Eire & The Nice Treaty - Democracy or Con?
Discussion
The recent (second) Irish referendum on ratification of the above has green lighted further expansion of the EC.
But the Irish had already said no in a previous referendum.
I think it was the Norwegians who said bugger off to Brussels not so long ago, only for the question to be put again in a similar vein to this and again for a mysterious change in public perception to occur.
How is it that 'No' seems to mean 'maybe later' in EC-speak?
Why is this not being focussed on by the media? Another example of creeping, inexorable Eurocracy?
But the Irish had already said no in a previous referendum.
I think it was the Norwegians who said bugger off to Brussels not so long ago, only for the question to be put again in a similar vein to this and again for a mysterious change in public perception to occur.
How is it that 'No' seems to mean 'maybe later' in EC-speak?
Why is this not being focussed on by the media? Another example of creeping, inexorable Eurocracy?
It certainly seems like a con - I have to confess that this Nice Treaty business hasn't received much of my attention, but what I've heard is not encouraging and certainly stinks of the aforementioned creeping Eurocracy.. after all.. more power is being ceded to an unelected Euro-elite..
As for the idea of a second referendum being called and actually being considered legitimate, well I wonder if there's any law or statute of democratic principles which clarifies the situation..
I could understand, for example, having a second referendum if the first ended 51-49, but if the first ended 60-40 I don't see how a second vote can be justified in a 5 or 10 year period..
What was the outcome of each of the referenda in Eire?
My gut feeling is that the same 'strategy' would be employed if we voted against the euro here in the UK - more votes would be held practically on an annual basis until we conceded and elected to join the infernal white elephant currency (ooooo it makes going abroad much more straight forward.....
).
As for the idea of a second referendum being called and actually being considered legitimate, well I wonder if there's any law or statute of democratic principles which clarifies the situation..
I could understand, for example, having a second referendum if the first ended 51-49, but if the first ended 60-40 I don't see how a second vote can be justified in a 5 or 10 year period..
What was the outcome of each of the referenda in Eire?
My gut feeling is that the same 'strategy' would be employed if we voted against the euro here in the UK - more votes would be held practically on an annual basis until we conceded and elected to join the infernal white elephant currency (ooooo it makes going abroad much more straight forward.....
).
Depends on what the question is doesn't it...... A poll is only as good as the question.
IMHo its undemocratic to go back and ask again after such a short period, especially as France, Germany and Italy are now well on their way to ignoring the fiscal policy of the ES (European Superstate) and going their own way. You can bet your bottom dollar (why dont we link to the dollar
( ) that if Britain was in , we'd obey every last dictate from Brussels and sod the effect it had on us. Civil Service stupidity. Anyway, back to topic - the countries being "invited"? are (IIRC) some of the poorest around, so who is going to pay for them to be brought up to the standard of the rest of the Eurozone - ooooh sorry, that'll be us then won't it?
But when has the EU ever been democratic - unelected quangos, commissionaires and councils with too much deveolved power.
IMHo its undemocratic to go back and ask again after such a short period, especially as France, Germany and Italy are now well on their way to ignoring the fiscal policy of the ES (European Superstate) and going their own way. You can bet your bottom dollar (why dont we link to the dollar
( ) that if Britain was in , we'd obey every last dictate from Brussels and sod the effect it had on us. Civil Service stupidity. Anyway, back to topic - the countries being "invited"? are (IIRC) some of the poorest around, so who is going to pay for them to be brought up to the standard of the rest of the Eurozone - ooooh sorry, that'll be us then won't it? But when has the EU ever been democratic - unelected quangos, commissionaires and councils with too much deveolved power.
I thought this change of heart was based basically on the tugging of heart strings?
Before the first referendum it was basically stated that if they expand the EU then it will become tiered and Eire will be in the lower tier.
Then, before the second referendum it was miraculously changed to 'if we dont vote yes then millions of people will continue to suffer under facism'.
Media manipulation no doubt lead by the pro-euros looking to line their futures with golden directorate contracts.
It has amused me immensely though that the manufacturing downturn in Germany maybe trouble ahead for that confounded Euro thing.
Matt.
Before the first referendum it was basically stated that if they expand the EU then it will become tiered and Eire will be in the lower tier.
Then, before the second referendum it was miraculously changed to 'if we dont vote yes then millions of people will continue to suffer under facism'.
Media manipulation no doubt lead by the pro-euros looking to line their futures with golden directorate contracts.
It has amused me immensely though that the manufacturing downturn in Germany maybe trouble ahead for that confounded Euro thing.
Matt.
I think it was the Norwegians who said bugger off to Brussels not so long ago, only for the question to be put again in a similar vein to this and again for a mysterious change in public perception to occur.
The Norwegians voted no to joining the EU a few years ago and as far as their Government was concerned, that was that (having been occupied during WW2 and only been truly independent since 1906 they are somewhat more protective of their independence than we are). However, the Danes had a second vote when they voted against the Euro. 51-49 against wasn't acceptable but a 51-49 pro-euro vote was....
ummm but that'll be in countries like Bulgaria and Turkey which have been told they've no chance of joining in the near future because their human rights records are bad - ergo, they only let in countries who are already geared up not to be undemocratic/facistic.
plotloss said:Then, before the second referendum it was miraculously changed to 'if we dont vote yes then millions of people will continue to suffer under facism'.
So that's patently bollocks..
We've already paid up for Eire, Spain and Greece to have massive improvements in their infrastructires and economies - I sure as hell don't want now to move on to funding Poland, Czech Rep., Slovenia etc etc..
might as well firkin move to one of those countries when they are admitted and pocket some of the money..
I just can't believe the insanity of it all; apart from the economic fragility of everyone significant, including the Hun, we are a net contributor (always will be too, unless Gordon keeps spending like he does) to this bureaucratic uber-club and the prospect of a dozen more national charity cases makes about as much economic sense as us adopting the lira.
The crazed dogma of the commie hoardes includes a suicidal cocktail of socio-economic experimentation.
I pray that the vast ocean of anti-Federalist material in cyber space represents the true voice of Albion. Mind you, in the light of the Eire and Norge experience, will it make a blind bit of difference to those socialist conspirators seeking to generate or radiate in a pan-European presidential residency, for whom democracy is merely an irritating blight on the political landscape?
Maybe the greatest Briton will be the one to bring us back from the brink of this mad design.
The crazed dogma of the commie hoardes includes a suicidal cocktail of socio-economic experimentation.
I pray that the vast ocean of anti-Federalist material in cyber space represents the true voice of Albion. Mind you, in the light of the Eire and Norge experience, will it make a blind bit of difference to those socialist conspirators seeking to generate or radiate in a pan-European presidential residency, for whom democracy is merely an irritating blight on the political landscape?
Maybe the greatest Briton will be the one to bring us back from the brink of this mad design.
It astounds me that this federated union of european states or whatever its called this week will happily take the supporting states cold hard cash but will give no positive benefit in return. If as a nation we are to be forced to be part of a bigger european 'wheel' (ignoring for the moment the fact that we actually invented this 'wheel' and the carriage that uses it) yet no decisions seem to be taken as a whole. Immigration is not europes problem, it more often than not is our problem, farming is not a european problem its our problem etc etc.
Whilst a marvellous fantasy opting out is, its not really going to happen, but with the pen pushing nature of the current administration commited to running all of us into the ground the model needs changing, and changing quickly.
On the whole being the 51st state is a wholly more appealing option, and thats saying something.
Matt.
Whilst a marvellous fantasy opting out is, its not really going to happen, but with the pen pushing nature of the current administration commited to running all of us into the ground the model needs changing, and changing quickly.
On the whole being the 51st state is a wholly more appealing option, and thats saying something.
Matt.
I'm far from convinced about that, personally..
plotloss said:On the whole being the 51st state is a wholly more appealing option
I have as many problems in principle with the USA as I do with the EU.
Anyway, once I'm the leader of this country, democracy will have served it's purpose and can be shelved.
At some point, you lot are going to have to decide whose side you want to be on. Britain is an irrelevant little backwater which only has clout when its seen as a bridge to Europe, or as Bush's poodle. Take either of those roles away & the currency, the economy & whatever passes as culture gets buffeted along by every other fcuker having no say in where it ends up. 
Nick W said: At some point, you lot are going to have to decide whose side you want to be on. Britain is an irrelevant little backwater which only has clout when its seen as a bridge to Europe, or as Bush's poodle. Take either of those roles away & the currency, the economy & whatever passes as culture gets buffeted along by every other fcuker having no say in where it ends up.
