lisbon treaty
Thoughts on Lisbon - Part 1
04/09/09 22:45 Filed in: Politics
| Lisbon
Treaty
The poll in this
morning’s Irish Times would have made very sobering
reading for the pro-Lisbon parties, and Fianna Fáil
in particular. The Yes side has shipped seven
percentage points since the last IT poll in May and
is now at 46%. The only redeeming feature of this
situation is that most of the slippage was into the
Don’t Know category, with the No side gaining only
one percentage point.
The referendum should pass this time, but that doesn’t mean it necessarily will. There are a number of ways where it could be lost - scaremongering by the extremes of left and right, abstention, or a desire to wound the government, could all scupper the Yes side.
There has been a lot of debate in recent days about scaremongering from the No campaign, especially regarding Cóir’s contribution to the debate, so there is no need to go over it again. Another danger is that some of the ‘soft’ Yes vote from last time around could stay at home on 2 October. If this was to happen, and in sufficient number, it could have a bearing on the end result. The pro-Lisbon parties cannot afford to assume that everyone who voted Yes last time around will do so again. Those votes will have to be won all over again.
What is really scary, though, is the notion that a significant proportion of the electorate would be prepared to use the Lisbon referendum to try to force a general election. It has been suggested in several quarters that if the referendum is lost, the government will collapse. I don’t necessarily believe this to be the case.
Back in June, Fianna Fáil and the Greens took a ferocious beating in the European and local elections. Once the dust had settled, they just went about their business as if nothing had happened. I can’t see it being any different if Lisbon Mk II goes down the pan. I reckon the only way it would happen would be if the Greens have a crisis of conscience and decide to pull out of the coalition. But if they did, they would be obliterated in the subsequent election, losing probably all their seats. It could take a generation for them to get back to the point of being a credible potential party of government again. OK, they are probably going to take a hiding in 2012 in any case, but at least by then they will have had the opportunity to get more of their policies into law. Why pull out now and give that up, when it could take twenty years or more to have the chance again?
Would Fianna Fáil decide to go to the country if Lisbon is lost? It is often said that FF have no principles, but to be fair to them they have at least two. The first one is to get into power, and the second is to stay there, come what may. It should also be pointed out that all the major parties in the Dáil, except Sinn Féin, support Lisbon. Those facts alone would suggest that FF will sit tight and brazen this out.
However…
A more cynical person than myself might suggest that FF could use this opportunity to finish Fine Gael off for good. Here’s the scenario - Lisbon is lost, the economy is still in freefall and the whole Nama business is up in the air. FF call an election, knowing they will lose, and in the process throw the incoming FG/Lab coalition a mother and father of a hospital pass. Enda and Eamonn now have to make all the difficult decisions, and FF wait in the wings for a term, happy that FG and Labour have done the dirty work for them. At the next election, they step over the carcasses of Fine Gael and Labour and back into power, just as the economy is starting to pull out of recession.
The referendum should pass this time, but that doesn’t mean it necessarily will. There are a number of ways where it could be lost - scaremongering by the extremes of left and right, abstention, or a desire to wound the government, could all scupper the Yes side.
There has been a lot of debate in recent days about scaremongering from the No campaign, especially regarding Cóir’s contribution to the debate, so there is no need to go over it again. Another danger is that some of the ‘soft’ Yes vote from last time around could stay at home on 2 October. If this was to happen, and in sufficient number, it could have a bearing on the end result. The pro-Lisbon parties cannot afford to assume that everyone who voted Yes last time around will do so again. Those votes will have to be won all over again.
What is really scary, though, is the notion that a significant proportion of the electorate would be prepared to use the Lisbon referendum to try to force a general election. It has been suggested in several quarters that if the referendum is lost, the government will collapse. I don’t necessarily believe this to be the case.
Back in June, Fianna Fáil and the Greens took a ferocious beating in the European and local elections. Once the dust had settled, they just went about their business as if nothing had happened. I can’t see it being any different if Lisbon Mk II goes down the pan. I reckon the only way it would happen would be if the Greens have a crisis of conscience and decide to pull out of the coalition. But if they did, they would be obliterated in the subsequent election, losing probably all their seats. It could take a generation for them to get back to the point of being a credible potential party of government again. OK, they are probably going to take a hiding in 2012 in any case, but at least by then they will have had the opportunity to get more of their policies into law. Why pull out now and give that up, when it could take twenty years or more to have the chance again?
Would Fianna Fáil decide to go to the country if Lisbon is lost? It is often said that FF have no principles, but to be fair to them they have at least two. The first one is to get into power, and the second is to stay there, come what may. It should also be pointed out that all the major parties in the Dáil, except Sinn Féin, support Lisbon. Those facts alone would suggest that FF will sit tight and brazen this out.
However…
A more cynical person than myself might suggest that FF could use this opportunity to finish Fine Gael off for good. Here’s the scenario - Lisbon is lost, the economy is still in freefall and the whole Nama business is up in the air. FF call an election, knowing they will lose, and in the process throw the incoming FG/Lab coalition a mother and father of a hospital pass. Enda and Eamonn now have to make all the difficult decisions, and FF wait in the wings for a term, happy that FG and Labour have done the dirty work for them. At the next election, they step over the carcasses of Fine Gael and Labour and back into power, just as the economy is starting to pull out of recession.
|
Yes To Lisbon Campaign - We Belong
27/07/09 22:03 Filed in: Politics
| Lisbon
Treaty
There was an
interesting development today from the Yes side of
the Lisbon Treaty referendum campaign, with the
launch of We Belong.
From their launch press release:
Listed are a number of well-known names and others who are not so well-known. The aim seems to be to bypass the politicians in spreading the pro-Lisbon word. That’s not a bad idea, given the unpopularity of all politicians at present, and also the hames the political parties made of the previous campaign.
It will be interesting to see how they get on.
From their launch press release:
A new modern and engaging organisation for Lisbon was launched this morning in the chq in Dublin’s Docklands. The group which will engage with thousands of Irish people across the country over the next two months is being supported by many well known figures from different areas of Irish life.
Listed are a number of well-known names and others who are not so well-known. The aim seems to be to bypass the politicians in spreading the pro-Lisbon word. That’s not a bad idea, given the unpopularity of all politicians at present, and also the hames the political parties made of the previous campaign.
It will be interesting to see how they get on.
Here We Go Again
14/07/09 22:23 Filed in: Politics
| Lisbon
Treaty
Richard Greene - Yes vote on Lisbon
could open door for abortion - Irish Times, 14
July 2009
And so it starts again. The scaremongering, the bullshit, the blatant lies. Richard Greene absolutely outdid himself in today’s IT, with his claim that “a Yes vote on Lisbon could open the door for abortion.”
The chances of this happening are so remote that they don’t bear a second thought. Social issues like abortion have always been competencies of national parliaments, not the EU. If anything, the Lisbon Treaty actually increases the role of the national parliaments in overall EU decision-making.
Do Greene and his fellow travellers in Cóir (aka Youth Defence) honestly believe that there is a secret conspiracy in Brussels and Strasbourg to force Ireland to legalise abortion and euthanasia. I can see it now, a secret bunker under the European Commission building, staffed by faceless bureaucrats with James-Bond-baddie accents: “Ve vill make zeeze Irish comply vizz our orders, ja! Zey vill haff to haff abortion, and zen ve vill force zem to haff euss-in-asia as vell!!”
A yes vote on Lisbon is about as likely to open the door for abortion in Ireland as it is to open the door to Sharia Law in Ireland, or open the door for Ireland to be taken over by giant space ants.
Hang on, do we know what is our putative new insect overlords’ position on abortion?
And so it starts again. The scaremongering, the bullshit, the blatant lies. Richard Greene absolutely outdid himself in today’s IT, with his claim that “a Yes vote on Lisbon could open the door for abortion.”
The chances of this happening are so remote that they don’t bear a second thought. Social issues like abortion have always been competencies of national parliaments, not the EU. If anything, the Lisbon Treaty actually increases the role of the national parliaments in overall EU decision-making.
Do Greene and his fellow travellers in Cóir (aka Youth Defence) honestly believe that there is a secret conspiracy in Brussels and Strasbourg to force Ireland to legalise abortion and euthanasia. I can see it now, a secret bunker under the European Commission building, staffed by faceless bureaucrats with James-Bond-baddie accents: “Ve vill make zeeze Irish comply vizz our orders, ja! Zey vill haff to haff abortion, and zen ve vill force zem to haff euss-in-asia as vell!!”
A yes vote on Lisbon is about as likely to open the door for abortion in Ireland as it is to open the door to Sharia Law in Ireland, or open the door for Ireland to be taken over by giant space ants.
Hang on, do we know what is our putative new insect overlords’ position on abortion?
Contradictions
10/12/08 22:33 Filed in: Politics
| Lisbon
Treaty
There’s
lots of talk these days about a second referendum
on the Lisbon Treaty. The No side is none too
pleased, and wants the result of last June’s vote
cast in stone.
Listening to some of the debate over the last few weeks, several contradictions have arisen. Declan Ganely of Libertas wants to halt the march towards a federal Europe and have the Lisbon Treaty replaced by a more concise 15-20 page document, more like the US constitution. However the US constitution is concise precisely because it is for a single, federal, sovereign country. The EU is a collection of sovereign states, which has evolved over the last fifty years or thereabouts.
The No side bemoan the “unelected beureaucrats” of the European Commission, yet are appalled at the idea of “losing our commissioner.” Lisbon proposed maintaining a 15-member commission, with each state appointing a commissioner for two five-year terms out of every three. If we keep the “one member state, one commissioner” model, we will have twenty-seven commissioners. Doing what exactly? The extra twelve commissioners will have to have offices and staff, thus increasing the number of unelected bureaucrats in Brussels poking their noses into our business.
The No side say that a new referendum would fly in the face of democratic principles. “What part of No do you not understand?” being their stunningly unoriginal mantra. Does democracy mean that you can never change your mind? We have precedents for this. The Nice Treaty had two goes before it made it through. Believe it or not, I voted No to Nice first time around. I can’t even remember why I did, but by the time the second referendum came around, I realised that I had made a mistake and I was glad to get the opportunity to put it right. We have had three referenda on abortion, and two on divorce in the last twenty-five years. Bear in mind also that a good chunk of the No vote last June was in protest at the overall policies of the government, which had been elected into office in May 2007. Many of these voters would have voted for Fianna Fáil in May 2007, and were using their ballots as a way of expressing their change of mind.
Listening to some of the debate over the last few weeks, several contradictions have arisen. Declan Ganely of Libertas wants to halt the march towards a federal Europe and have the Lisbon Treaty replaced by a more concise 15-20 page document, more like the US constitution. However the US constitution is concise precisely because it is for a single, federal, sovereign country. The EU is a collection of sovereign states, which has evolved over the last fifty years or thereabouts.
The No side bemoan the “unelected beureaucrats” of the European Commission, yet are appalled at the idea of “losing our commissioner.” Lisbon proposed maintaining a 15-member commission, with each state appointing a commissioner for two five-year terms out of every three. If we keep the “one member state, one commissioner” model, we will have twenty-seven commissioners. Doing what exactly? The extra twelve commissioners will have to have offices and staff, thus increasing the number of unelected bureaucrats in Brussels poking their noses into our business.
The No side say that a new referendum would fly in the face of democratic principles. “What part of No do you not understand?” being their stunningly unoriginal mantra. Does democracy mean that you can never change your mind? We have precedents for this. The Nice Treaty had two goes before it made it through. Believe it or not, I voted No to Nice first time around. I can’t even remember why I did, but by the time the second referendum came around, I realised that I had made a mistake and I was glad to get the opportunity to put it right. We have had three referenda on abortion, and two on divorce in the last twenty-five years. Bear in mind also that a good chunk of the No vote last June was in protest at the overall policies of the government, which had been elected into office in May 2007. Many of these voters would have voted for Fianna Fáil in May 2007, and were using their ballots as a way of expressing their change of mind.
Losing The Run Of One's Self
Over at
Irish Election, in a comment from some dude
called ‘Future
Taoiseach’:
Indeed. Why, only this evening, I saw a marauding gang of veterans of the Maastricht and Nice campaigns burn a family of “No” voters out of their home in Bracklone Street here in Portarlington.
A once democraric union of cooperating nation states has crossed the line into coercion and dictatorship. As in Mugabe’s Zimbabwe, your vote is not respected unless you vote ‘the right way’.
Indeed. Why, only this evening, I saw a marauding gang of veterans of the Maastricht and Nice campaigns burn a family of “No” voters out of their home in Bracklone Street here in Portarlington.
