You have voted wrong!, vote again Please!!!

by Nevienoodle Tue May 12, 2009 10:48

I'm at a loss to try and understand how this treaty can be voted upon again. Does it not clearly state that all countries MUST RATIFY the treaty. We have rejeted it so whats the problem. This is the 2nd time the Irish have been told, "ah, sorry, but you actually voted wrong, you were supposed to vote the other way, but its ok, we'll go again". Why are we not getting angry about this. Its a clear sign of things to come. If our opinions are rejected because it wasn't the answer they were looking for, then what chance do we have in the future. The article above has mentioned all of the fears I hold with regard to the ratification of this treaty. Clearly the immigration issue can be seen already, with countries suffering as a result. Why move people from one country to another and then use up resourses there, then the indigenous people along with the immigriants must go on to further pastures and the cycle begins again. The EU has done great things for Ireland, such as the 5 ring roads that have been built around Dublin, (because foresights is not a skill requirment for the National Roads Development) and a few new roads here and there. But where's the broadband, where's the Train that connects with an airport. Why is the longest runway in Europe been abondoned. But Dublin needs a new terminal!!!! Clearly since Europe has had a part to play in our country it has seen greed intensify. EVERYTHING got more expensive when the Euro came in. But we have our own to blame for that. The population grew, so too did the service requirements, but instead of increasing services we now cut them altogether. Where is Europe in that respect. Does Europe have any interest in the medical system or is it just giving grants to farmers. So it brings us back to the business side of things. Not everyone gets a PACKAGE if they loose their jobs, or are expected to upgrade. The whole things is disgusting and i truly hope and believe that Ireland has really had enough now. Heads will spin. TIOCFAIDH ÀR LÀ

by hotel europa Tue May 12, 2009 11:58

Why is there a perception out there that Ireland has gained a huge volume from its' membershi of the EEC/EC/EU? There is one country in Europe at the moment that is not in recession - it is not a member of the EU and has benefitted from having control over its' own resource of oil, gas and fishing grounds. It is of course Norway, a country that ironically stands to gain more from oil and gas production in ireland, through its' ownership of statoil, than we do.
Also, Ireland has lost more on fishing rights alone than it has gained from CAP, ESF, ERDF and EDF combined. We are losing upwards of €3 billion per year on the loss of our fishing rights in our own lands. We have c. 16 % of the total waters of the EU and only 3% of the total allowable catch. Go figure.
So instead of blaming farmers, etc, let's take a long hard look at how our resources were squandered by our own people to benefit a few. Vote No and Vote often!

by Sharon. - Individual. Tue May 12, 2009 12:25

Hi !

It seems that the 'political elite' are intending to "cuddle and pamper" the voters but at the same time put "pressure on them" tp vote the 'right' way .
More info at the 'Related Link' below.

Thanks!

Sharon.

Vote 'NO!' . Again.

by Peter Tue May 12, 2009 12:43

the government and media are going to start a big smear campaign against certain people on the no side....

by Sceptic Tue May 12, 2009 13:28

Norway is a major petro-economy. Ireland has no commercial oil whatever and insufficient gas reserves even with the Corrib field to supply itself let alone to export and thereby support its balance of payments or an independent currency like Norway can. Neither does it have the hydro or timber resources of Norway. What it does have is a comparative advantage in dairying which has been much supported from EU funds and price support mechanism. EU membership therefore suits Ireland much more than Norway – the latter can be more choosey about which clubs it joins though it is a full member of NATO. Invasion and occupation like happened recently to Norway concentrates the mind in these matters – neutrality is a luxury only for the peripheral, isolated and often sanctimonious.

It’s interesting that it’s claimed that the yield from Irish fishing would have been larger than that from the CAP and the various funds. Source for this remarkable assertion? Even outside the EU Ireland would hardly have been able to claim and keep an exclusive fishing zone of any size – geography would seem to rule that out. The writer also ignores that Norway is able to participate in the EU internal market as an EEA member but has no influence over the EU policy – it just must accept what is handed down by the Member States. Being outside the EU but inside the EAA would still undermine the bulk of Irish wealth generating capacity which lies with the FDI sector. It is fanciful to think this could be replaced by increased fishing yields. Also the EU has no say over offshore mineral rights – these things are decided purely locally.

by hotel europa Tue May 12, 2009 18:37

It seems that my lack of quoted sources has struck a sore point with whatever sceptic wrote against my previous argument.
Ironically the figures i quote are by far and away conservative.
The figures I quote on fishing rights are based on the EU's analysis of the value of the TAC (total allowable catch) after quotas of the member states.They have put this figure fished off irish seas at 3 billion euro of unprocessed material. Now again that's unprocessed. Conservative estimates published in the Irish offshore fishing journal place the value of the TAC if processed on these shores at 5 Billion euro per annum.

Furthermore, it is extremely ignorant to poke holes in an argument based on the oil and gas reserves given away by previous and present crooks. In 2006, when Noel Dempsey was attempting to give away the latest round of resources, his department stated that there were "at least 10 billion barrels of oil" in one basin alone. (SLYNE). Even at today's oil price of c.$60 / bl or €45/ bl that's 450 billion euro in one basin alone. Get real. We don't even need to develop a large scale oil and gas industry. We simply need to charge oil companies vast amounts of money to drill here. Bolivia and Venezuala - both claim 85% off their own oil and gas supplies. The oil companies are still more than happy to sit back and put in the work for 15%.

As for FDI, uh have you even been in this country for the last few years???? We are bleeding this to foreign countries with lower wage costs and overheads. It was inevitable this would happen in Western Europe and no attempt was made to ensure the companies stayed. It was a failure on behalf of the EU and Irish government that no attempt was made to help foster indigenous industry.

Furthermore, our biggest trading partners are still the UK and the US, neither tied into the ECB and if anything our membership of this is hurting our exports.

The EU was a wonderful idea in theory and I would have loved to have seen it succeed. It has not.

Vote NO and Vote often

by Sceptic Tue May 12, 2009 23:49

There are choices in everything and the potential value of fishing in Ireland was never regarded by objective authorities as close to that of agriculture combined with the market access value of EU membership. Even if billions could be made from a developed and large scale fishing industry outside the EU it is very unlikely that this would outweigh the benefits of EU membership even assuming it was possible to bring such into being at this stage.

I will take your word for the quote about €10b of oil being available but this is not proven certainly not commercially and the geological and conditions in the east Atlantic are among the worst in the world. By comparison it is easy to find and exploit oil in the Gulf of Mexico or the North Sea. It is horrendously expensive in the Atlantic and unless we spend billions on risky state exploration it has to be done by a series of incenitvized licenses – otherwise the majors won’t explore and had in fact largely stopped by the late 1980s. It’s easy to appeal to ill informed nationalist type sentiment and emotion on this issue “it’s our oil they are taking” etc but the hard facts of geology, ocean depth, capital intensity, weather, richness of fields and ease of extraction are all against us. If we had Norway’s endowment it would be quite different but we don’t.

The EU and the Irish Government do run funding programmes supporting indigenous industry – that’s largely what Enterprise Ireland does and the EIB gives substantial credits in this area as do the various structural funds. FDI and indigenous industry are not mutually exclusive and large indigenous firms become multinational and invest overseas themselves just like the FDI firms here have done.

As for the ECB it’s again a matter of choices but suffice to say without euro membership we would be certainly insolvent long ago in the credit crunch. Moreover we did have monetary union with the UK and that brought its own substantial problems as would any monetary union with the US whether official or shadow based. Export performance is good right now – the problem is sterling weakness because sterling is not in the eurozone. Not being in the zone would make the punt a very weak and unstable slave currecny of sterling.

The EU has its problems and drawbacks but overall it has succeeded economically and politically in bringing peace, prosperity and democracy to its member states and in exporting same in its zone of influence. The right comparator is not a State so rich in natural resources as Norway but arguably Iceland whose own developed fishing industry has not saved it in the present crisis and is now knocking on the door of the EU.

by hotel europa Wed May 13, 2009 21:41

the figures i quoted are 10 billion barrels and not €10b as you stated.
I find the comparison of the East Atlantic and the Gulf of Mexico particularly amusing, Hurricanes, anyone? The North sea is just as volatile and as for the Arctic circle? Incentivizing shouldn't mean giving away your resources for nada. That's just idiocy. As for insolvency, it wouldn't be a problem if the resources of this country weren't mismanaged.
Unfortunately, there are thousands more like you who would vote in the same idiots in the morning. Even armed with the facts.
VOTE NO and vote often

by Detriment - Society Thu May 14, 2009 06:21

I'd like to begin by stating that I'm opposed to the Lisbon Treaty for two reasons. Firstly, I think the EU is increasinly bloated and anti-democratic. I'm not comfortable with the entire population of Munster having one vote in the EU parliament. I know this is already the case, but this treaty is trying to centralise even more power, which can't be a good thing. Secondly, even if I'd been in favour of it to begin with, I find the idea of being TOLD how to vote by the creatures who run this country more than I can bear.

However, you do the anti-Lisbon cause no service by your original post. The Jean Monnet quote (like the Karl Marx quote that's been doing the rounds) is made up, and it took me about five minutes on google to discover this. And the article from the Kosovo ministry, or whatever it is, is nothing but febrile paranoia, spewed by evidently damaged nationalistic rabble-rousers. Please try to be rational when you're arguing against this treaty, because reason is on our side on this one. By resorting to drivel, you might convince people that the anti-Lisbon is a desperate, irrational one.

by German. Thu May 14, 2009 15:47

"Why is there a perception out there that Ireland has gained a huge volume from its' membershi of the EEC/EC/EU? "

Because we HAVE.

Statistics about this (enough to come out your ears) are available here:

http://www.finfacts.ie/comment/irelandeunetreceiptsbene...s.htm

.

by Sceptic Thu May 14, 2009 16:17

Hotel Europa - what counts in oil exploration is sea depth and the ambient weather conditions and ocean swell. A cursory acquaintance with the basics of this technology demonstrates the difficulty of exploring in the north east Atlantic as against shallower waters in more sheltered or warmer sea areas, even with hurricanes. Oil platforms can be shut down in the event of a hurricane. It is an inconvenient fact that there are no proven commercial oil reserves whatever in Irish waters (no ten billion barrels waiting to be drawn up I am afraid) – if we want to establish if there are any there we have to contract the only people able to explore are the oil majors and it’s a very expensive business much more so than you seem ot understand. One may have to forgo royalties altogether in order to ensure drilling takes place. That was why the initial programme from the mid 1970s failed after a time – it was clear after some years that the costs of exploration was too great against the prospect of success or the fruits of success if one did succeed. None of this is anything to do with the EU or the Lisbon Treaty however – the EU has no competence in this area. As for FDI firms v fish processing check how many of our school leavers would prefer working at fish gutting in Killybegs to being web designer in an FDI firm like Google or a merchant bank in the IFSC? People have a habit of not liking the lifestyles that armchair anti European community socialists think is best for them. If you tired to grow fish processing it would be an unpopular low value added activity needed large grants and staffed by Brazilians if one was lucky enough to get them. When we did have a super trawler the ‘Atlantic Dawn’ it spent its time hoovering up the fish stocks of Senegal and other vulnerable nations around Africa. You ignore the Norwegian EAA reality – if we followed Norway we would have to give up a rep on the Commission as well as our MEPs and our place on the Council of Ministers. This would be a massive reduction of influence as well as structural funds and of farm price supports. A major loss of FDI and market access is not going to be offset by increased fish processing. Even if your comparisons were valid rejecting the Treaties is not going to make Ireland any more like Norway. You also ignore the currency issue in a post Euro situation. To persuade people to hold a new Irish punt interest rates would have to be high anyway – probably higher than the ECB rates. The alternative would be not to have a hard currency which would lead to economic collapse and reversion to subsistence. These are real issues which you either ignore or conflate with irrelevancies like the oil sector which have nothing whatever to do with the EU membership let alone the Lisbon Treaty. Your slogan is anti intellectual – you should not pretend it is supported by a valid economic analysis.