Say what you mean nick
. Do not be confused by the fact that people in this country feel that they can express their views good and bad that they do not care, indeed the fact that they can express any view is a point I'm sure wouldn't be wasted on the other side of the pond
. To be so dismissive of this country is a mistake that has been made by others before and will be made again again.
Whilst on the topic, don't forget that the Great in Great Britain is not for how wonderful this country is, it's to distinguish it from a region in France
, long may that continue. I suppose what I'm trying to say nick is it's a bit like family arguments, if you're not part of the family its best to keep out
. Harry
>> Edited by HarryW on Thursday 24th October 00:30
Sorry that was a bit reactionary - end of the day angst.
A few things...
1) I get peed off with the mentality that Britain is a economic powerhouse. It isnt but, as part of a strong EU, it can be.
2) There is so much intolerance/ignorance/poverty in the outposts of Europe that Kosovo can keep happening. Tie these rag bag countries into an EU economic powerhouse, and you can stop it.
3)I am actually british and I really wouldnt be so rude about another nationality. except maybe le french
4) I also get peed off with the prevailing self interest the EU debate brings about. Ireland wavered last time, not because they were worried about their cultural identity/independence, but because they would lose some of their farming subsidies. They dont need 'kin farming subsidies.
5) the talk of 51st state seems a bit odd, given the perpetual griping the british do at evrything america is & stands for.
6) - err thats it, except I'm nearly out of english mustard
A few things...
1) I get peed off with the mentality that Britain is a economic powerhouse. It isnt but, as part of a strong EU, it can be.
2) There is so much intolerance/ignorance/poverty in the outposts of Europe that Kosovo can keep happening. Tie these rag bag countries into an EU economic powerhouse, and you can stop it.
3)I am actually british and I really wouldnt be so rude about another nationality. except maybe le french
4) I also get peed off with the prevailing self interest the EU debate brings about. Ireland wavered last time, not because they were worried about their cultural identity/independence, but because they would lose some of their farming subsidies. They dont need 'kin farming subsidies.
5) the talk of 51st state seems a bit odd, given the perpetual griping the british do at evrything america is & stands for.
6) - err thats it, except I'm nearly out of english mustard
NickW said:I get peed off with the mentality that Britain is a economic powerhouse. It isnt but, as part of a strong EU, it can be.
So you don't think being the fourth largest economy in the world is sufficient for us to qualify as an economic powerhouse?
Do you realise that over 80% of our trade (at least) arises from domestic endeavour or that with non-EU countries?
If we left the EC, instruments of the World Trade Organisation's construction would in practice afford us immense protection from the bumbling Brusselites. After all, since just after WWII, this body has been committed to the lowering of international trade barriers. And let's face facts; the EC is hardly a collective of reactionary economic ostrich states, like Rhodesia.
Look at Switzerland; have they ever felt the need to sign themselves off to a bunch of corrupt commies? Do we really think any of our European trading partners would seriously cuy off ties with one of their largest markets? Would they hell!
In the mid-90s, the DTI produced a list of reasons why Britain was such an attractive target for foreign investment: contrary to the propoganda, EC membership was not cited. Talk to any American or Japenese big cheese and favourable, pro-corporate legislation (i.e. minimal red tape) and flexible labour markets are what counts. Not excatly the type of thing going down in the Socialist Soviet Republic of Mainland Europe at the mo...
English is the pre-eminent language, we retain one of the top three financial centres on the planet, are technically up there with the best and suffer relatively lightly (as stated above - at the moment), compared to some of the strangulatory, economically regressive legislative regimes on mainland Europe (France being a classic example).
Furthermore, our status would be enhanced by an independent foreign policy, unbeholden to a meek coalition of appeasers which is invariably the compromised product of the evolving European model.
We are preminent within NATO, the UN, the aforementioned WTO, G8 and head the often scoffed at but nevertheless significant Commonwealth. Oh yes and if the d1ckweeds in Whitehall would get their fingers out, we could well and truly exploit our military personnel who are trained, well, rather well.
So let's get the hell out of the damned thing and sort things out from a position of deciseveness rather than weak compromise. Let's retain our socio-economic and political self-determination and implicit therein, the franchise for our people - after all - they are exactly whom such events impact upon. We cannot do this if we are bound to centralized (and wholly suicidal, if I might just SCREAM!) fiscal amd monetary policy.