The Lies Have It
13/06/08 21:51 Filed in: Politics
| Lisbon
Treaty
The
result of the referendum
was not
unexpected, but it is still depressing all the
same.
The usual clichés were being trotted out on the airwaves all day:
“The people have spoken and we must respect their decision…”
“Now is not the time for recriminations or assigning blame…”
“We must now reflect on what the people have said…”
Blah, blah, blah.
Two things swung this referendum result - ineptitude on the Yes side and lies on the No side.
The No campaign was well under way before the political establishment got its act together. By the time they shook off their ennui, the best the Yes crowd could do was to try to fight an EU referendum campaign assuming that Ireland’s enthusiasm for the EU from times past was still intact. How wrong they were. Their posters were crap, ranging from bland platitudes to “get to know you” opportunities for the candidates in next year’s local and Euro elections. In debates they were forced onto the back foot by a No campaign that had no compunction about lying repeatedly. Then there was the infighting, with public squabbles between the various pro-Lisbon parties.
What they should have done from the outset was pool their resources and establish one strong Yes campaign, with the focus on the issues and not the personalities. The treaty was always going to be a difficult sell, as the issues involved didn’t resonate with people’s everyday lives. The Yes campaign failed to make the treaty relevant enough to the electorate to motivate them to vote for it.
In contrast, all the No campaign had to do was to raise as many spectres as it could to sow seeds of doubt in the minds of the electorate. It didn’t matter how they did this, as the end justified the means. So they presented a campaign that ranged from what could be called “creative interpretation” of the treaty to outright lies. Tax, neutrality, abortion, worker’s rights, etc., it didn’t matter - just keep spreading the shit and some of it would eventually stick.
What’s disappointing is that no-one on the Yes side had the balls to nail these lies at source. Rather than getting bogged down in technical arguments with sloganeering opponents, it might have been more productive to just call the lies as they emerged. Rather than trying to explain the ins and outs of QMV, or the Maastricht protocol or whatever, it might have been more productive to just say to the naysayer: “We have explained time and time again that the concerns you raise have been addressed. Why do you persist in repeating these unfounded misrepresentations/lies?” Forcing them on to the defensive and making them justify their point of view would have stopped their lies in their tracks.
But that’s all the realm of “what if” now. The referendum has been lost and we must move on to salvage something from the wreckage. Ireland’s political capital in the EU has plummetted in value, and it is now up to Brian Cowen and the rest of the government to restore our reputation as an enthusiastic member of the EU club. It won’t be easy. Neither will it be easy to explain to our EU partners why Ireland rejected the treaty. A lot of the critical detail of the treaty was actually won by the doggedness of the Irish negotiators on behalf of the smaller states, such as the rotating commission arrangement. Originally, the bigger states would have a permanent place on the commission, with the smaller states rotating. Irish intervention changed that to all states regardless of size having to share and concede time on the commission. (Not that it really matters anyway, as commissioners represent their portfolios within the EU, not the states from which they come.)
Still, we can always look on the bright side. At least the threat of the New World Order as outlined by Jim Corr has been averted. (YouTube audio link.)
The usual clichés were being trotted out on the airwaves all day:
“The people have spoken and we must respect their decision…”
“Now is not the time for recriminations or assigning blame…”
“We must now reflect on what the people have said…”
Blah, blah, blah.
Two things swung this referendum result - ineptitude on the Yes side and lies on the No side.
The No campaign was well under way before the political establishment got its act together. By the time they shook off their ennui, the best the Yes crowd could do was to try to fight an EU referendum campaign assuming that Ireland’s enthusiasm for the EU from times past was still intact. How wrong they were. Their posters were crap, ranging from bland platitudes to “get to know you” opportunities for the candidates in next year’s local and Euro elections. In debates they were forced onto the back foot by a No campaign that had no compunction about lying repeatedly. Then there was the infighting, with public squabbles between the various pro-Lisbon parties.
What they should have done from the outset was pool their resources and establish one strong Yes campaign, with the focus on the issues and not the personalities. The treaty was always going to be a difficult sell, as the issues involved didn’t resonate with people’s everyday lives. The Yes campaign failed to make the treaty relevant enough to the electorate to motivate them to vote for it.
In contrast, all the No campaign had to do was to raise as many spectres as it could to sow seeds of doubt in the minds of the electorate. It didn’t matter how they did this, as the end justified the means. So they presented a campaign that ranged from what could be called “creative interpretation” of the treaty to outright lies. Tax, neutrality, abortion, worker’s rights, etc., it didn’t matter - just keep spreading the shit and some of it would eventually stick.
What’s disappointing is that no-one on the Yes side had the balls to nail these lies at source. Rather than getting bogged down in technical arguments with sloganeering opponents, it might have been more productive to just call the lies as they emerged. Rather than trying to explain the ins and outs of QMV, or the Maastricht protocol or whatever, it might have been more productive to just say to the naysayer: “We have explained time and time again that the concerns you raise have been addressed. Why do you persist in repeating these unfounded misrepresentations/lies?” Forcing them on to the defensive and making them justify their point of view would have stopped their lies in their tracks.
But that’s all the realm of “what if” now. The referendum has been lost and we must move on to salvage something from the wreckage. Ireland’s political capital in the EU has plummetted in value, and it is now up to Brian Cowen and the rest of the government to restore our reputation as an enthusiastic member of the EU club. It won’t be easy. Neither will it be easy to explain to our EU partners why Ireland rejected the treaty. A lot of the critical detail of the treaty was actually won by the doggedness of the Irish negotiators on behalf of the smaller states, such as the rotating commission arrangement. Originally, the bigger states would have a permanent place on the commission, with the smaller states rotating. Irish intervention changed that to all states regardless of size having to share and concede time on the commission. (Not that it really matters anyway, as commissioners represent their portfolios within the EU, not the states from which they come.)
Still, we can always look on the bright side. At least the threat of the New World Order as outlined by Jim Corr has been averted. (YouTube audio link.)
More Thoughts On Renegotiating The Lisbon Treaty
10/06/08 22:45 Filed in: Politics
| Lisbon
Treaty
Last night,
I posted my
reasons for voting Yes to the Lisbon
Treaty this Thursday.
Since then the issue of renegotiating the Treaty has come up again, so I’m going to hammer a few more nails into this one.
As I said last night, if Ireland rejects the Treaty and is forced to go back to renegotiate it, this will have to be done by the very people who negotiated it in the first place. Some naysayers seem to think that we will be in a position of strength in this situation, given our requirement for a referendum in order to pass the Treaty into Irish law.
This is utter horseshit. If we do that, we will be sending our representatives back into the negotiating chamber on their knees. As far as our EU partners are concerned, our negotiators were satisfied with what they got last time round, especially given the fact that the bulk of the negotiations were done on our patch, during our presidency of the EU in 2004. Those opt-outs, protocols and clauses that we gained in the original round of negotiations were the result of hard bargaining, and not everyone was happy that we got them. So if we go back looking for more, we would more than likely end up with less than we had originally.
What is this “better deal” that Libertas, Sinn Féin, Kathy SInnott MEP, et al seem to think we can extract from our EU partners? The simple fact is that it doesn’t exist. The lake of goodwill in today’s EU is not particulaly deep and if we think we can send our horses to drink from it having first let them trample over everyoines else’s flowerbeds, we’ll soon find out that it has dried up.
Even in the best case scenario, whereby we actually come through a renegotiating process with a treaty that is no worse than the one we have now (we will not get a better one, remember), there is every likelihood that the very same hurlers in the ditch will come out and oppose that one too.
In simple terms - this is the best deal we’re going to get. Let’s take it and move on.
Since then the issue of renegotiating the Treaty has come up again, so I’m going to hammer a few more nails into this one.
As I said last night, if Ireland rejects the Treaty and is forced to go back to renegotiate it, this will have to be done by the very people who negotiated it in the first place. Some naysayers seem to think that we will be in a position of strength in this situation, given our requirement for a referendum in order to pass the Treaty into Irish law.
This is utter horseshit. If we do that, we will be sending our representatives back into the negotiating chamber on their knees. As far as our EU partners are concerned, our negotiators were satisfied with what they got last time round, especially given the fact that the bulk of the negotiations were done on our patch, during our presidency of the EU in 2004. Those opt-outs, protocols and clauses that we gained in the original round of negotiations were the result of hard bargaining, and not everyone was happy that we got them. So if we go back looking for more, we would more than likely end up with less than we had originally.
What is this “better deal” that Libertas, Sinn Féin, Kathy SInnott MEP, et al seem to think we can extract from our EU partners? The simple fact is that it doesn’t exist. The lake of goodwill in today’s EU is not particulaly deep and if we think we can send our horses to drink from it having first let them trample over everyoines else’s flowerbeds, we’ll soon find out that it has dried up.
Even in the best case scenario, whereby we actually come through a renegotiating process with a treaty that is no worse than the one we have now (we will not get a better one, remember), there is every likelihood that the very same hurlers in the ditch will come out and oppose that one too.
In simple terms - this is the best deal we’re going to get. Let’s take it and move on.
Yes
09/06/08 22:29 Filed in: Politics
| Lisbon
Treaty
On Thursday, I will
get up at some ungodly hour and make my way to
Dublin Airport to catch a 6.30am flight to the UK
for a meeting. I should be back in Dublin about 12
hours later, so there will still be plenty of time
before the polling stations close to go and cast my
vote.
And if you hadn’t worked it out by now, that vote will be a Yes. I’m voting Yes for several reasons:
Furthermore, I simply don’t believe the arguments put about by the various No campaigners. The tax issue is one. We retain a veto on the issue of Corporation Tax. It won’t change unless we agree to it.
The commissioner issue is nonsense. You would swear listening to the arguments that Ireland was the only state that was due to lose a commissioner in the rotation. It will affect every member state. Furthermore, commissioners do not represent their own states’ interests at the commission table. They are there to manage a portfolio without fear or favour to any member state, their own included. To say that each member state has to have a representative commissioner at all times is like saying that every constituency in Ireland has to have a representative minister in the Cabinet. Ireland’s interests will be represented by the Council of Ministers, The European Council (Heads of Government), and the European Parliament. All of these bodies are made up of people who have either been elected to their national parliaments, or directly to the European Parliament itself. Unlike commissioners, who are appointed.
Finally, there is the notion going around that if we reject the Lisbon Treaty, we can somehow negotiate a better deal for Ireland. This gibberish is being peddled by Sinn Féin and also by Kathy Sinnott MEP. So let’s say we do reject it. Who is going to have to go back to our EU partners to renegotiate it? One thing’s for sure, it won’t be the Shinners, or Kathy Sinnott, or any of the other naysayers. It will be the government, the very people who negotiated this deal in the first place, and who are trying to convince the electorate that this deal is the best Ireland can get.
If you can’t make up your mind, or if you feel you don’t understand what it’s all about, I would recommend that you read the Referendum Commission booklet that was delivered to every household in the State. If you can’t get hold of that, they have a website lisbontreaty2008.ie
And if you hadn’t worked it out by now, that vote will be a Yes. I’m voting Yes for several reasons:
- I believe that this treaty is a positive step forward for the EU.
- It brings reform to where it is needed.
- Ireland’s specific concerns have been addressed (even though I’m not bothered about one or two of them.)
- I am satisfied that Ireland’s sovereignty will not be compromised by this treaty.
Furthermore, I simply don’t believe the arguments put about by the various No campaigners. The tax issue is one. We retain a veto on the issue of Corporation Tax. It won’t change unless we agree to it.
The commissioner issue is nonsense. You would swear listening to the arguments that Ireland was the only state that was due to lose a commissioner in the rotation. It will affect every member state. Furthermore, commissioners do not represent their own states’ interests at the commission table. They are there to manage a portfolio without fear or favour to any member state, their own included. To say that each member state has to have a representative commissioner at all times is like saying that every constituency in Ireland has to have a representative minister in the Cabinet. Ireland’s interests will be represented by the Council of Ministers, The European Council (Heads of Government), and the European Parliament. All of these bodies are made up of people who have either been elected to their national parliaments, or directly to the European Parliament itself. Unlike commissioners, who are appointed.
Finally, there is the notion going around that if we reject the Lisbon Treaty, we can somehow negotiate a better deal for Ireland. This gibberish is being peddled by Sinn Féin and also by Kathy Sinnott MEP. So let’s say we do reject it. Who is going to have to go back to our EU partners to renegotiate it? One thing’s for sure, it won’t be the Shinners, or Kathy Sinnott, or any of the other naysayers. It will be the government, the very people who negotiated this deal in the first place, and who are trying to convince the electorate that this deal is the best Ireland can get.
If you can’t make up your mind, or if you feel you don’t understand what it’s all about, I would recommend that you read the Referendum Commission booklet that was delivered to every household in the State. If you can’t get hold of that, they have a website lisbontreaty2008.ie
Lisbon Explained
08/06/08 23:01 Filed in: Politics
| Lisbon
Treaty
Can No-one In The Yes Campaign Use Photoshop?
06/06/08 00:06 Filed in: Politics
| Lisbon
Treaty
Yes Campaign - Unable To Organise Piss-Up In Brewery (Official)
05/06/08 22:48 Filed in: Politics
| Lisbon
Treaty
Over the last week or
so, I got the distinct impression that the tide has
been turning in favour of the anti-Lisbon point of
view. This evening that hunch has been
confirmed, as a poll in tomorrow’s Irish
Times shows that the No vote is five
points ahead of the Yes vote.
If this follows through to polling day, it will be a disaster for both the government and the main opposition parties. So far they have allowed the No campaign to gain the upper hand and instil the necessary FUD into the minds of the electorate (well, those voters who are going to bother their arses to vote, at least.)
So where has it all gone wrong? They say that a lie gets half way around the world before the truth gets its boots on, and this is true in this case. The Yes campaign have not had a chance to fight this campaign on their own terms, as they have been forced to spend their time and resources denying the claims of the No side. Whatever the issue, be it taxation, neutrality, workers’ rights, the democratic deficit or abortion, the Yes campaign were forced to firefight. But it didn’t matter, because the seed of doubt has already been sown.
The treaty is a difficult sell for the Yes campaign, as it falls foul of the old maxim that all politics are local. The beneficiary of this treaty is the EU as a whole, and is is difficult to point to any aspect within it that is of direct benefit to Ireland specifically. But it is easy to spin a negative interpretation of it, and point to aspects of it that could possibly be to Ireland’s detriment.
To add to the Yes side’s woes is the general sense of apathy among the electorate. A common reaction is to claim not to understand the treaty (a seam well-mined by the No side), and thus not to bother voting at all. Given that the No side probably have a more motivated constituency, this will work in their favour.
Even taking into account the the difficulty in selling the positives of the treaty, the Yes campaign has been very wishy-washy. “Good for Ireland, Good for Europe” claim Fianna Fáil. Bland, bland, bland. Fine Gael and Labour used the campaign as an opportunity to introduce their candidates for the 2009 local and European elections. Labour’s campaign especially was a disgrace, as you really had to look closely for their message regarding this campaign. Where a lamp post had one poster with a photo of Eamon Gilmore making a profound political point, and another one claiming that we are going to pay more tax because of the Lisbon Treaty, there was only ever going to be one winner.
The Yes campaign have six days to turn this around. They need to promote this as a way of showing that Ireland is a team player in Europe. They need to definitively nail the lies from Libertas, Coir and the rest of the FUD-merchants.
I’m voting Yes and I hope that it passes, but my hopes are below my expectations.
See also Bock and Irish Election
If this follows through to polling day, it will be a disaster for both the government and the main opposition parties. So far they have allowed the No campaign to gain the upper hand and instil the necessary FUD into the minds of the electorate (well, those voters who are going to bother their arses to vote, at least.)
So where has it all gone wrong? They say that a lie gets half way around the world before the truth gets its boots on, and this is true in this case. The Yes campaign have not had a chance to fight this campaign on their own terms, as they have been forced to spend their time and resources denying the claims of the No side. Whatever the issue, be it taxation, neutrality, workers’ rights, the democratic deficit or abortion, the Yes campaign were forced to firefight. But it didn’t matter, because the seed of doubt has already been sown.
The treaty is a difficult sell for the Yes campaign, as it falls foul of the old maxim that all politics are local. The beneficiary of this treaty is the EU as a whole, and is is difficult to point to any aspect within it that is of direct benefit to Ireland specifically. But it is easy to spin a negative interpretation of it, and point to aspects of it that could possibly be to Ireland’s detriment.
To add to the Yes side’s woes is the general sense of apathy among the electorate. A common reaction is to claim not to understand the treaty (a seam well-mined by the No side), and thus not to bother voting at all. Given that the No side probably have a more motivated constituency, this will work in their favour.
Even taking into account the the difficulty in selling the positives of the treaty, the Yes campaign has been very wishy-washy. “Good for Ireland, Good for Europe” claim Fianna Fáil. Bland, bland, bland. Fine Gael and Labour used the campaign as an opportunity to introduce their candidates for the 2009 local and European elections. Labour’s campaign especially was a disgrace, as you really had to look closely for their message regarding this campaign. Where a lamp post had one poster with a photo of Eamon Gilmore making a profound political point, and another one claiming that we are going to pay more tax because of the Lisbon Treaty, there was only ever going to be one winner.
The Yes campaign have six days to turn this around. They need to promote this as a way of showing that Ireland is a team player in Europe. They need to definitively nail the lies from Libertas, Coir and the rest of the FUD-merchants.
I’m voting Yes and I hope that it passes, but my hopes are below my expectations.
See also Bock and Irish Election
Incoming FUD
15/05/08 22:47 Filed in: Politics
| Lisbon
Treaty
The current Lisbon
Treaty referendum campaign is turning out to be one
of the dirtiest in years. On the one side we have
all of the mainstream political parties, IBEC,
Alliance for Europe, etc. On the other side we have
all the perennial anti-EU treaty stalwarts like
Sinn Féin, the Socialist Party, various trade
unions; alongside newer and slicker organisations
such as Libertas.
Whichever side of the argument you are on, it's going to be a hard sell. Few people are going to go to the trouble of actually reading the treaty itself, and those that attempt to do so will probably give up after page 2 or 3. It's not a page turner, it's a complex legal text, that is also an amending treaty to other already established treaties.
Now that the campaign proper has gotten underway, it would appear that both sides are trying to use FUD as a tactic to get their message
across. The Yes
campaign is trying to frighten us into believing
that a No vote will isolate us from the EU beltway.
their themes include threats to jobs and
investment. All utter crap. If we reject it, the
worst we will face is having to vote on it again, à
la Nice.
The No side are tripping over themselves to paint the Doomsday scenario of an Ireland at the heel of a Euro superstate. There are posters and leaflets out there that are frankly disgraceful. Here's a selection, collated by blogging solicitor Simon McGarr. (The one used to illustrate this page is from that stream, published under a Cretive Commons licence.) Why bother trying to argue against what's in the treaty, when it's so much easier to spread the FUD with what's not in the treaty?
It's going to be a long few weeks, I think.
Whichever side of the argument you are on, it's going to be a hard sell. Few people are going to go to the trouble of actually reading the treaty itself, and those that attempt to do so will probably give up after page 2 or 3. It's not a page turner, it's a complex legal text, that is also an amending treaty to other already established treaties.
Now that the campaign proper has gotten underway, it would appear that both sides are trying to use FUD as a tactic to get their message
The No side are tripping over themselves to paint the Doomsday scenario of an Ireland at the heel of a Euro superstate. There are posters and leaflets out there that are frankly disgraceful. Here's a selection, collated by blogging solicitor Simon McGarr. (The one used to illustrate this page is from that stream, published under a Cretive Commons licence.) Why bother trying to argue against what's in the treaty, when it's so much easier to spread the FUD with what's not in the treaty?
It's going to be a long few weeks, I think.
Abusing Democracy
13/05/08 22:09 Filed in: Politics
| Lisbon
Treaty
It had to
happen. A local protest group has hitched
their trailer to the anti-Lisbon Treaty
wagon.
Activists in Roscommon campaigning for the
retention of hospital services in the county
town have urged their supporters to reject the
Lisbon Treaty as a way of getting the
government's attention.
Now I am glad that Ireland has a written constitution, even when it means holding a referendum on something or other almost every year. However, it does leave us vulnerable to political gobshitery such as this. We are the only electorate in the 27-member EU who will have the privilege of voting on whether or not we approve of the Lisbon Treaty. Therefore we should cast our vote based on our opinion of the treaty, and that alone. Using it as a proxy to highlight a completely separate issue is immature and an abuse of the democratic right we are privileged to possess.
Now I am glad that Ireland has a written constitution, even when it means holding a referendum on something or other almost every year. However, it does leave us vulnerable to political gobshitery such as this. We are the only electorate in the 27-member EU who will have the privilege of voting on whether or not we approve of the Lisbon Treaty. Therefore we should cast our vote based on our opinion of the treaty, and that alone. Using it as a proxy to highlight a completely separate issue is immature and an abuse of the democratic right we are privileged to possess.