

Please understand that a campaign like the IPSC brings people together on one issue. They well have different opinions regarding other causes. Respect that.

by MichaelY - iawm,IPSC and Campaign Against the EU Treaty Tue Jan 15, 2008 14:32

Dear puzzled,

I put IPSC as an organisation I am proud to be part of to avoid being criticised that I haven't specified the organisations I belong to.
There was no suggestion, explicit or implied, that the IPSC has taken a stance on the Lisbon Treaty issue - as yet. However, it is definitely true that many many activists supporting the struggle of the Palestinian people are sick to the teeth re: the positions taken by the EU on the issue.
I have no indication that many IPSC activists may vote YES - that notion is an ambiguous statement by itself and I have a suspicion that you may be wrong about that one. However, that remains to be seen.
What puzzles me is whether you yourself,dear puzzled, are a YES person. Prey tell.

by Puzzled Tue Jan 15, 2008 14:45

Pleased to able to unpuzzle you as I will indeed be voting No!

But I really think you should try to understand the concept of Single Issue Campaigns. In the past the IPSC have requested that you not put IPSC after your name so as to make it clear that you are not speaking on their behalf.

by MichaelY - iawm,IPSC and Campaign Against the EU Treaty Tue Jan 15, 2008 15:02

Now that I know we are on the same NO side re:the Lisbon Treaty:

First, I would like to thank you for throwing light into the concept of 'Single Issue Campaign'. There's lot to talk about that but this is not the place or the thread!!
Secondly, the IPSC National Committee and the Dublin group of the organisation to which I belong are crystal clear about who does and who doesn't speak on behalf of the organisation. It obviously did not come through to you but by putting the initials of an organisation after your name one does not imply that one is speaking on behalf of a large mass organisation. It implies - very simply - membership!! The same way that your arguments do not reflect IPSC policy with or without initials, unless you are a real live spokesperson hiding your identity! Prey tell.The very same argument applies to me putting the initials iawm after my name - that doesn't imply that I speak on behalf of the iawm - God save us!! lol.
Finally, as this is a thread re: the cloned EU Constitution, let us tell people why we intend to vote NO!! Much more useful than cribbing.

by davekey Wed Jan 16, 2008 00:01

...would basically be the end of this country as we know it: the end of our Constitution, the end of our freedom and the end of what's left of our democracy. If you think FF are corrupt they are only in the minor league, the EU accounts haven't been signed off in 10 years because of widespread corruption with €billions unaccounted for, and 26 countries are not being allowed to vote on this because they are being lied to by their respective governments.

The Charter on Fundamental Rights means the European Court of Justice will tell us what our rights are rather than our Constitution. They can also take our rights away at will.

Article 48 makes it a self-amending treaty: a blank cheque for the elites, and the end of referendums in this country.

The EU will be a state for the first time and we will be citizens of that state, our loyalty will be required to the EU over our own nation.

Over 60 areas of legislation will be changed to qualifying majority voting which uses population as the main criteria. We have 0.8% of the EU population so that will be our voting weight...worthless.

This treaty was deliberately designed to be unreadable and it is. Even if you manage to read all 300 pages of it there are many amendments and references to previous treaties that you must refer to meaning you have to read about 3000 pages to get the full picture. And we will be asked to vote on this in a few months.

Millions of people across Europe are now looking to this country to save them from this nightmare so we should do the decent thing and completely reject it, if we don't then we fully deserve what's coming.

by RAGAMUFFIN Wed Jan 16, 2008 08:35

Many thanks to you Davekey for your clear explanation.
It would as you say be disastrous those countries who wish to remain independant.

Which leads me to wonder why they joined in the first place, because I have always understood that a united europe was the original intent ?

by RAGAMUFFIN Wed Jan 16, 2008 11:30

Given that a No vote might be the will of the people of Ireland, which I doubt because the benefits that this country has received during it's membership are enormous.

Is it concievable that their will might also be that they would wish to withdraw from the E.U. altogether and go it alone and would that be achievable/practical?

Understanding that there is a desire to retain some measure of
independance as a country and to maintain a National Identity.
Has our Irishness been lessened by being in the E.U.?

and if so can you indentify the areas?

What are the alternatives to having a united europe or for that matter of having conglomerates of states forming large groups of what we might call Super States that will inevitably bring global peace to a troubled world ?

by about democracy Wed Jan 16, 2008 11:37

the eu has to take on board two things:

1. people want better than a sarkozy fit-up and re-hashed Nice 2.
2.things should not be presented as fait accompli's and 'no other option scenarios' but intelligently
with debate, as usual that does not happen cos we are kept in the dark and fed shite.

no-one wants democratic attrition and corporate running of the Eu= make it representative
or fuck off with the fear messages!

by MichaelY - iawm,IPSC and Campaign Against the EU Treaty Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:29

It's great to note that the debate on the re-constituted EU Constitution Treaty, now labelled Lisbon Treaty, is beginning to develop.
In my opinion, there are three major strands, vectors if you wish, why the Lisbon Treaty would be a negative and destructive development not only for us, here in Ireland, but the people of Europe as a whole.
(1) At the level of local/national democracy where a whole load of areas are taken out of the decision remit of the national Parliaments and handed over to the Commission. This in a context that already 85% of our laws have been initiated and pushed by Brussels.
(2) At the level of militarisation of Europe where binding decisions on foreign policy, which Ireland would have to abide by and follow, will be taken by unelected bureaucrats under the direct influence - and, some, pay - of the armament producing companies. Check the Galileo project as an example.
(3) The so-called Charter of Fundamental Rights, which I call Charter of DEFECTIVE Rights, that will be pushed by the Labour Party, and most probably by the Green leadership, is another area that needs serious debate as it will introduce right-wing and neo-liberal market considerations in the public service area - particularly health and education and transfer decision making on problematic or conflict areas from Irish Courts to the ECJ - European Court of Justice. Consider, for example how the 'right to strike' would sleep in bed 'with the 'right to conduct a business' !!

Each of these three areas will be graduially developed and explained in plain language by the Campaign Against the Lisbon Treaty - to which PANA, Sinn Fein, the Workers Party, the SWP, the iawm and an increasing number of non-aligned activists are affiliated . Pamphlets and leaflets are in preparation. So far, the Campaign has set up three constituency groups in Baldoyle, Dun Laoghaire and Rathmines (South East). A Cabra and a Galway group are in preparation.

The Campaign is organising its first Dublin Public Launch Meeting on Thursday February 7th at 19.30. Watch this space for venue details.

And in case you're wondering if the NO side is exaggerating what's in store for us if we vote Yes, please read carefully the following three quotes from the horses' mouths so to speak:

Giscard d'Estaing, the architect of the Lisbon Treaty, in a le Monde interview last June
"Public opinion will be led to adopt, without knowing it, the proposals that we dare not present to them directly....."

Sarkozy in Le Monde last December:
"There is a cleavage between people and governments. A referendum now would bring our Europe into danger. There will be no Treaty if we had a referendum in France".

And Bertie, who knows well what 'cleavage' means, referring to the Treaty, was quoted by the Irish Times as follows:
"All the changes we made are for the worse...thankfully they haven't changed any of the substance"!!

Now you know

by davekey Wed Jan 16, 2008 21:30

"Is it concievable that their will might also be that they would wish to withdraw from the E.U. altogether and go it alone and would that be achievable/practical?"

I think we should lead by example here and leave the EU as soon as possible. We would still have access to the markets and co-operate with other countries without being in a totalitarian dictatorship. Hopefully it will then cause a huge revolution across Europe and other countries will follow us and bring down the EU. The EU is not Europe, it is a huge bureaucratic, political and elitist organization which is completely alien from the people and pretends to represent us. They don't create wealth or real jobs, they don't support small indigineous industries, they eliminate real competitiion and they have an insatiable need for power and control. They want to dictate and control us down to the smallest detail and centralize wealth to a very small group of elites. For example the European Central Bank is owned by a cartel of international bankers who are unelected and unaccountable to anyone, they suck vast amounts of wealth away from individuals and states and have complete control of the money supply.

"Has our Irishness been lessened by being in the E.U.?
and if so can you indentify the areas?"

One of their aims is to eliminate all forms of national identity and to turn us all into a homogenous race of Europeans. They know that if you can alienate people from their culture, identity and history they are much more controllable. Any display or mention of nationalism in this country is now considered to be backward at best or dangerous at worst, you are considered to be progressive and openminded if you are a little European and go along with the programme.

What are the alternatives to having a united europe or for that matter of having conglomerates of states forming large groups of what we might call Super States that will inevitably bring global peace to a troubled world ?

We will never have peace in this world until strict limitations are put on people in power and democracy is decentralized. Ordinary people never create wars, famine or genocide. They are always created by people with too much power and psychopathic tendencies. The EU is a big part of the problem worldwide by interfering in the sovereignty of other countries, particularly in the third world, exploiting their resources and turning a blind eye or secretely supporting their dictators.

Europe can set the example for the rest of the world but only if the EU is completely dismantled, otherwise it will just be business as usual.

by Alan Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:37

I read this today:

The appropriately named Green Party turns people’s stomachs green when it proves it can not deliver promises has just gone one farther by demonstrating that the party can’t even follow it’s own rules. When it failed to get a two-thirds (66%) majority vote to support the EU/Lisbon treaty, it then voted to abandon the two-thirds constitutional mandate, allowing them to campaign for a yes vote on the EU/Lisbon treaty.

Could the party have been hijacked by the eight Oireachtas members who all support the treaty?

Read the full article here:
http://www.wiseupjournal.com/?p=111

Green Party makes me sick :)

by Hands held high Wed Jan 23, 2008 14:06

The statement above, alleging a vote to abandon the 2/3 rule was taken last Saturday, is factually incorrect. Gormley may well have interpreted the vote as a 'majority' decision despite falling far short of the required mandate, however no such vote (to abandon the 2/3 rule) was taken.

by Alan Fri Jan 25, 2008 15:55

By factually incorrect do you mean the vote didn't take place on Saturday but another day?
Because it also says similar here: http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/mheyojkfeyoj/rss2/

"A large majority of members voted to abandon the third, technical motion, which sought to clarify the result for the party's ministers and members, on grounds that it was unnecessary."

Are you sure that you are correct? It doesn't seems to make sense as Gormley interpreting something that is not legal and forcing the rest of the party to obey him would be a dictatorship of the party.

by davekey Sat Jan 26, 2008 21:38

Not only is the wording of the treaty unreadable but they even made the text smaller:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Kr0Foq3CQE

by Alan Sun Jan 27, 2008 16:03

Watch here:

by We the People Thu Jan 31, 2008 10:03

MAY 9TH. IS VOTING DAY FOR LISBON TREATY/E.U.CONSTITUTION.

Not a mention in the Papers.

Article 48 of this Treaty allows the E.U. to overrule ALL our Laws.

The Irish Constitution will be obsolete.

Having struggled 800years for such adraft ,we barely have it 80years and our so called Leaders want it gone in 8Hours.

Habeas Corpus will be abolished ( Article 40). You may be jailed without trial or reason or Jury. No right to call a Solicitor-left in Jail without charge.

If you are lucky to get a Jury at all, it will be three Judges.

Double Jeopardy - gone. You may be tried over and over again for the same Crime, even if it's a case you already won.

Irish Constitution in total will be overidden by E.U.Law.

Abortion will be promoted and no rights for the unborn.

Your rights will no longer be inalienable(rights that cannot be surrendered); meaning rights that will be given by the E.U. will/can also take them away by them at will.

There will be no votes on policy concerning our own Country.

The even bigger plan is for a Global Union, to merge the African Union,Asian Union,European Union and the now American Union into one. Cash will dissappear and be replaced with RFID implants to facilitate E-Money.
Do we really want this enslavement for our Children?

by sid Sat Mar 29, 2008 22:02

recently i had the pleasure o9f mneeting with meps to di=scuss the lisbon treaty. their main concern was what the new europeans, poland, czech, latvia, would think if ireland voted no. why should we be concerned with the opinions of others regarding our internal affairs. bertie is obviously not concerned. we have a right to decide the future of our country. our democracy should not be undermined by the thoughts of poles, latvians and czechs, or americans for that matter. the eastern europeans will keep coming here as long as there is work, and they are welcome. the american govt/economy does not have much more to give us. it is spontaneously combusting.
the lisbon treaty has some good points, but these do not make up for its failures!

losing a commisioner: there is no real reason for this except lack of imagination, we need to send them back to the drawing board on this one, if the dail can have 15 ministers and 17 (there may be more now?)junior ministers then surely an organisation like the eu could have 27?

we will lose our veto at international level, at organisations like the wto. are we ready for this....our politics are not the same as former colonial powers, we have a different outlook and should be able tpo maintain this. the lisbon treaty will remove this.

it brings us closer to the european army and with sean dorgan recently appointed to the board of bombardier that makes one wonder about ff motives. they keep casting aspersions on declan ganley, at least we know what his motives are, ff and fg have not claimed any donations for several years, we do n ot know who is supporting them....

voting no does not mean we will be thrown out of europe, it is not armageddon. it may force them to create a better treaty and a better eu and a better future for all of us.