thx ireland
•
13 Jun 2008, 13:16
•
Journals
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7452171.stm
seriously, i dont wanna be a racist, but its kind of ridiculous that a country who only has 4 million habitants (<1% of total EU-population) has the power to overturn the european union's constitution. You have to admit that this isnt very democratic...
Not even 30 years ago Ireland was poorest country in west europe and now ist one of the richest. Is this the thanks for it? If you dont know what the constitution means for europe, i advise you to read the book "Au nom des peuples : le malentendu constitutionnel européen" in french or in english.
K, flame on
seriously, i dont wanna be a racist, but its kind of ridiculous that a country who only has 4 million habitants (<1% of total EU-population) has the power to overturn the european union's constitution. You have to admit that this isnt very democratic...
Not even 30 years ago Ireland was poorest country in west europe and now ist one of the richest. Is this the thanks for it? If you dont know what the constitution means for europe, i advise you to read the book "Au nom des peuples : le malentendu constitutionnel européen" in french or in english.
K, flame on
+ what's wrong with real democracy? in here it was just a random "K L3TS DO THES SO WE CUD B MORE AEWSOME AND RESPECTED H3RE YO"
i bet if you would have done that in other countries too,more than 50 percent of them would have rejected it...
Although it is a disaster from the economic side. In times of redistribution of the world market needs the EU a clear statement/policy.
Parliamentary(!!!!) democracy is just one big fail anyway.
It's pretty simple and populist to reason it with the EU. ;)
k maybe there were some other factors as well, but i think ireland withoutintervention of eu wouldnt be this what it is now.
but i fully agree to the rest of your comment
no biggie
You cant go to court just to cancel the decision of the people. The court would NEVER confirm your claim because this would be the anti-democracy par excellence.
Ok they could try to go to court but i can assure you that they are not gonna win. And even if, the referendum has to be repeated and do you really think that people would change their mind within 2-5 months?
Who knows what direction the populace of the other 18 countries would have voted had they been given a democratic vote.
The 'No' vote may have been reached due to mis-representation of the treaty, in which case the fault lies with the politicians not the voters.
Not all member states have voted yes, it just happens that Ireland were the first to potentially vote against it.
1. The EU Superstate boogeyman
2. The fictional and nonexistant neutrality
3. Militarism
5. Workers rights and public services
6. CT is not an issue for anyone except Libertas...RTE cited a poll showing only 5% were worried about it
also what bothers me is, arent the irish people represented by their political leaders?
If you agree that they are then you should be happy with the Dail Eireann making the decision.
If you do not think the Dail represents you or your politics, where do you turn? A direct referendum can only be induced upon a changing of an article in the Constitution. the constitution is meant to represent all of us or at least provide a law that all of us subscribe to.
The constitution states that Dail Eireann shall be the executive arm of the state in all matters.
err...what tha fack
I don't doubt what you say about them ratifying the treaty had the constitution allowed them though, the parties seemed keen.
If i wouldnt have chosen law as field of study i would neitehr have an idea about what is the european constitution and probably i would have voted (hypothetically) against it aswell.
So what we need is a better education in EU questions!
A such question (constitution) should not be let to the people if they dont know what it ontains and what it means to have a eu constitution
The fact that you didn't get to vote has nothing to do with the EU. Your government chose not to allow it's citizens to vote (probably in fear of it being rejected), so if you wish to complain about democracy then your whine is misguided. The EU has nothing to do with guarenteeing referenda on this treaty, it doesn't have the power to do so and it's entirely in the hands of national governments.
Thats one big problem of the actual european union. Every fucking decision (except single european market decisions) has to be decided by unanimity of ALL member states. If i am not totally wrong the new constitution would allow to take a decision by simple or qualified majority, which is much more democratic. You see, the actual european "union" is more a confederation than a federation. The new constitution would change this (im absolutely for it).
But to come back to your point: i think it has its advantages and disadvantages that governments dont let their population vote on such important matters. As i mentionned largely, the government has to inform its population about the content of the treaty. If the population has no idea what the european parliamentarians wrote into this 287 filling pages document they could even go play lotto. In this way (if the people are not inormed) i prefer not to make a referendum, but as soon as the people have an idea about the treaty there has to be a referendum
How is any of that relevant? I don't know why you're bringing that up, we're talking about the democracy involved in passing this treaty, not pre and post Lisbon voting systems. I think you're confusing yourself.
You initially complained about a lack of democracy (and seemed to suggest that the EU was in some way responsible). I simply corrected you and said that the EU has nothing to do with you not getting a vote, as it's purely up to your national government.
I think that is what the treaty was trying to change in the first place. But a lot of Irish people want to keep their power in EU, and not have it rotate.
A country like the UK would be stupid to vote no, because they would have a permanent seat of power in the EU, while smaller countries would rotate annually (like ireland), which at the moment we have a permanent place seat.
Look at France. They changed the law just to avoid democracy. That's absolutely ridiculous.
If the population are given the vote it is up to the powers that be to make sure they are adequately informed.
also agree with jnO. People need the info explained to them properly (like on TV news with nicely coloured graphs :p).
I saw one that referenced the martyrs from 1916 rising and said if we vote yes, it would be an insult to them or w/e. Obviously it has nothing to do with that, it's compelte bullshit.
Also I'm too young to vote - but a lot of my friends who can vote didn't bother, because the whole treaty was too confusing. And I aggree, I didn't understand much of it, however, i would have voted yes.
Proud to be Irish.
If I was 18 i would have voted no.
Stupid rumours which have nothing to do with the lisbon treaty at all.
I want to be Irish, not European.
If anything the EU has given us more freedom, yet now we seem to be fighting against it...So it has nothing to do with the martyrs who died for independance.
His first big job and he faillz