Yesterday I raised the question of Ireland's capitulation to the apparent inevitability of European assimilation - this bizarre turnaround should be a stark warning of the leviathan's stealthy resolve. Some within the EC refer to us as 'pre-in.'
Make of that what you will.
For me, I sense a welling of something almost Churchillian in gravitas required to repel the influence of a force little short of Sauronic in it's evil, ring-like influence.
Let's get out - NOW!
Derestrictor said:
Do you realise that over 80% of our trade (at least) arises from domestic endeavour or that with non-EU countries?
Err.. I think this is plain wrong. The ratio is 48% (EU) / 52% (Non EU). If you take into account that the Non-EU figures are largely influenced by Banks in the City of London, it is clear that Britain's industry - or what's left of it - is massively reliant on trade with EU countries.
Personally, I can't how opting out could not harm the country. The EU would start to levvy taxes and duties on every British imports to start with...
R
CarZee - this issue, more than most, winds me up like few others.
I argue from an entirely objective basis but such positions are all to frequently misrepresented by the ferderalist nonce brigade as (yawn, effin' yawn) right wing extremism.
Rollocks to that; if your goal is the weakening of the UK PLC to a level that Gordo's unionised creatures could only fantasize about then fine; pork away!
Just look at the mess across Europe; witness how farcically oblivious the Franco-Germanic synthodroidal political elite is to the rules of the EC's own construct; how these out and out, self-serving dogs plan to subjegate us whilst moving the goal posts every other wet Wednesday - but only if it's convenient.
And as their own economies plummet headlong into recession they stand there, arrogantly pontificating about undeniable economic truths.
Tragically, the lunacy soesn't stop at Calais or Zebrugge; our own rulers are insanely seduced by these overtures of seeming economic certainty; one can only speculate as to the motivations behind such monstrous notions of national surrender.
Question is, will we anyone in Whitehall see the iceberg before it's too late?
I argue from an entirely objective basis but such positions are all to frequently misrepresented by the ferderalist nonce brigade as (yawn, effin' yawn) right wing extremism.
Rollocks to that; if your goal is the weakening of the UK PLC to a level that Gordo's unionised creatures could only fantasize about then fine; pork away!
Just look at the mess across Europe; witness how farcically oblivious the Franco-Germanic synthodroidal political elite is to the rules of the EC's own construct; how these out and out, self-serving dogs plan to subjegate us whilst moving the goal posts every other wet Wednesday - but only if it's convenient.
And as their own economies plummet headlong into recession they stand there, arrogantly pontificating about undeniable economic truths.
Tragically, the lunacy soesn't stop at Calais or Zebrugge; our own rulers are insanely seduced by these overtures of seeming economic certainty; one can only speculate as to the motivations behind such monstrous notions of national surrender.
Question is, will we anyone in Whitehall see the iceberg before it's too late?
Deres - top notch stuff 
Need Europe - my arse do we need Europe - there is not a single country in Europe (correct me if I'm wrong)that has our best interests at heart. The Germans want to close down the London stock exchange, the French want to ruin our agriculture, the Spanish want our fish stocks, everyone wants our oil and our money.
If we pulled out, how much damage would really be done - goods still need to be bought, the markets still exist. Any attempts to install trade tariffs and taxes would be seen globally as peevishness by the EU, re-inforcing the point that they need us more than we need them.
I cannot understand the need for this European Parliament, army, currency, taxation. Fine, group together to improve trade if you feel that there are advantages, but the rest - NO. And this headlong rush is just foolishness par excellence.
Coffee n fag time methinks.
Need Europe - my arse do we need Europe - there is not a single country in Europe (correct me if I'm wrong)that has our best interests at heart. The Germans want to close down the London stock exchange, the French want to ruin our agriculture, the Spanish want our fish stocks, everyone wants our oil and our money.
If we pulled out, how much damage would really be done - goods still need to be bought, the markets still exist. Any attempts to install trade tariffs and taxes would be seen globally as peevishness by the EU, re-inforcing the point that they need us more than we need them.
I cannot understand the need for this European Parliament, army, currency, taxation. Fine, group together to improve trade if you feel that there are advantages, but the rest - NO. And this headlong rush is just foolishness par excellence.
Coffee n fag time methinks.
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff