The Lisbon Treaty, in its earlier form of the EU Constitution, was already rejected in the summer of 2005 by the people of France and the Netherlands. Now because of a few word changes this referendum will not go to the people of Europe to decide, except in ireland because our constitution still demands it. Vote yes to this and kiss the constitution goodbye. If you agree with, as i do, a european union then it is the No vote not the Yes vote which will continue its present form. A yes vote iwill effectivly be the beginning of the end for national sovernty for every EU country. So much for a united ireland this will take away ireland as a state for ever i kid you not. Your rights like being able to vote on decisions like this will be taken away and liberties locked down by someone you never voted for and someone you dont know. Educate yourself on the treaty the government do not want to inform you on. http://www.wiseupjournal.com/?p=116 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Kr0Foq3CQE The man who chaired the body which drafted the original EU constitution has now confessed that its revived version, the so-called Reform Treaty, was deliberately drafted to try to avoid the people of Europe having their say on it. The French people were allowed a vote in 2005 as were the Dutch, and the Irish will now get a vote on the revived version – so why can't the British people have their say too?" http://www.independent.co.uk/news/e...onstitution-says-giscard-destaing-395521.html
Why were these protests in the European parliment not reported on the RTE news?? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JJlI9swbsA Its time the lies stopped and we pull the wool away from our eyes. Time to say NO http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpWQd73OS2I
Is it not already the case that in a situation under article 234, when a question is referred to the ECJ, the irish courts must adhere to it and bring irish law in accordance with it. A case in point is the recent Lidya Foy case... A further loss of Sovereignty...A restraint on our liberty? Could ypu explain... Furthermore can I ask your justifications for your stance...I'm not trying to say you're right or wrong, I just want to engafe in a discussion...
Bertie reckons it's good for Ireland so we'll be able to get involved in global discussions on matters such as global warming etc.. 64% of the Irish public still don't know which way they are going to vote. You would expect that the YES sites would want to start appearing soon to redress the balance... that's if there are any positives to a Yes vote!
Depends what youre refereing to. Why is it the ireland is the only country getting to vote on the proposed european constitution...coz thats what it is with a few word changes as admitted by the european elite in the quotes in the linked sites thats cool discussion is good mate. This treaty is the first step to a european constitution where ireland will have a very small voice if any matter.....infact yes we wont have a say in european law anymore and we will be told what to do by the greater powers.Does is say this directly in the treaty ? of course not. Have i read it all? of course not as they have made it illegible with two reference manuals 1000s of pages thick on the inital vote that france and holland said no to. luckily people are working on this right now and will have a legible explaination on this treaty out before the vote.
No, it's actually because the Irish constitution requires a referendum on amendments like those the Treaty of Lisbon will impose... I have read the Treaty of Rome and following treaties, and also studied European Law as part of my law degree, and I can honestly say that certain areas need to be clarified in this area, especially when one looks at the judicial activism in the area due to the limited available interpretation open to the ECJ... Doubtless areas need to be improved if the EU is to become an expansive trading block and world power, but on the other hand there are many aspects that I do not agree with, one being the fact that despite Ireland's membership going back to 73', we still do not share the same voting rights as the new accession states due to it coming down to population... I also think that Ireland and the UK made a wise decision opting out of judicial affairs... However, I think in substance we would be somewhat greedy if we were to deny the possible expansion of the EU due to out vote following thirty years of support which in my opinion caused the birth of the celtic tiger... I think we must also be careful not to take on board narrow minded views regarding this treaty, as you have said yourself, many parties etc will be giving out information booklets and will without a doubt be bias towards their views...
and thats what my initial point was. this treaty is the beginning of taking away any further say on european issues. you wont get any more referendums. as i said already, why have they changed the original constitution which was rejected, so now it does not have to go to referendums around europe. why are we having to vote again on something already rejected. how many times do we have to tell them no?its a disgrace and the "elite" must not be allowed get away with it. Well im sure you know much more about EU laws than any of us but i dont understand something you said about being greedy if we reject it. Explain why we would be greedy? were holland and france greedy to vote no to this or did they call it for what it was? in rejecting this treaty we would be doing what every other nation would do if they were given a referendum. They have changed it intentionally so the people cant vote. Why was this? Lets here Mr Sarkozy explain why......."Referendums on the new European Union Treaty were “dangerous” and would be lost in France, Britain and other countries", Nicolas Sarkozy admitted yesterday. The London Telegraph reports Sarkozy’s comments to MEPs in Strasbourg yesterday, where he said if France had a referendum, it would surely vote no. “A referendum now would bring Europe into danger. There will be no Treaty if we had a referendum in France, which would again be followed by a referendum in the UK.” .....eh thanks for that Sarkozy!!! This is NOT good for europe and is better without this treaty. I am pro europe and have always voted for europe expansion. there is nothing in this treaty that i see good for europe. This IS good for the powerful elite. Its not EU expansion it is EU lockdown where countries like ours will have no say in the future. I am not fooled by the spin that it helps europe move faster in markets, we are doing very well up to now why change it? This is a vote for an EU constitution when you strip away all the riff raff. How can the green party for example vote no on this before in power and now complete turn on all its values and have a split party this time? Power corrupts as they say....... "In short I am advocating a United States of Europe." Belgian Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt..........eh no thanks i like my country the way it is
This joke of a document is the EU Constitution in another guise. In reality, it's about centralising power to France, Germany, England, Spain and Italy. It has a proviso for a 30-month "permanent" EU President, and abandons the current 6-month rotation. France and the Dutch have already rejected this nonsense in free and fair referendums. It's up to us to uphold their voice. It's a big responsibility for our people to be entrusted with.
It's a tough one, the continued growth of the EU cannot continue in the current form as it would take absolutely forever to get agreement on anything and the EU would effectively be a talking shop and rendered powerless. On the other hand ceding so much power is a big risk. While I think there will be alot of scare-mongering and conspiracy theorists out there, it is a potentially dangerous situation to give that power over your country to others. Of course the whole theory of the EU as a developing concept is that we would eventually see ourselves as European rather than Iirsh, French, German etc, how many people are really that convinced of the concept? I think it's being done in good faith and I don't give in to the conspiracy theorists in that regard, but there is huge scope for the system to be abused. It's hard to know how to take the EU further, and equally it has done a lot of good up to now. Legally, it's arguable that we've gone so far down the line that you couldn't unravel it if you wanted to...
so the populations of france and holland are all conspiracy theorists? have you read the quotes from the so called self labelled "elites"? Sorry im not having that and find it insulting that people will call No voters scare mongerers or conspiracy theorists. you will have to put a much stronger argument out there to try convince people to vote yes than that Former French President AND one of the architects of the EU constitution which was voted no to Mr. Valéry Giscard d'Estaing states the following....... "The proposed institutional reforms, the only ones which mattered to the drafting convention, are all to be found in the Treaty of Lisbon. They have merely been ordered differently and split up between previous treaties." M. Giscard d'Estaing said: "In the Treaty of Lisbon, the tools are largely the same. Only the order in which they are arranged in the tool-box has been changed. Admittedly, the box itself is an old model, which you have to rummage through in order to find what you are looking for."(i.e. intentionally made illegible and manipulated to avoid referendum) M. Giscard d'Estaing said references to the constitution had been removed "above all to head off any threat of referenda by avoiding any form of constitutional vocabulary".
the EU constitution, its all still in the new treaty..... "The substance of the constitution is preserved," Mrs Merkel told MEPs last month. "That is a fact." http://www.youtube.com/v/siweqKqqoZs&rel=1
I never said I was voting yes mate, and you're making a huge jump between what I said and claiming that I'm painting the no vote as conspiracy theorists. Maybe you should read it again. I make no apologies for saying there are conspiracy theorists WITHIN the no vote because there are people who like to stir it up in relation to Europe at every opportunity. There are pros and cons to both side of the argument.
No worries. Then again with the way America voting in George Dubya for a second term, maybe democracy is over-rated