Lisbon Treaty (1 Viewer)

[MDR]

How many people read the other EU treaties before voting on them or have read the constitution from cover to cover for that matter. There's no way you're going to get an easy to read text of something as complex as an EU treaty. If people didn't bother reading the four-page leaflet from the Referendum Commission, they're not going to read an entire treaty.

 

[broken arm]

http://europa.eu/scadplus/leg/en/s90001.htm

 

[shower another shower]

Wouldn't be funny if Martin Cullen was sent to talk to Brussels!

 

[pete]

How many people read the other EU treaties before voting on them or have read the constitution from cover to cover for that matter. There's no way you're going to get an easy to read text of something as complex as an EU treaty. If people didn't bother reading the four-page leaflet from the Referendum Commission, they're not going to read an entire treaty.

The people who were voting on it not reading it wasn't really the issue - but the people who were telling me how to vote on it should have at least read it themselves.

IN other news, someone (in the sbpost i think) pointed out that the ballot paper didn't have the text of the constitutional amendment (which is what we were voting on, rather than the Lisbon Treaty itself) on it.

 

[Goff]

How many people read the other EU treaties before voting on them or have read the constitution from cover to cover for that matter. There's no way you're going to get an easy to read text of something as complex as an EU treaty. If people didn't bother reading the four-page leaflet from the Referendum Commission, they're not going to read an entire treaty.

I read it. And even I was confused and I helped draft our new forms of contract that you'll probably be using soon enough.

The thing was deliberately obtuse.

As for easy to read texts of EU treaties...Maastricht, for example, was very accessible. Granted, they've been getting more complex since then, but, as this was supposed to be the constitution, by any other name, it should have been extremely clear and concise.

It wasn't.

 

[broken arm]

As for easy to read texts of EU treaties...Maastricht, for example, was very accessible. Granted, they've been getting more complex since then, but, as this was supposed to be the constitution, by any other name, it should have been extremely clear and concise.

It wasn't.

I'd say it probably wasn't clear because it was born out of 5 years of negotiation and balances the expectations of over 20 different countries, cultures, economies and histories - with a view on future expansion. Personally, I'd be worried if it was simple.

Anyway - I couldn't vote in the end because I was in the Balkans at the time. That was an interesting experience and led me to some deep thinking on my views on neutrality and the Irish position on defence.....

 

[Wobbler]

That was an interesting experience and led me to some deep thinking on my views on neutrality and the Irish position on defence.....

............and?

 

[broken arm]

............and?

basically - pacifism is fine for me but i wouldn't impose it on someone who had a serbian mortar shell kill their children.

and peace keeping is a mop up exercise after you allow people be killed. I'm not sure what number we allow to die before we 'keep' the peace.

I thinking reading some Primo Levi books added to the questioning....

all these thoughts were mixed in with my views on militarism under Lisbon.....

 

[Mormon Nailer]

basically - pacifism is fine for me but i wouldn't impose it on someone who had a serbian mortar shell kill their children.

and peace keeping is a mop up exercise after you allow people be killed. I'm not sure what number we allow to die before we 'keep' the peace.

I thinking reading some Primo Levi books added to the questioning....

all these thoughts were mixed in with my views on militarism under Lisbon.....

"I refuse to indulge in the bestial vice of hatred"

 

[Goff]

I'd say it probably wasn't clear because it was born out of 5 years of negotiation and balances the expectations of over 20 different countries, cultures, economies and histories - with a view on future expansion. Personally, I'd be worried if it was simple.

I understand that aspect of it, but the way it was written with its constant use of "Amendment of Such and such refers" and "See Document this and that" was a bit hard to keep track of. But, a constitution should be one all-encompassing, easy, document. And, no matter which way you look at it, it was the constitution repackaged. The sad part is, the proposed constitution was easier to read.

basically - pacifism is fine for me but i wouldn't impose it on someone who had a serbian mortar shell kill their children.

and peace keeping is a mop up exercise after you allow people be killed. I'm not sure what number we allow to die before we 'keep' the peace.

There's no one saying we wouldn't defend ourselves if push came to shove. Obviously that's what the army is for. Peace-Keeping is extremely important.

Personally, our "neutral" stance was never an issue with me on this thing, as we haven't ever been truly neutral. We're allied to whoever we're allied to, as the Government sees fit. Just because we're not dropping the actual bombs and mortars doesn't mean we're not culpable. I have always felt that Ireland's self-declared policy of neutrality was more of an ideal that a practicality.

I would, however, be very much against the wading into a war because atrocities have been committed. Atrocities are always committed on both sides of any war. When you get into the choosing sides aspect, you can never choose the right side. That's one of the things our neutral stance was designed to protect against. But this Government basically threw that to the wind after 9/11.

On a lighter note, I had a look at Primo Levi on your recommendation. They're on my list of waiting to be read.

 

[billygannon]

On a lighter note, I had a look at Primo Levi on your

That's an oxymoron if I ever saw one.

 

[Mormon Nailer]

Look what we have done for ordinary Europeans
By DAVID MCWILLIAMS
Wednesday June 18 2008
What makes a good European country? According to many of our European neighbours - specifically the French and Germans - Ireland post-Lisbon, can't be regarded as a good member of the EU club because we are ungrateful and unpredictable.
More egregiously, the spin is that the Irish people are in someway intent on blocking enlargement. The storyline continues that, given how much we gained from the EU, how could such a nation of malcontent ingrates deprive our eastern neighbours of their opportunity?
Do you go along with that view? Certainly some of the crestfallen 'Yes' campaigners are using similar arguments, toeing the French line that "eaten bread is soon forgotten". How could we possibly trouser the cash and then give them the two fingers?
It is easy to see the world this way, particularly if you regard politics as one giant inter-country game of treaties and committees. In this world view - one usually formulated by over-educated, risk-averse courtesans - people do not matter. The only thing that counts for the Eurocratic worldview is summits, leaders and the elite.
But Europe is about more than countries; it is about people. It is about 400 million individual people whose ambitions, aspirations and lives can be improved by the opportunities that economic integration affords.
If you take this people- centred view of things, it is interesting to contrast Doubting Ireland and Enthusiastic France. French politicians have conveniently forgotten that while they might hob-nob with their Polish counterparts, France does not allow Polish immigrants to work freely in France. So France talks the language of solidarity but freezes out the people that this very solidarity is supposed to help. What breathless hypocrisy!
While France threw up barriers, Ireland on the other hand opened its doors to hundreds of thousands of ordinary Poles, Lithuanians and Latvians whose lives have been greatly enhanced by the opportunities we have given them.
Ireland is a proper European partner to the Joe Soaps from Warsaw, Riga and Vilnius, while the French and Germans have closed their doors to them.
This distinction between a Europe of the peoples - the Irish view - and a Europe of the elites - the old Europe view - goes to the heart of our differing approaches.
So, for example, the French foreign minister claimed indignantly that over the 35 years of EU membership the Irish people have received €33bn in aid from the EU. This is true.
But because Ireland, unlike Germany or France, allowed the people from the accession states to come and live and work freely here, we have given back to the East in wages and opportunities.
Let's do a little calculation. We have close to 300,000 immigrants working from the new accession states here. Let's say they are on a wage between the minimum wage of €17,000 and the average wage of close to €35,000 a year. So let's say €25,000. That's a total wage bill of €7.5bn per year.
As we are now going into our fifth year of open borders, it is likely that Ireland has put back more cash in the pockets of poor European immigrants in five years that the EU has given us in 35 years.
We have also provided an open platform for people to come and go without recourse to registering with the local authorities or without the need to be monitored by identity cards. Furthermore, the Irish Ryanair, not the EU Commission, has been the single greatest force behind actual integration, flying the poor people of the East cheaply all around the Union. We've yet to see a low-fares French carrier demean itself to carry ordinary citizens to work.
So, not only have we given hundreds of thousands of eastern Europeans a chance to fulfil the promise of the EU and have their children educated here, but given that the propensity to save is higher among immigrants than the rest of us, billions of euros earned in Ireland are likely to have been sent home to Eastern Europe to build opportunity there.
Only Ireland, Britain and Sweden - the three countries most regarded as sceptical on Europe - have shown real, material solidarity with the poor of Eastern Europe.
While the French, Germans and Italians might lecture others on being good Europeans, they don't stick to the spirit of the treaties they sign.
The question then arises again: which is the better European country; the one that blocks the freedom of mobility but accords to the fine rhetoric of the 'grand projet', or the one that allows free movement of people but might be more quizzical about the rhetoric?
Go down to your local Spar or Centra and ask the Polish or Lithuanian working there (who would not be freely allowed to work in France or Germany) who has done more for them - France or Ireland?
Also ask them, who made xenophobia part of the last referendum? It was in France not Ireland that the anti-EU vote made a big deal of the threat of the 'Polish Plumber'. The ever-so-European French played the race card last time they voted with the 'Yes' side, ensuring the 'No' side that a 'Yes' vote would keep the Poles off French building sites.
The problem for the elite is that Ireland has given back money to the EU, but just not to them. We have given the poor an opportunity to work which is precisely what an economic union is all about.
Tomorrow morning, when Brian Cowen is facing the music and feels he is dealing with a meagre hand, he should remind his tormentors, such as former communist Mr Kouchner, that Ireland has given back to European workers in wages far more than we have taken in direct subsidies. Ireland is accepting in eight times more EU immigrants per head than France.
There are many ways of looking at Europe. Some of our neighbours are 'top down' Europeans, pushing through treaties in parliament, not consulting their electorates. This makes them look powerful at summits.
There are others who are happy to enhance ordinary peoples' lives but have to face the electoral music at every turn.
We are the 'bottom-up' Europeans - the more honest and less hypocritical EU members.
If you want to see what European integration is for ordinary people, don't watch the pomp and ceremony of the leaders' summit tomorrow, go to the arrivals hall at Dublin airport.
There, amid the stonewashed denims, shaved heads and East European biker jackets, you will see the true hope that Europe brings. It is a chance of a better life for the immigrants and their children. It is the chance to bring money home, to plan and to invest in the future. This is what Europe is all about.
www.davidmcwilliams.ie [email protected]
- DAVID MCWILLIAMS

 

[classic seanc]

He misused the expression "Polish Plumber".
The idea of the “Polish Plumber” wasn't conceived as a xenophobic thing. It was because EU regulations more or less allowed for Poles (or whoever) to work in Dublin (or wherever) for the wages they get in Poland, rather than the normal rate for wages in Ireland, which most people thought would lead to abuse of workers from the East.

Anyway, he makes a fair point I reckons, self righteous as it is.

 

[nofunchee]

it's funny the way ireland is described as mad giving and charitable to all those poor eastern europeans. you'd think we had nothing to gain from their labour the way mcwilliams is going on.

 

[broken arm]

www.davidmcwilliams.ie [email protected]
- DAVID MCWILLIAMS

interesting development in the slagging match but is handing over 40 billion quid the same as using minimum wage workers to prop up your economy?

 

[Mormon Nailer]

I dunno.
It's not charity but neither are ESF grants. There are selfish motive behind those as well, in as much as the improved infrastructure allows the growth of the european economy as a whole.
It's all economics - there always going to be a selfish motive somewehere.

 

[broken arm]

Go down to your local Spar or Centra and ask the Polish or Lithuanian working there (who would not be freely allowed to work in France or Germany) who has done more for them - France or Ireland?

yea, the energetic and hopeful eastern european youth should be grateful to work in our shitty newsagents, to serve our racist taxi drivers greasy breakfast rolls, take abuse from customers and earn relatively fuck all to do so.

is this a joke?

 

[Froog]

oh man, i'd love to see cowen and co. squirming in the EU Council today.

 

[Wobbler]

This from today's Times. Brilliant.

Madam, - In the wake of Ireland's democratic decision, some people are saying we must either repeat our referendum or bear the consequences, even extending to banishment from the EU itself. Well Ireland is in a much stronger position than the would-be dictators realise.
If any attempt is made to "punish" Ireland, or to expel us, we should then apply to become the next state of the United States of America. And we should take our fisheries with us. We have the most valuable fisheries in the entire EU, and through them we have given more to the EU than it has ever given us.
America would greet us with wide-open arms, and the very threat to Europe of having the US on the doorstep would soon awaken the bullies who have contempt for our referendum result.
After all, there are already some 40 million Irish living in the States. It would not take much to join them and we would be very welcome. - Yours, etc,
DERMOT C. CLARKE, Wilson Road, Mount Merrion, Co Dublin.

 

[classic seanc]

interesting development in the slagging match but is handing over 40 billion quid the same as using minimum wage workers to prop up your economy?

In economic terms it is, pretty much. McWilliams is an economist after all. If you ignore the silly ethical point his trying to make, it would be fair to say that there's as many €€'s generated in Ireland swirling around Europe as there is €€'s swirling around Ireland that were generated in Europe.