The results from the referendum in Ireland on the Lisbon Treaty are almost complete.

Ireland says "No" to the Lisbon treaty (By about 53.5%:NO to 46.5%:Yes - Unofficially - 1 or 2 hours to official result)

The official result will be avalable from RTE, the Irish National TV station; www.rte.ie/news/features/lisbontreaty

Here is a link to an Irish Government website that explains the Lisbon Treaty; www.lisbontreaty2008.ie

I personally voted "Yes" to the Lisbon Treaty but i would be interested to hear from people who live in the EU member states.

John.

---

I say "no" to any treaty that allows one or more countries to dictate laws and rights onto another, or deny the use of it's own currency or other fundamental aspects which give a country it's own identity.

Well done the Irish for making a good decision here.

---

flaming balloons

Well don the Irish.


It is the right result.

---

It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues

(By about 53.5%:NO to 46.5%:Yes - Unofficially - 1 or 2 hours to official result)

Gee, another 50/50 split... Imagine my surprise... ;)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

I heard one of the ways the EU may deal with this is retaking the vote. Doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose of having a vote to begin with, if you can just repeat the vote until the people running the show get the result they want?

Edit : Quote -

Rejection leaves the EU operating under current rules. EU leaders have to decide whether to draw up a new constitution -- which would mean years of meetings and drafts -- or they could ask the Irish people to vote again.

source

I heard one of the ways the EU may deal with this is retaking the vote. Doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose of having a vote to begin with, if you can just repeat the vote until the people running the show get the result they want?

Edit : Quote -

Rejection leaves the EU operating under current rules. EU leaders have to decide whether to draw up a new constitution -- which would mean years of meetings and drafts -- or they could ask the Irish people to vote again.

source

As I understand it, the Irish will not hold another vote on the same issue. This was confirmed by the Irish Prime Minister, and their written constitution does not allow it.

Politically, the EU would be very foolish to pressure the Irish in to a repeat, as this would be seem as bullying by large neighbours, and show the electors the real undemocratic face of Brussels

---

It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues

I tip my Guinness,

Though I don't drink any more.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jun/15/ireland.eu1

Taoiseach faces EU backlash over Lisbon

France and Germany spearhead move to isolate Republic after 'no' vote on treaty

* Henry McDonald in Dublin and Ian Traynor in Brussels
* The Observer,
* Sunday June 15 2008
* Article history

Taoiseach Brian Cowen is on course for a major clash with Ireland's European partners this week after senior strategists in the Republic's ruling party decided against a second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

Relations with the EU are set to worsen as Germany and France appear to be moving to isolate Ireland. They were scrambling for ways of reviving the treaty yesterday, 24 hours after Irish voters firmly rejected the blueprint for Europe's future.

Conor Lenihan, Minister for Integration, said it was unlikely that the EU reform treaty would be put to the Republic's electorate again. He added that there was an even greater risk of a public backlash by holding a second referendum. However, senior strategists in Fianna Fáil were even more emphatic yesterday, insisting there would be no re-run of the Lisbon campaign.

Refusing to take the Irish no for an answer, the Franco-German game plan, to be refined at a crucial EU summit in Brussels on Friday, is to get the other 26 EU states to ratify the treaty as soon as possible, quarantine the Irish, then come up with some legal manoeuvre enabling the treaty to go ahead.

'The situation is clear,' a European Commission official said. 'Unless the treaty is ratified by all, there is no treaty.'

But French European minister Jean-Pierre Jouyet stressed that 'specific means of co-operation could be invoked to deal with Ireland. The most important thing is that the ratification process must continue in the other countries, then we shall see with the Irish what type of legal arrangement can be found.'

The move by the main European powers is likely to further deepen hostility towards the EU in Ireland and cause more embarrassment for Cowen's embattled government.

One senior Fianna Fáil member warned that this weekend that it would be 'politically impossible' for the party to try to repeat what happened in 2001/2002 when Ireland first rejected the then Nice Treaty - which overhauled the institutions of the European Union in preparation for a union of 27 states - but held a second vote that was passed 12 months later.

'Nice II was run because the first Nice referendum had such a low turn-out,' the Fianna Fáil source said. 'This time the turnout was high for Lisbon, so there can be no justification for a re-run.

'The government is in a political clinch. There are local as well as European elections in Ireland next year and Fianna Fáil will not risk having to hold another referendum as well. Within the next 12 months at the very least there is no chance Ireland will re-run Lisbon.'

He added that another reason why the Cowen-led government would not go back to the Irish people with a reshaped treaty is that the Fianna Fáil/Progressive Democrats/Green party coalition is already obliged to hold a referendum on the separate issue of enshrining children's rights into the Irish constitution.

Fianna Fáil is concerned that Europe has become a 'toxic issue' for the party. Any move by EU partners that is perceived as simply ignoring the Irish people's will would be even more damaging to Cowen, the source said.

Meanwhile, the Taoiseach was in telephone contact with a number of his European counterparts yesterday in a bid to explain Ireland's rejection - by 53 to 47 per cent - of the treaty. Cowen said he has already spoken to Gordon Brown, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy.

'I appreciate the solidarity and support they have shown me,' he said.

The British government yesterday rejected calls to abandon the treaty in the wake of Ireland's no vote, with Europe Minister Jim Murphy insisting it was not yet dead.

'Only those who previously wished to dance on the grave of this treaty, even before the Irish referendum, are declaring it dead,' Murphy told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Dead or not dead, that is the question?

For we suffer the undemocratic and un-elected fools in Brussels who do not hear the wishes of the electorate when it scuppers their careful plans!

---

It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues

Dead or not dead, that is the question?

For we suffer the undemocratic and un-elected fools in Brussels who do not hear the wishes of the electorate when it scuppers their careful plans!

hope not dead, and in finland we elect our canditates to brussel, why not do the same.ireland could separate from eu if they don´t want to be part of it, now they are just wasting money saying no

---

"Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exist elsewhere in the Universe is that none of it has tried to contact us."
Calvin to the Hobbes

I would certainly like to see Britain in the same relationship to the EU as Switzerland. Part of a trading block, obeying the trading rules and all else is to our preference.

The problem is all our political parties seem to be committed to remaining in the EU, and no one represents our views.

I have yet to see the advantage in belonging, and that goes away back to the early 1970s

---

It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues

[I have yet to see the advantage in belonging, and that goes away back to the early 1970s[/quote]

no war in sight in europe (and yugoslavia wasn´t part of eu), before it was like every twenty year or something, you can travel more easily through europe, and for musician, it is bonus, and other changes will take place slowly

---

"Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exist elsewhere in the Universe is that none of it has tried to contact us."
Calvin to the Hobbes

[I have yet to see the advantage in belonging, and that goes away back to the early 1970s

no war in sight in Europe (and Yugoslavia wasn´t part of eu), before it was like every twenty year or something, you can travel more easily through Europe, and for musician, it is bonus, and other changes will take place slowly

The threat of European wars was one of the drivers for the formation of the Common Market back in 1956. I think it was France that wanted to tie Germany into a binding community, which, through trade, made war more difficult.

However, I would dispute the assertion that a benefit coming from the EU was no war.

I have always been under the impression that the formation of NATO, after the war to counter the Communist Block, was the basis for the last 50 years of peace in Europe. The benefit of NATO membership was that it included most of the original EU member countries, and several that have joined since.

NATO makes the same claim that you pointed to as a benefit of the EU. It was NATO that was the guarantor of peace, not the EU. The latter, by means of deepening trade relations, built on and enhanced/strengthened this angle.

The EURO zone does make movement between countries easier, but is this an EU benefit? I think not, but it is more a series of agreements between states who happen to belong to the EU.

The interesting bit, for me, is that all the benefits could equally have been achieved by running what is now the EU as it was in the early days.

It was the 1985 treaties that changed the nature of the relationships from a Common Market. The Common Market was the model the UK agreed to join back in 1973 to 1975.

Given time (50 years) the trade between the members, and growing member numbers, would have driven a need towards more integrated methods of co-operation. But the EU, and the current obsession with the constitution, is making moves the politicians want to see but the general populations are not yet ready for.

The big advantage the US, as a Federal Group of States, enjoyed early was a common language. Later came common currency, etc.

---

It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues

Mette Fugl (a Danish journalist) gets the honor of the Irish EU No

Denmark's Radio's correspondent Mette Fugl was responsible for the "No" from the Irish, the no-politicians and medeas say. The kingpin herself is killing herself with laughter over it. But she had a finger in the pie, she admits.





She had heard the rumors everywhere: Ireland's own prime minister hadn't even read the treaty, he wanted his people to vote yes to.

So when the Danish journalist Mette Fugl in May got the chance to ask Brian Cowen himself direcly, of course she did.

'Have you read the treaty?', the simple question was, which gave the minister a tired grimace. And which cost him a bitter admission.

- I haven't read it from start to finish, Brian Cowen replied.

The story went as a lightning through the Irish media, which cleared the frontpages and wrote long analysis' about Cowen's political missed shot.

- In that moment he said he hadn't read the whole treaty, I decided for a 'no' right at the spot. How can you seriously expect from us that we will vote for something, our own leaders haven't even bothered themselves with reading?, said Martin Cunningham, a no-sayer, according to the newspaper Irish Independent.

Before the election almost all polls gave a 'yes' to the treaty. After Fugl's question and several week's campaigns the people voted no - 53,4 percent against 46.6 percent out of more than three millions votes.

My honor, my fault

The explanations of the no are many, but the scandal over Brian Cowen's lack of will to read the treaty sticks.

And that was the most important reason for the no, says the important Sinn Fein-president, Gerry Adams, to the Danish newspaper Information. It ran the headline Monday evening >>It was Mette Fugl's fault<< in the newspaper on page 10.

Mette Fugl - who has worked at Information herself - was killing herself with laughter when she saw the headline.

- My fault, my responsibility, my honor, my error... Really, it must be said with a twinkle in one's eye, I insist on that, the experienced journalist says in a cell phone on her way from Copenhagen to Belgium.

She stresses that she 'in principle is neutral, either for or against EU,' and she just asked a relevant journalistic question at the right time.

Then she is quick to point at all the other facts in the election - that the yes-side was late to start the campaign, that the government misunderstood the people, and that the economy in Ireland in general is about to crash.

- Such a no is very complex. You can't just say that it was caused by one single question. There was a very strong anger against the government, which they totally failed to see, and as we have seen it before, there again was a weak connection between the EU-top and the people. In reality the election came to be about everything, which wasn't in the treaty at all - if there would be abortion clinics on all street corners and an EU-army, Mette Fugl says.

She will admit though that her question - and not least Cowen's reply - also had a certain importance.

- Of course. There are many who used it as a kind of excuse or explanation. When even he hadn't read it, then why should I?

How much importance the question have had, she won't guess about. That would be silly, she says.

Who has actually read it?

Brian Cowen was out fast to defend his missed reading of the treaty.

Because, you see, he had negotiated 95 percent of the content of it home, he said. [He] just hadn't had the time to read through it all.

- And who actually has the time to read a 300 [My comment: Huh? That must be a typo in the newspaper, 300 pages are not that much] page long treaty, which weighs 6 and a half kilo, as Mette Fugl comments herself.

The Irish EU-commissioner Charlie McCreevy - he's responsible for the inner market - hasn't read it himself. He says that himself.

- The treaty refers to under paragraphs of earlier under paragraphs and other documents, so there's no person on this side of Timbuktu, who would be able to read it all together, he said to The Irish Times.

There hasn't yet been found a solution to the crisis after the Irish 'no'.

----------------------------------------------

Mette Fugl (In Danish)



(Translated by me)

---

"I'm trying to maintain a shred of dignity in this world." - Me

http://www.wiseupjournal.com/?p=339


Irish Constitution Vs EU Lisbon Treaty / Constitution

Wise Up Journal

03.06.2008

By Benjamin Smith-Kavanagh

With the majority of politicians advocating a yes vote on the Treaty of Lisbon, claiming it is nothing more then a tidying-up treaty designed to make the EU run more efficiently. They have purposely failed to discuss any of the facts contained in the Treaty, especially in regard to areas where the EU will gain power over Irish law if the Lisbon Treaty is ratified in all member States. In these new areas EU law will prevail over Irish law in any matter of conflict (declaration 17 of the Treaty ). This could include areas where the EU has exclusive power, joint power and the power to co-ordinate the Member States in the areas where they will still retain power to make their own laws.

In all these areas Article 52 in the European Charter of Fundamental rights will become legally binding on all Irish and EU citizens. This will allow the EU to do any thing it wants to in these areas. For it can limit and take away our rights any time it pleases.

Article 52 Scope of guaranteed rights:

1. “Any limitation on the exercise of the rights and freedoms recognised by this Charter must be provided for by law and respect the essence of those rights and freedoms. Subject to the principle of proportionality, limitations may be made only if they are necessary and genuinely meet objectives of general interest recognised by the Union or the need to protect the rights and freedoms of others“.

Legal explanations

The purpose of Article 52 is to set the scope of the rights and principles of the Charter, and to lay down rules for their interpretation. Paragraph 1 deals with the arrangements for the limitation of rights. The wording is based on the case law of the Court of Justice: “…it is well established in the case law of the Court that restrictions may be imposed on the exercise of fundamental rights, in particular in the context of a common organization of the market.

Literally our rights will be granted and can be taken away by foreign Judges in the European Court of Justice and all they will have to do to justify any action against a person or organization is claim it is for the interest and objectives of the Union. This is in direct contrast of our Irish Constitution.

Article 40.3.1 states. ( A Study Of The Irish Text By Micheal O Cearuil )

“The State guarantees not to interfere by its laws with the personal rights of any citizen, and further guarantees to defend and assert those rights with its laws in so far as it is possible“.

This article makes it as clear as can be that at no time can the Irish State make laws or take any action that goes against our natural born inalienable rights, this includes areas such as right to freedom of expression, right to privacy of the family, right to choose health, right to own and keep property, right to self-determination etc.

Who in their right mind would want to vote yes to something that would overrule our Constitution, that enshrines and fully respects our natural born inaliable human rights. However, unfortunately we live in a world where our public servants don’t serve us but their higher powers in Europe. Whether it is Fianna Fail, Fine Gael, Labour or any organization calling for a yes vote, they have purposely tried to mislead the public they are supposed to serve into thinking the European Charter of Fundamental Rights is better than our Constitutional rights. They are working not in the interest of Irish and EU citizens, but in the interests of big Government and business. They see no benefit in citizens having rights the State cannot take away unless we vote to allow them to do so.

However if you are not aware of what is actually contained in the Treaty text and vote yes, based on what those on the yes side say about it, you could soon be in for a rude awakening if it is within the jurisdiction of EU law.

The Irish Constitution will become invalid if the Treaty of Lisbon is ratified, despite those on the yes side claiming it won’t, for it is these people who will have most to gain with the destruction of it who are advocating this. In areas such as personal rights, family, health, property, social, we will be at the mercy of Judges who could be in the pocket of the Union and big business. If a developer wants your land to develop a project, you could be forced to sell it for a pittance, or the Union could seize it for nothing, if they feel it is in the interest of the Union to allow a development where your land is.

In the area of health you and your family could be forced to take poisonous vaccinations or face imprisonment if the Union makes them mandatory. Britain has already proposed this, even though a Federal Court in America recently ruled that a girl with Autism was caused by vaccination shots. In Ireland these are voluntary but if you consent to taking them the makers are not liable if any harm is caused to you or your family.

Under our Constitution we are fully protected by these kind of actions, so the State cannot force itself on anyone or make anything mandatory if it goes against

Article 40.3.2 ( A Study Of The Irish Text By Micheal O Cearuil )

“The State will, in particular, by its laws, protect the life and person and good reputation and property rights of every citizen“.

The real question we need to ask is why has the general public been kept in the dark about what is actually in the Treaty and what the Treaty will do in terms of our rights.

Having fundamental inalienable human rights is the cornerstone of any great society, but if the Treaty of Lisbon is ratified, we will not have any enshrined rights, but the rights that EU grants us. This is a sign of how the EU views the citizens of it’s Member States, they feel we have no rights especially if it goes against their interests. What if you speak out about EU corruption, will you be arrested for going against the Unions interests. Article 52 of the ECOFR would allow the Union to legally and lawfully do so.

The EU is beginning to act like a dictatorship, they are nice when you go along with them, but when you disagree or have concerns of how the EU is trying to turn itself in to a Super-state or Empire as EU President Barrosso proclaimed back in 2007, you see their true colours, like back in 2001 when we voted against Nice. Their response was we’ll vote again until we vote the way they want us to. The same can be said of this Lisbon Treaty for it is over 90 % the same as the rejected EU Constitution, which the French and Dutch people wisely rejected back in 2005 when the EU showed them their true colours. The EU response to this was we will not let them have a vote this time.

But with the ECOFR becoming legally binding if we do not vote no to the Treaty of Lisbon, it is of the utmost importance that we all see it for what it really is, that being the ultimate attempt at taking away our fundamental inalienable human rights which our Constitution already guarantees us. If the Treaty is not defeated you and your family could soon find out the consequences of voting away our Constitution.

Areas Of EU Power

When reading or trying to understand the Treaty text you might ask yourself the question, what does Competence mean?

This is how the Independent Referendum Commission Handbook explains it on page 9.

What is Competence?

“Competence is the term used in the Treaty of Lisbon to describe the power the EU has to draw up policies and laws. The EU may introduce policies and laws only in relation to those areas that are set out in the treaties”.

Lets look into the Areas where the EU will have power in and ask ourselves, is this just a tidying-up Treaty or is it a serious attempt at taking power away from the people and National Parliaments. For the benefit of the largely un-elected and unaccountable EU Government.

Referendum Commission Proposed EU Areas Of Power

EU exclusive power

Customs Union;

Establishment of competition rules necessary for the functioning of the internal market;

Monetary policy for member states which use the euro;

Conservation of the biological resources of the sea as part of the common fisheries policy;

Common trading policy;

The conclusion of an international agreement when this is within the framework of EU legislation or when it is necessary to help the EU exercise an internal competence or if there is a possibility of the common rules being affected or of their range being changed.

Joint power of EU and member states

Internal market;

Social policy with regard to specific aspects defined in the treaty;

Economic, social and territorial cohesion;

Agriculture and fisheries except for the conservation of the biological resources of the sea;

Environment (the Treaty includes specific reference to climate change);

Consumer Protection;

Transport;

Transeuropean Networks;

Energy;

Area of freedom, security and justice;

Joint security issues with regard to aspects of public health

Research, technological development

Space;

Development cooperation and humanitarian aid.

Member states exclusive power (the EU can co-ordinate )

Protection and improvement of human healthcare;

Industry;

Culture;

Tourism;

Education, professional training, youth

Sport;

Civil protection;

Administrative co-operation

Even in area’s where the EU does not have exclusive power, article 3b,3. Makes it clear that the EU can take over member States at a central, regional and local level. If they feel they can do the job better then the National Government.

Article 3b,3.

“Under the principle of subsidiarity, in areas which do not fall within its exclusive competence, the Union shall act only if and insofar as the objectives of the proposed action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States, either at central level or at regional and local level, but can rather, by reason of the scale or effects of the proposed action, be better achieved at Union level”.

Is this the part of the Treaty that those on the yes side failed to read, as Charlie McCreevey himself recently stated he has not read the full Treaty and went on to add.

“I would predict that there won’t be 250 people in the whole of the 4.2 million population of Ireland that have read the treaties cover-to-cover. I further predict that there is not 10 percent of that 250 that will understand every section and subsection”.

The golden rule of making your decision when voting on this Referendum should be “ if you don’t know, vote no”. for if you don’t know what the consequences will be, why play a game of roulette. When our Constitution gives us the power to say no to the Government, if they have failed to explain to us what we are voting on. Unlike the people in the other member States of the EU, we have the power to say no, do not be afraid to use it.


more...

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

eu is not a monster, it is not about making life more miserable, if somebody is afraid that our precious cultural identity is going to toilet, maybe it wasn´t
that great in a first place. i can have all the cultural stupidity i posses, doesn´t matter where in a world i am, so why a country should be afraid of it.
( and if you don´t know, read and you are wiser like magic, and then vote whatever, not because you don`t know and don`t wanna know, you have learned to read so read)

---

"Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exist elsewhere in the Universe is that none of it has tried to contact us."
Calvin to the Hobbes

Question? If this Treaty were to pass then another country or countries would dictate what could/ or should be done in that country.

---

LETS BEGIN IN 2010

Oh yes,

That's the problem the Irish found in it.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

The Lisbon treaty can completely rewrite the Irish written constitution, including removal of the right to vote on a referendum which has fundamental changes to that country's political life.

---

It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues

then they can decide that they don`t want to belong eu and do whatever they want

---

"Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exist elsewhere in the Universe is that none of it has tried to contact us."
Calvin to the Hobbes

There is an exit clause but imagine the pressure that could be placed on an island state from those who don't like their attitude no matter how valid it may be.

This is what Ireland risks, and still did for the good of all EU members.

Not all countries were even allowed to vote on it. Amazing isn't it?

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss