Lisbon deal taking shape
Mr Cowen didn't use the word "referendum". But the Irish prime minister has told his fellow leaders that his government "is committed to seeking ratification of the Lisbon Treaty" by the end of next October.
In return the EU will deal with what the Irish government claims are the "concerns" of the Irish people and give "the necessary legal guarantees". They will ensure that the Lisbon Treaty doesn't affect:
Ireland's traditional neutrality;
Ireland's laws on the family and abortion;
The taxation system.
If Lisbon comes into effect the leaders would then use the vote to make sure the commission "includes one national of each member state". The plan to slim down the commission would be abandoned.
The UK wants more legal advice about the nature of what is being promised, so no one can argue the treaty is now substantially different and needs to go back to the British Parliament... or British people.
I’m Mark Mardell, the BBC's North America editor. These are my reflections on American politics, some thoughts on being a Brit living in the USA, and who knows what else? My 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~51~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Mark, re the British seeking legal advice. I hope they don't use the same people who gave them advice over the legality of the Iraq war. Or if they do, they at least publish the reasons for any conclusions contained within that advice - won't hold my breath though
Complain about this comment
Quite wise after all we do have a two speed Europe at the moment and the Euro and Shengen come to mind. So Lisbon was buried but there was still a little life in it so let's dig it up. My bet is that it will be well and kicking come this time next year.
Complain about this comment
They will ensure that the Lisbon Treaty doesn't affect:
Ireland's traditional neutrality;
Ireland's laws on the family and abortion;
The taxation system.
You know what the sad part is, the Lisbon treaty already did all of this BEFORE the referendum. Perhaps the Irish government should have explained the treaty to her people better?
Complain about this comment
Mark
The Irish Government is taking a big gamble. Should the vote be negative again the breakup of the Union is almost inevitable. The signature of a legally binding document confirming that the Irish can retain what they already had under Lisbon is smart politics. The real victory is they can keep a Commissioner but then no Member State really wanted to lose one anyway. A win-win outcome. Let us hope that my turkeys and christmas analogy of the other day is wide of the mark. If the Irish say no yet again then those who want to proceed will quite legitmately say the EU as presently constituted no longer meets the needs of the 21st century. Their will to continue with ever closer union, minus those who never subscribed to the idea, will put put to the test. Late 2009 will be interesting. Perhaps all those who hate the Union will get the opportunity to experience sum-zero sovereignty in the modern world. Iceland appears to have realized the limits of 19th century sovereignty in the contemproary world for small European States.
Complain about this comment
Brian Cowan must be convinced he is going to win a second Irish Referendum pro-Lisbon vote.
I hope he is right otherwise the EU is going to have a lot of egg on its face and the damage to the credibility of how these improvements are driven forward regardless of obvious electorate concerns (be it in Ireland where there is a strong pro-EU belief and where thay did vote "No" and elsewhere in Europe where the groundswell of public opinion may be somewhat less pro-EU) may become irrepairably damaged as the alleged democratic deficit is now clearly being ignored by the Council of Ministers in their efforts to drive forward the EU Project.
Despite my being in favour for the ideas and democratic improvements to the EU provided by the Treaty of Lisbon, I find the process of delivering this Treaty utterly unwholesome and arguably an abuse of of political power using the maxim "The end justifies the mean!"
Complain about this comment
Re post 5, menedemus, well said.
For those that say there is nothing undemocratic about asking people to vote again, think about another example. There is an election, Party A recieved most votes. But Party B says hold on, the electorate did not really understand what we were trying to say, let's vote again. Can any one here say it would be deomocratic to allow a revote.
What if next time, there is a yes vote. Could the no vote campaign argue, 'the people did not understand what we were trying to say, let's vote again'. Of course not, a free and dempcratic vote should be allowed to stand. Even those that may be in favour of Lisbon can surely see this is wrong and an abuse of power.
Complain about this comment
Mark....
I hope that the Irish will vote YES on this "treaty"....
Complain about this comment
Irish neutrality, in an age of international terrorism is unacceptable.
Pray tell us how can Ireland participate in and get all the advantages of EC membership and then abdicate their duty to defend it ?
One can understand the taxation and cultural issues involved, but this so called neutrality issue is both bogus and immoral.
Complain about this comment
I wish we in Britain could have a referendum on this infernal Treaty.
Complain about this comment
As a Irish man, I would have no doubt that Ireland will vote yes the next time.
Why? a lot has changed since june, Credit Crunch, Property Crash, High Unemployment (over 270,000 unemployed), and the country in recession, people here don't want to be isolated from the EU.
The real problem was, the yes side (The goverment) took their eye off the ball and didnt give the people enough information or confidence in the treaty.
I voted yes the first time, I will do the same again.
Lisbon part 2, I cant wait!
Complain about this comment
To Menedemus (5):
I think that the thing is that the Irish govermeant can't afford on not having another referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. The whole debacle with the Lisbon Treaty is a loose - loose situation where the only question is who is going to loose and how much.
If they don't have another vote, then for the rest of the Europe it will look like the Irish govermeant didn't do everything that it could do to get the treaty accepted. This would mean that the Irish govermeant would be in disgrace and offside in any future negotiations: not just this govermeant, but any govermeant after it. So not having another vote and Ireland at whole will loose.
If, and it seems like, the Irish govermeant has another vote then it will loose no matter the outcome.
If the Irish vote Yes, even the current govermeant is going to be blamed for caving into the EU.
If the Irish vote No, the govermeant has to likely step down and many people will loose their political carriers.
The only open question, on if the Irish vote No, is how does it affect Irish position in the negotiation tables. The No vote would for sure mean the end to the current EU and give rise to a multi speed EU. With good luck nobody would hold resentment for the Irish as they would be too busy on fighting on what will the multi core/speed Europe look like. With bad luck the Irish still can join the more advantageous version of the EU, but in negotiations nobody leading to this it will not have any weight on influencing where the process goes.
To the EU I don't think that the Irish voting either Yes or No will be in the end be a big deal. If it Yes then the union will progress as it has used to be in the past, and if it is No then it will be show time for the multi speed union: especially if the Torry party wins in the UK and they don't change their EU politics to more positive direction, there will be war of words and wills inside the EU.
To jordanbasset (6):
The situation in Ireland is actually more comparable on the govermeant presenting a budget for the next year, the parliament rejecting it and the govermeant coming back again and putting it on a vote with few changes. In another words, business as usual.
Complain about this comment
3. At 7:19pm on 11 Dec 2008, Ticape wrote:
They will ensure that the Lisbon Treaty doesn't affect:
Ireland's traditional neutrality;
Ireland's laws on the family and abortion;
The taxation system.
You know what the sad part is, the Lisbon treaty already did all of this BEFORE the referendum. Perhaps the Irish government should have explained the treaty to her people better?
Or maybe the irish people did beleive all that was in the original treaty and still didn't like it.
It is very sad that so many pro-eu'ers find it incomprehensible that any one could disagree with them -- that is this same arrogance/ignorance that the EU demonstrate in all they do - that is what makes the whole organisation so dangerous.
I hate the EU, but understand that others can rationally hold a different view - that is what makes me infinitely superiour to eu-philes.
Complain about this comment
#6. Something like this happened before in the Netherlands. In the 2002 Dutch election the voters were stupid enough to vote for a party which recently lost it's leader.
8 months later they were asked 'to vote again and get it right this time' and they did! ;-P
#8. You can still fight terrorism and not participate in military actions.
Complain about this comment
and if the irish vote no again?...you will have to vote again and again and again, until you do as you are told! please tell me what is the difference between this attitude and a mugabe dictatorship?
Complain about this comment
spedkaufmann @ #8
I could not agree more.
I even think the opt-outs that the British, the Danish and the Irish benefit from under Maastricht are wrong.
I also think that the UK is wrong to be outside of Schengen and not be in the Euro.
Alternatively, if a country does not want to participate wholeheartedly from membership and its responsibilities with the EU then it should withdraw from taking those benefits until it is ready to be grown up and join in wholeheartedly!
Complain about this comment
Re post 11, Jukka, you say that they have put in a few changes to the treaty. Another pro Lisbon person on this site has said there are no real changes as the various additions were already in the Lisbon treaty (see post 3 above)- are you right and the other wrong?
Why is it that europe can boss Ireland around but would not dare do it when France and Holland voted no to the constitution. Why were they not made to go back to their people with changes (or not ). Because France would not be pushed around. I hope the Irish people continue to stand up for those people who have been disenfranchised in this process.
Complain about this comment
To jordanbasset (16):
You miss read me, I said that the situation compared to this situation is a situation where a govermeant takes budget that was previously rejected with small changes. Now in this case the small change is that the Ireland will get guarantees on the three points mentioned.
Now is Europe bossing Ireland? Not from my opinion. Ireland doesn't have to agree on anything. The thing however is that in real world where there are actions or inactions there are to consequences these. With Ireland the thing is that its a small country of 4,4 million peoples while France is a country of approx 60 million. Both of these countries are free to choose what they do, but their ability to pay for consequences differs largely: Ireland has the weight of a small country, France has the weight of a large country. Or lets say in other words, for European integration its essential that France is in it, but its not essential for Ireland on being it in.
Of course this is highly unfair, but that is the situation and this is how the reality works.
Complain about this comment
Re post 18, Jukka, thanks for your honesty, I hope people who will be voting in the referendum will read your post
Complain about this comment
Iceland may apply to join the European Union as soon as next year, the EU's enlargement commissioner says.
Olli Rehn said the European Commission was "mentally preparing for the possibility of an application from Iceland... for early next year".
Iceland has always preferred to stay outside the EU, but after being badly hit by the economic crisis, some are now advocating its entry.
hahahahahahaha... what can I say, except laugh.. so funny.. when they were rich they didn't even give a sh.. about EU, not that they are poor they are begging for a bail out.. by who?
Complain about this comment
"Irish neutrality, in an age of international terrorism is unacceptable."
Why? Because you say so?
The most notable thing about foreign reaction to the rejection of Lisbon is the tone that people take. Those who are "eurosceptic" are supportive of Ireland and hopeful that Irish voters will vote No again. Those who are "europhiles" are dismissive and angry.
If Ireland had voted Yes, all of this would have been forgotten long ago; instead we voted No and a real debate has opened up across Europe about the meaning of democracy and the questionable value of centralising sovereignty in Brussels... and some people hate that kind of debate. You know who you are.
Complain about this comment
There have only been three referendums on the Euro Constitutional Treaty - and all three nations have said "no".
The fact that it's going through anyway (France and Holland don't have a second vote) tells us everything we need to know about the undemocratic EU.
Complain about this comment
"When Ireland voted NO, EUphiles said: Ireland should have voted YES for the treaty. Ireland should be kicked out of EU.. out. If they dare to say NO again we will do it."
Do you want to try if EU is bluffing? Then vote NO.
My question is what will happen if a second NO will come from Ireland? Is it strange EU is asking for a second referendum?
But EU must be 100%sure that there is no chance they can get a NO. And how EU can get this garantee? By corruption and manipulation of votes... you buy people who are against in Ireland.. how do you do that? You create a problem for them (Irish meat industry) and then you pretent to be their saivor by giving money to the Irish meat industry. It is all over newspapers that EU is giving help to Irish meat industry.. why not the national government?why the national government let EU do its job? EU creates a problem then helps.. what is this? dirty tricks by EU and EUphiles
Complain about this comment
All this hypocritical cant from the British/English europhobes abiut the "undemocratic" EU is becoming tiresome.
Their unwritten constitution applies a unique English constitutional concept of "parliamentary sovereignty" to all the nations of the multi-national UK state. What is "democratic" about denying the sovereignty of the people?
Their complaint about unelected commissioners hypocritically ignores the UK practice of drawing Government Ministers from the unelected House of Lords.
Their House of Lords includes the unelected bishops from the Church of England - England is the only nation in the UK to have an Established Church, but these people vote on issues affecting everyone in the UK.
The UK Parliament can, at any time, decide to annul devolution to the Parliament/Assemblies of the minority nations or overrule their legislation. how is this democratic?
The UK Parliament is simultaneously that, and also the English Parliament for non-reserved powers, but Scots MPs can vote on English only issues (only Labour MPs from Scotland actually do that). Why are the democratic rights of the English constantly ignored?
When the British/English create a democratic constitution, then they can criticise European structures - in the meantime pot and kettle come to mind.
Complain about this comment
3. At 7:19pm on 11 Dec 2008, Ticape wrote:
"
'They will ensure that the Lisbon Treaty doesn't affect:
Ireland's traditional neutrality;
Ireland's laws on the family and abortion;
The taxation system.
You know what the sad part is, the Lisbon treaty already did all of this BEFORE the referendum. Perhaps the Irish government should have explained the treaty to her people better??"
That, Ticape, is your opinion. As I write, I have in front of me last Saturdays Irish Times. In it on page 15 three people have an article replying to another by one Dr. Devine. I Quote:
" ... Like Dr. Devine, we are academic analysts in the related fields of international relations and European integration ...
However we part company with Dr. Devine's orthodox analysis on ... her interpretation of the Lisbon Treaty...." and on more.
So these academics who specialise in international relations and European stuff cannot agree as to the effect of the Lisbon Treaty.
So how can an "ordinary" person be confident of any interpretation, yours or mine?
" ... Perhaps the Irish government should have explained the treaty to her people better."
I'm not Irish. Going on the experience in the UK, I wouldn't believe any interpretation any "EU"-lover gave me. We have been lied to repeatedly over a period of almost forty years.
Added to that comes claims that the Lisbon Treaty has been deliberately written to be unintelligible to the ordinary person.
Given all of that, the Irish were very sensible to reject it the first time. I hope they will reject it again if it is placed before them.
Complain about this comment
I dont see why the question cannot be asked on next years Euro election ballet for those of us that although promised a referendum didnt get one.
It wouldnt increase the elections cost by much and would then give the EU the mandate they require and they can be seen to be actually doing what the people want.
Something sadly lacking with Euro politicians....
Complain about this comment
Post 22 by karolina001 - outstanding cynicism, well done!!
So if the dioxin issue is deliberately created pro-EU electioneering, what suitable riposte can we engineer on the anti-EU side? Proof of EU funding of underground abortion clinics? Brussels sprouting plans to conscript Irishmen into an EU army? Hell, if they can play dirty then so can we! ;-)
Complain about this comment
To quote American comedian Stephen Colbert: "Reality has a well-known liberal bias." If I read some of the people who complain about a presumed pro-EU bias here (the same 3-4 posters over and over and over again), the BBC also has:
a) a pro-Green bias because it reports on the strong scientific consensus over global warming and the vastly overwhelming evidence supporting it;
b) a pro-terrorist bias because it reports on human rights violations like Abu Ghraib;
c) a pro-atheist bias because it doesn't cite the "Evolution" "Theory" in scare quotes;
d) a pro-multiculturalist bias because it has sites in several languages and doesn't proclaim itself proud of being white or English;
e) presumably, a pro-"round Earth" bias because it doesn't give equal hearing to flat-Earthers.
Come on, just because you don't like reality, it doesn't mean that you can walk away from it, like Robert Mugabe declaring cholera "arrested" (what an interesting choice of words) in Zimbabwe. The fact is, those particular 3-4 posters (and I really do not want to tar the genuine Euro-sceptics with the same brush here) just do not like the EU. They do not like it and they still would not like it if it gave free energy, cured cancer and AIDS, and was the most accomplished democracy in the world with accounts approved every year by beady-eyed infallible beancounters. They dislike it indifferently of whether they understand how it works or not. Their dislike is not rational, it is a primeval, atavistic disgust.
I don't know what causes this disgust, whether it is attachment to all traditions, or the result of a continuous propaganda campaign. And, quite frankly, I don't care: it is their problem, not mine. But I will very forcefully resist any attempt by them to use allegations of bias to gag a journalist, never mind one genuinely trying to shine some light on an often misunderstood and misrepresented subject like the EU.
Complain about this comment
I am also highly amused by the reaction of some people to a likely second Irish referendum. Why is ONE referendum GOOD, but TWO referenda BAD?
The only reason, of course, is that politicians (quite independently of their political orientation) only like referenda they think they can win (or referenda they already won). Witness how Vaclav Klaus opposed giving a direct vote to Czechs and Slovaks on the split of Czechoslovakia back in 1991, whereas he now thinks referenda are the acme of democracy (as long as they are not carried out more than once, and he wins that one).
Complain about this comment
a quote about iceland joinging the EU today on the bbc website "The EU's door is open to any European country that respects the principles of liberty, democracy and human rights and can carry the obligations of EU membership," said Anna-Kaisa Itkonen, a spokeswoman for Mr Rehn's office. What a load of rubbish bbc once in democracy goes through the window . If i was iceland i would ride the storm sooner or later things will buck up dont sign your country to brosso
Complain about this comment
24I wouldn't believe any interpretation any "EU"-lover gave me. We have been lied to repeatedly over a period of almost forty years.
Then you have to read it yourself, and it's not unreadable it's just not a light read and it will take a while.
#21There have only been three referendums on the Euro Constitutional Treaty - and all three nations have said "no".
There's been four referendums on the Euro Constitutional Treaty. Just because the Spanish and Luxembourgers voted yes doesn't mean their vote doesn't count.
Also funny fact: there has been more yes votes on the constitutional treaty then no votes.
Complain about this comment
As far as I'm concerned, the fuss abouth the Consttitution is a positive phenomenon. The future of the EU is a major subject of the public debate all around the continent.
I believe in the 'European idea' and would love the project to go ahead. But from time to time a shake-up is needed.
Complain about this comment
Rcalvo @27 wrote
“They do not like [the EU] and they still would not like it if it gave free energy, cured cancer and AIDS, and was the most accomplished democracy in the world with accounts approved every year by beady-eyed infallible beancounters. They dislike it indifferently of whether they understand how it works or not. Their dislike is not rational, it is a primeval, atavistic disgust.
I don't know what causes this disgust, whether it is attachment to all traditions, or the result of a continuous propaganda campaign. And, quite frankly, I don't care: it is their problem, not mine”.
This is so typical of the pro Europhile rant we get on these blogs when they say people would still hate the EU even it was the most democratic and accountable organisation in the world etc. Well, the EU is certainly NOT any of these things but the Europhiles still think it is wonderful, even when (a) they know there is not even the slightest possibility that the EU would ever become a democratic and accountable organisation and (b) yet still wish to give this undemocratic and unaccountable organisation more power at the expense of member states!
It is the Europhile that is acting in a totally irrational way as they ignore all the shortcomings of the EU and know these will never be resolved: all that matters to them is their irrational desire to move towards the creation of an ever closer union irrespective of the wishes of the people of Europe.
Europhiles are by their very nature anti-democratic because they desire the creation of an ever closer union which would concentrate power at the centre, where there is no democratic control or accountability, and remove it from member states where there is democratic control and accountability.
Complain about this comment
In Lisbon I see the political reality in Europe. At the Lisbon European party politics was definitely in front marginalizing their citizens to ostracism and slavery that producers and Asian Americans need to justify them down on their villages. The Welfare State has died. The European political power long ago that sold the soul of Europe to the interests of international corporations. To global capital.
Since long ago in Europe's vote has no value to justify to the world and an alleged false democracy, that everyone knows worship and not a slave. As in Spain, in the rest of Europe are decided outside the political affairs of its citizens, whether or not decisions important to their lives. The Europeans are already so slaves and bonded as Spanish nationals are subject to the regime of the Spanish monarchy partitocrática direct heir of the dictator that Europe wanted to keep in power following the instructions of the United States.
The Spanish example has unfortunately spread in Europe. Many Spaniards believed that the Europeans in the north, which had followed a trajectory supposed brave and dignificante since the Protestant Reformation of Luther, vituperar not be left by the political-economic power, as we see, the subject has, as is happening to us we. We thought that Europeans were able to overcome cultural ignorance that it has been in Spain. What are you going to come at the Europeans now?, Are we may say that they are free politically, and they are the ones who decide policy and the future of Europe, the future of their own lives?. If the Europeans allow the sale of Europe and not make you remedy this situation, freed from the bondage that support, Europe has been completed. Political leaders, at the foot of global economic power, led by U.S. what we want for Europe Jacques Delors wanted to Spain, which was the Andalusia and Europe told the European business. "Ne pas SOYEZ myopes, L'Espagne is on sale." Well friends, now is your time: "L 'Europe est in sales." And of course, just as happened to the Spaniards of that sale did not go to see absolutely nothing. The only thing you will receive, depending on your docility, are lined with alms grants. We can say that Europe is the U.S. Andalusia and their new allies. Dear Europe, where they are made. And, having said that, we also say that this is the Europe we want, is not the Europe of free citizens who decide their own future in democracies in which truth and defend freedom above all else. It is not the Europe that breathes truth and loyalty to each other. If we do not know how to take this example to the world, the world will undergo the most brutal servitude ever.
That saw him, when you have been given the opportunity, the Irish voting NO on this mass of papers that ultimately comes to saying that decisions will be taken directly, not by a European Parliament representative of European citizenship and power to veto the proposals concerned the Council comprises the leaders of each state folded the international financial capital and whose accountability to citizens by its absence.
Now, in a display of arrogance studied dare to insult and humiliate the Irish, the only ones who have been loyal to himself, to the Irish people that we represent all that we were unable to require our leaders a democratic referendum , To return to vote with the direct threat or that they vote or are just nougat. That is blackmail, blackmail that we can not afford. It is now just as if we are really something, we must request it. Now is the time to speak, because we will step into place both the fascist Spanish that governs us, dancing water with the alternation of political parties does not state that emerged from civil society. That's a scam in any order. We must demand that not only re-Ireland vote, but vote for all. If we allow such treatment to the Irish already know what awaits us. So, miserable people of Europe unite, and to rectify your cowardly behavior.
[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
Complain about this comment
Ticape @30,
Luxembourg with its 480,000 citizens receives more EU money per capita than any other nation.
It is also has the world's highest gross national income per capita.
Of course they would vote for the EU.
(Spain is also, of course, a nett recipient of EU funds).
Complain about this comment
We tried for hundreds of years to get the Irish to see it our way, but they didn’t want any of that! We tried force (many times) and we tried concessions and we even gave they them a disproportionate number of seats at Westminster to try and keep Ireland within the Union of Great Britain and Ireland. In the years before 1914, Irish Home Rulers even held the balance of power in the Liberal Govt which ruled the biggest empire the world has ever known. But the Irish always wanted to govern themselves and I think the same desires are at work today. No concessions from us would have satisfied their desires for independence back then so why should they now give up any more of their hard won independence and control over their way of life by accepting the Lisbon Treaty?
As Ireland moves into sharp recession, I expect many Irish people will come to realise that the fault lies with the European Central Bank which fixed rates far too low for Ireland’s needs in the early years of the Euro. This caused a huge unsustainable inflationary boom which the Irish Govt was unable to modify as they had given up control of monetary policy. Now the Irish are reaping the whirlwind of surrendering monetary control, and it is all down to their membership of the Euro.
Complain about this comment
jordan basset, re".. legal advice on Iraq.."
Iraq!?
Are you one of those incapable of separating utterly different issues?
The Government received 'legal advice' and then went to the UK Parliament and by a very substantial MP vote the Iraq policy was passed. End of.
Now, as for the EU and the UK Parliament: When was 'legal advice' given to the Government or MPs that the Citizens of England (at least) who in Opinion Polls record by 65 to 80% their wish for a Referendum on EU Membership, should be ignored by all 3 major political parties?
Complain about this comment
#30 Ticape
You have perhaps forgotten the remark from Valery Giscard D'Estaing cited in these blog comments some time ago from Le Monde of June 2007:
That is perhaps why it's not a light read.
Complain about this comment
Re post 36, ikamaskeip, hi, pleased to meet you. Firstly my post on the legal advice was a little tongue in cheek but does have some relavance.
The legal advice was required, as you say, prior to the U.K. being able to progress any further re the war in Iraq. However there was evidence that the advice did change during the course of 'discussions', a final decision being that the legal advice did say it was lawful to go to war against Iraq. However, despite repeated requests, the Government refused to disclose the grounds for that decision and would only give the decision itself. Many suspected the decision but found it difficult to challenge it because of a lack of information forthcoming.
Now returning to the Lisbon Treaty, Mark stated that the U.K. wants legal advice on this issue to prevent people saying this is substantially different from the first treaty and so requiring it be put back before Parliament. My concern is that again there wil be shadowy goings on re this legal advice and all we will get is the final decision, yes it's legal. Again there will be no information released on how this decision was come to and this will make it difficult to challenge the decision.
My own opinion for what it is worth is that it should go back before Parliament as the treaty has changed (would also like it to go before the British people, but that is unlikely).
So, although the substantive issues are different, the process that was used is similar and of relevance here
Complain about this comment
22. It kind of just goes to show that all real hard-line Eurosceptics are conspiracy theorists. European governments aren't conspiring against their peoples. It's just nonsense.
37. Lies, lies and more lies. We never hear anything else from Eurosceptics. http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2008/0626/1214432054124.html
Complain about this comment
I am disgusted with two things about this:
1. The grossly undemocratic re-vote. If it hasn't changed much, then there should not be a rerun. If it has, everyone else should get a vote;
2. The sinister pro-EU BBC HYS debate. It doesn't appear on the main HYS page and can only be accessed through various other pages. It has now been closed after one day. End the licence fee now until you stop your gross bias towards the EU
Complain about this comment
"Irish neutrality, in an age of international terrorism is unacceptable."
Does this go for Sweden, Finland and Austria as well?
Complain about this comment
There seems to be some people on this blog who speak Euro Speak.
They don't wrtie like normal people but more like people brainwashed by the euro language of ratification without democratic mandate.
Is this a deliberate ploy to jam the blogs full of Euro nonsense.
After the No Vote Mr Shultz said he wanted to see more "passion" for the European project through campaigning. It seems we have a federal solution to this on this blog.
This is getting scary.
You will never take Britain Quietly, the public will react when they realise what you are doing.
See this link for proof of the arrogant totalitarianists:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=M6QmH-7fu68
Complain about this comment
37. Sadly enough no. It seems that that all treaties aren't light reads. :-(
34.: So it's okay to disregard yes votes, but it's not okay to disregard no votes? I believe the English saying goes pot calling the kettle black.
Complain about this comment
threnodio @ # 41
I would say "Yes".
Having started off as being anti-EU by prejudice I now feel quite strongly that Europe "together" is stronger than its many component Nations behaving independently.
The future for Europeans is, I believe, likely to be better by working together in ever closer union or else the various global trading, economic, financial and political Blocs that are developing will treat Europe and its citizens with a diffidence somewhat akin to European attitudes towards former colonial nations in Africa and South America.
It is a case of growing up and realising that individual nations have had their day and that together we Europeans are stronger working together in all areas of expertise and talent.
However, what must end is this dilettante apporach to what each nation likes to get from membership of the EU.
It is time that the UK grew up and took a vested interest in the EU and committd itself to full membership of the European Union, adopted Shengen and the Euro.
Similarly, one can see that the various current opt-outs being enjoyed by Denmark are being voluntarily rescinded by the Danish people and good for them.
The question of neutrality is more difficult but I believe that one cannot be part of an organisation and feel removed from defending that organisation should the need arise.
Clearly international incidents do not happen overnight but the Irish, Austrians, Swedish and Finns cannot train with the other nations for a possibile international confrontation and perform at their peak of cooperation if they have a case-by-case approach to self-defence and not cooperative mutual self-defence at the heart of their militay training.
If Sweden were attacked by another country it is highly likely that, for example, British boys and girls would be sent into harm's way to support the Swedes. Could Britain or any of the non-neutral EU Nations expect that same tacit support - I would suggest that the case would be, currently, not.
Religious opt-outs such as the right to not allow abortions are (and should be), for the time being, an acceptable exemption from universal international applicability but the scenario of, for example, young Catholic girls travelling to England (as they do now) and, eventually (if they do not already?), travelling to elsewhere in the EU to obtain secretive abortions will lead the Irish to join the 21st Century and be less repressed about the need to manage morals according to religious diktat.
Sooner or later, being European will mean accepting and being part of a European community. Half-hearted membership of that community will be to the detriment of the uncommitted.
Complain about this comment
#42 - RareBreedlibertarian
No, it is a dirty cynical conspiracy to enable people who don't agree with you to have their say. It's called democracy.
Complain about this comment
Michael_Walsh @ 39
You accuse post 37 as being "Lies, lies and more lies. We never hear anything else from Eurosceptics" and give a link to the Irish Times.
But all we get from Europhiles is lies, lies, and yet more lies and the article you linked to in the Irish Times proves my point!
The Irish Times story did NOT, repeat NOT deny the words of Valerie D'Estaing when he was quoted as saying:
"Public opinion will be led to adopt, without knowing it, the proposals that we dare not present to them directly ... All the earlier proposals will be in the new text, but will be hidden and disguised in some way".
The Irish Times article stated that Valerie D'Estaing said these words were said in relation to the voters of France!!! So he did say them, and as the Constitution/Lisbon Treaty both would have applied equally to France and Ireland, the words and sentiment expressed apply equally to Ireland and to every other member country.
The europhiles can't even construct consistent denials, so showing how untrustworthy they are. The Irish Times stated that "Mr Giscard's next, unquoted paragraph, however, makes clear that he regarded such an approach as "unworthy" and likely to "confirm European citizens in the idea that the construction of Europe is organised behind their backs by lawyers and diplomats".
Wiki's comment on the other hand tells a quite different story. That states that Valerie D'Estaing has denied making the statement in question, claiming that it was a mistranslation, of what was a speculation about the path that others may take the treaty without proper monitoring.
All this goes to show is that the Europhiles are never to be trusted because they lie, they deceive and then cover up. It is second nature to them.
Complain about this comment
What I can never understand is that the Europhiles don't seem to care that the whole thing is run so poorly.
It fails its audit - so instead fo sorting it out they spin a load of stuff about it being the member staes fault.
MEPs never turn up to debates.
They limit the time an anti EU MEP can speak.
Why don't you at least want it run well and democratically.
If the system was corruption free, efficient and clearly democratic then that would get you far more support than any amount of propoganda.
The more you spout about the EU in that drone like language the more the average brit will realise that you are all brain-washed sheep in some strange cult or Sect who want force their opinions on people DESPITE democratic objection.
The reason they put up with the corruption, inefficiency, lack of democracy is because if the process was really democratic then they wouldn't be able to force through their policies.
You should all be ashamed of your lack honour and respect for the voice of the people.
Long live Geat Britain and its Great people.
Complain about this comment
Threnodio -
How is it democratic to ignore the voice of the people of a nation state in a referendum 3 times.
It doesn't matter that other countries have voted for it. If they vote for it they can have it.
But the people vote no and Europe says:
"hang on chaps, I think you got this wrong.
Think again or we'll poison your pork! Comrade".
Complain about this comment
#46 - busby2
With you terminology, you have spectacularly shot yourself in the foot. A Europhile is simply someone who likes Europe. He or she has political axe to grind at all. I suspect you meant EUphiles (if there is such a word) and that you in any case were not talking about those who favour it but rather those whose politics or profession involve them promoting it.
If you are seriously suggesting that anybody who is not antagonistic towards Europe is dishonest, deceitful and secretive, you have dragged this debate to a new low.
This may seem to you either pedantic or patronising. It is not intended to be either. Try to look at it from the other perspective. In the last few weeks, a lunatic fringe has been posting the most outlandish allegations including one post which serious wanted us to believe that the Hatfield Rail disaster was the EU's fault. Face with that level of blind prejudice, you can hardly be surprised if you receive sharp reaction. The truth is that the future of Europe and Britain's role in it must now be the subject of open and honest debate. Similar debates are taking place the length and breadth of Europe. Eurosecpticism is not a uniquely British phenomenon. However, it needs to be an informed debate and people of both sides of the argument achieve nothing by throwing in red herrings and disinformation.
It also seems to me that we have to distinguish between two quite separate questions which are becoming confused in these columns. Is Lisbon the right way forward and is it a good treaty? It is an entirely sensible question which needs to be addressed in it's own right. Quite separately, good or bad, is Lisbon being foisted on an unwilling or sceptical people using underhand means to avoid consulting and if so, by whom. Doubtless, if I repeat my argument in favour of open consultation by referendum, I will stand accused on ignoring the fact that referenda do not sit comfortably with constitutions which rely on the principle of parliamentary sovereignty since the outcome cannot by definition be binding on the legislature. How else, however, are you going to test it?
I am an unashamed Europhile and I suspect that the more strident Eurosceptic voices here are not as numerous as they would like to think. I do however suspect that both the British and a number of other European governments are sufficiently afraid of what the answer might be to avoid asking any kind of question. Is this dishonest or is it what they were elected to do? Since the likelihood of the UK government consulting the people is close on zero, you have but one opportunity to voice your objections and that is in the forthcoming EU parliamentary elections. If the UKIP does not adequately reflect your views, Mr. Ganley has opened another dorr for you.
But please do not accuse us of being deceitful liars. We didn't lumber you with Lisbon and neither did the EU. Your government negotiated this and if you believe that you were not consulted, blame the people who didn't do so and stop going off on tangents and attributing blame where there is none.
Complain about this comment
The EU should scrap political integration, leave the Irish alone, and remain focused solely on economic matters. The EU choir has too many people singing from their own song sheet for political integration to ever happen. EU leaders fall over themselves trying to secure as much as they can and give as little as possible. Not that that is bad, but it underscores, in my opinion, why political integration will never work. But I must admit, watching from the sidelines it can be hilarious to see the way the EU convulses this way and that. Take the Russia/Georgia war for example, I thought the EU demanded fairly unambiguous terms before continuing the partnership talks with Russia only to, bravely, decide they didn’t really mean that, and that they are of course happy to continue discussions with the Russians. Or the violations of the stability and growth pact a couple years back by the big nations. Or the Iraq war. Etc, etc.
Personally, I would like to see the EU utterly fail as a political force and hope that the EU doesn’t take over long to implode. Remain an economic force and call it a day. Leave the Irish alone and quit attempting to usurp power that is not rightfully yours
Complain about this comment
#47 - RareBreedlibertarian
"You should all be ashamed of your lack honour and respect for the voice of the people".
How dare you? Ashamed?
I have not heard the voice of the people and neither have you. They were not asked. I will honour and respect that view when and if I know what it is and not until.
Complain about this comment
Why is this blog full of people from Europe?
Surely they would prefer to comment on Europe on their national websites, broadcasting media?
If they are so passionate pro-EU then surely they would be campaiging on websites from their own country?
Why are they so keen to promote their views to British People?
Why does this seem like a concerted effort?
What has it got to do with you what the British people want? Surely that is up to us alone?
I respect your right to campaign in your country but why do so over here unless you wanted to force your opinions on OUR country?
What are we doing so wrong in our country that motivates you to campaign for issues in Great Britain over issues in your own country?
I think we all know the answers to these questions.
Complain about this comment
Thenrodio,
Then honour the voiceof the Irish!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Complain about this comment
RareBreedlibertarian @ #47
And the UK's parliamentary system and the members of the Houses of Parliament are that much better or more efficient than the European Parliament or it's membership?
The UK government is in power with a majority of first-past-the-post seats but only has 33% of the electorate vote - how unrepresentative is that?
I appreciate that two wrongs do not make a right but one can hardly complain about the Parliament of the EU when the UK parliamentary system is so archaic, unrepresentative, poorly attended, financially corrupt and inefficient.
They have only just done away with the quaint system where if one MP dons a top hat in the Chamber of the Palace of Westminster that the business of the day cannot be concluded. The Europeans have nothing on the British for quaint but archaic parliamentary inefficiencies and truly non-democratic representation.
Far better you concentrate your singular criticisms of the EU Parliament on the UK national parliament where the inefficiencies and unrepresentative democracy is not such a beacon of light in the darkness as people imagine in their dreams!
Complain about this comment
The End of the EU and my contribution.
Goodbye Euro people.
Complain about this comment
#53 - RareBreedlibertarian
Indeed - and I respect them for it and their government for enabling it.
Complain about this comment
Ticape @43 wrote:" So it's okay to disregard yes votes, but it's not okay to disregard no votes?"
Absolutely.
The EU's own rules call for unanimity. Countries that voted 'yes' are unable to push through the Constitutional/Lisbon Treaty if even only one country votes 'no'.
The EU should have rigged the rules more carefully.
Complain about this comment
The worst thing about Cowen's approach is that he is pandering to every interest group that opposed Lisbon.
There will be little debate about what Europe should be about when we step back from talking about the issues. His new mantra will be 'look how we addressed those concerns, now vote Yes'.
Ireland is to get guarantees on neutrality. Why? This panders to the usual Sinn Fein rhetoric, which is basically anti-British sentiment.
Again Ireland is to get a guarantee on abortion. This is an issue into which many feel the European Court of Justice has crept to increase its areas of competence. I would think that rather than simply give ireland an opt-out the rest of Europe should be seeking to reign back the creeping powers of the ideologically suspect ECJ.
I believe that it is institutions like the ECJ that are at the heart of the democratic deficit facing Europe.
Ireland's rejection has ensured that every country will retain a commissioner now. Again this flies in the face of making Europe more manageable if we keep increasing the bureaucracy!
Complain about this comment
"In return the EU will deal with what the Irish government claims are the "concerns" of the Irish people"
I know you probably are afraid of being branded as europhile, but the Irish Government found out what the Irish people's genuine concerns through independent research studies. No loose claims.
Complain about this comment
To Franjacapa @ 33
I am glad that you have expressed your thoughts here in this blog as a Spaniard.
For many Europe is growing to slowly or not according to their wishes. But remember the 30 000 heros that went to Spain to fight the Fascists on your side. They may not have prevailed in their livetime, but how would they see the world and Europe in it today?
Franco's collaborators may still have some power today, but it is lessening all the time.
But I gladly join you to fill a few sacks with that excellent spanish product, salt. We will have the sacks imprinted large with the origin of that salt: SAL DE ESPANA. We shall place those sacks at the doors of those collaborators, the Catholic Church. The, to this day, hegomonialist Catholic Church.
Cordialmente
(For those few that have missed out on their spanish lessons let it be explained that "sal" means salt as well as "to get out")
Complain about this comment
The word referendum is probably the most popular in this blog. The word neutrality (referring to the Irish version in particular) is also creeping in.
It may come as a surprise to some, but the Irish drive motor cars on petrol that originates elsewhere and has to be transported by ship. Those ships require some sort of military protection as we know.
Why not therefor propose a referendum asking those worthy Irish whether they are prepared to give up their motorcars or rather their cherished neutrality?
Complain about this comment
To Rarebreedliberitarian
Some of us that may or may not be posting from the British shores today, are nonetheless also British. We may even hold several passports, all of them being of burgundy colour.
The obvious question comes to mind, how British are your Royals?
Then there is that fellow David McAllister, also with a British Passport, who is lining up to become a "Primeminister" in the German Federal State of Niedersachsen with the Administration in Hannover no less.
And in a few more years he could be challenging for the top job of Chancellor of the whole of Germany.
Would'nt you want to wish him luck?
Regards
Complain about this comment
49. Threnodio :
*But please do not accuse us of being deceitful liars. We didn't lumber you with Lisbon and neither did the EU. Your government negotiated this and if you believe that you were not consulted, blame the people who didn't do so and stop going off on tangents and attributing blame where
there is none.*
Absolutely right. It is just so tiring to hear the Anti-EU brigade talking about the EU being corrupt and undemocratic. It is definitely not perfect, but is the UK any more democratic, less corrupt? Can anybody please provide evidence about that?
The methods used to push the Lisbon Treaty through may not be very orthodox, but no one can say they are undemocratic. There are 27 member countries in the EU. ALL, absolutely ALL, the 27 heads of government of these countries put their signature to the document that rubberstamped the decision to rerun the Irish referendum.
I didn’t see that the document was signed by any obscure *Brussels eurocrats*, except perhaps Mr Barroso, but his signature would be useless if it wasn’t accompanied by those of the 27 heads of governments of the EU. This is exactly how all important decisions in the EU are made.
Are you saying that Mr Brown wasn’t properly elected as head of the UK government? Absolutely right. Is the EU to blame for this or has this anything to do with the EU? Absolutely NOT.
Were Sarkozy, Merkel, Zapatero, Berlusconi et al, democratically elected by their own citizens? YES, YES, YES, YES, and 26 times YES.
The Anti-EU camp needs to grow up and stop spouting bile. Their problem is NOT whether the EU is undemocratic, but the fact the UK is a member of the EU. Just keep voting UKIP to see if they will put you out of your misery. As they are obviously not in the majority, perhaps you should try to apply democracy to yourselves:
UKIP not in power EQUALS UK is a member of the EU (Or rather half-member, as it is out of all major EU pillars, the Euro, Schengen, etc.).
And please, please give me the EU any time rather than a BIG BROTHER-CONTROLLED INTERNMENT ISLAND, as perfectly defined by one member (or maybe dissident member?) of the anti-EU camp.
[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
Complain about this comment
First time around, the preponderance of so called "country folk" threw Lisbon out.
This time, the threat/promise of EU compo for the loss caused by the Dioxin fraud is being bandied about as a carrot/stick to make them change their minds.
Dioxin was a fraud designed to encourage the people to vote the correct way second time around.
What a coincidence.
I will be voting NO, AGAIN.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS