Lisbon Treaty Rejection - Interpretation of Vote

If you had to summarize the reasons why people voted No then what would you say?

My view is that people rejected the Lisbon Treaty because they were not willing to sign up to the supremacy of such a complex document over the Constitution. At the end of the day people accept that legislation is complex but they want an understandable Constitution that trumps other laws. Peoples awareness and concerns have been exasperated by the fact that they have been asked to vote in incomprehensible Treaty after incomprehensible Treaty. People fear that they are agreeing to changes beyond what they intend to agree to, such as the fact that they are told that we lost our Commissioner during the Nice Treaty. The more Treaties we are presented with the worse this will become.

What is the solution? I suggest that the amendment to the Constitution should limit what areas can be affected by EU Treaties and the EU should acknowledge this limitation. The supremacy of EU law should then only operate within that exception and the Dail could ratify anything that did not go outside it.

I've only realised that it's Friday the thirteenth, typical. A crumb of comfort for the government I think, is the widespread confusion about the treaty. I think that IT poll gave this as the main reason for voting no. It means that Ganley and the gang and their tax/neutrality ideas were not all swallowed by the people. There is room in this interpretation for a Lisbon II referendum.

Quote :

The swing to the No camp has not been prompted by domestic considerations, with just 5 per cent of those opposed to the Treaty saying they are influenced by a desire to protest against the Government.
The reason most often cited by No voters is that they don’t know what they are voting for or they don’t understand the Treaty, with 30 per cent of No voters listing this as the main reason for their decision.

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/breaking/2008/0605/breaking84.html

905 wrote:

I've only realised that it's Friday the thirteenth, typical. A crumb of comfort for the government I think, is the widespread confusion about the treaty. I think that IT poll gave this as the main reason for voting no. It means that Ganley and the gang and their tax/neutrality ideas were not all swallowed by the people. There is room in this interpretation for a Lisbon II referendum.

Quote :

The swing to the No camp has not been prompted by domestic considerations, with just 5 per cent of those opposed to the Treaty saying they are influenced by a desire to protest against the Government.
The reason most often cited by No voters is that they don’t know what they are voting for or they don’t understand the Treaty, with 30 per cent of No voters listing this as the main reason for their decision.

[url=http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/breaking/2008/0605/breaking84.html

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/breaking/2008/0605/breaking84.html[/quote[/url]]

Well it's really interesting. As a no voter I had a sinking feeling yesterday it wasnt going our way. The media was so hell bent on the yes vote. I think this result shows a clear mistrust of government and of media. Ganley was never as important to what people were thinking as the media were making out. There were more influential factors than them at work. But the most significant of all were the incomprehensibility of the Treaty itself and the impossibility of disguising its true nature, imo. People just werent fooled.

One prominent FF person I spoke to said that in the last week the women he met while canvassing were all asking questions about broader issues than the treaty - wondering about where Europe was going, whether we were giving away too much power and concerned that Europe was simply getting too big (which is one way of solving the enlargement issues!) Men, he said, were more keen to simply accept the facts whereas women were far more concerned about longterm implications.

He said he knew that the vote was going since Monday - and that if the referendum was next week, the Yes side would have been wiped out completely.

Kate P wrote:

One prominent FF person I spoke to said that in the last week the women he met while canvassing were all asking questions about broader issues than the treaty - wondering about where Europe was going, whether we were giving away too much power and concerned that Europe was simply getting too big (which is one way of solving the enlargement issues!) Men, he said, were more keen to simply accept the facts whereas women were far more concerned about longterm implications.

He said he knew that the vote was going since Monday - and that if the referendum was next week, the Yes side would have been wiped out completely.

I wonder was there any one issue that hardened opinion against it? Lack of trust? I was inclined to laugh at an Irish Examiner editorial earlier this week which said Bertiegate had interfered. But now I if this issue must be relevant to any FF assessment of what went wrong. He dragged that it out in a disastrous way - personally and politically. His last appearance at the tribunal was terrible. Not having the status of Taoiseach made has protestations and explanations stand all the more starkly for what they were. Cowen must have been wishing the ground would swallow him up. The last thing FF needed at a time when they were asking the electorate to take a lot on trust in relation to the Treaty.

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

If you had to summarize the reasons why people voted No then what would you say?

My view is that people rejected the Lisbon Treaty because they were not willing to sign up to the supremacy of such a complex document over the Constitution. At the end of the day people accept that legislation is complex but they want an understandable Constitution that trumps other laws. Peoples awareness and concerns have been exasperated by the fact that they have been asked to vote in incomprehensible Treaty after incomprehensible Treaty. People fear that they are agreeing to changes beyond what they intend to agree to, such as the fact that they are told that we lost our Commissioner during the Nice Treaty. The more Treaties we are presented with the worse this will become.

What is the solution? I suggest that the amendment to the Constitution should limit what areas can be affected by EU Treaties and the EU should acknowledge this limitation. The supremacy of EU law should then only operate within that exception and the Dail could ratify anything that did not go outside it.

I think you have certainly captured the reality of how I have experienced the EC - EU project: there was a big lie of omission going back many years in relation to the free market and progressively neo-liberal agenda. A soft sell exercise was used to citizens at every stage that presented the EU as opening up european trade barriers in a neutral fashion, avoiding european war and giving us compatible electrical appliances (ha!) and road signs etc. The pace of integration outran the pace of democratisation - in fact the existing structures of the EU (not designed to run a State) may be incapable of reform to make them effective in an integrated EU state.

As a small state, we have traded our small market and large fisheries for access to a bigger market, but at the cost of loss of management and control over the national currency, interest rates, and investment incentives that is clearly damaging and premature. In Ireland, we have gained some good governance and regulation of environment, but if we can't afford to pay for it it will be seen as a burden.

The No vote in Ireland is a crack in a big project under strain. The Lisbon Treaty was dragged together under the Irish Presidency in just the wrong kind of rush.

I don't feel a bit elated by the No vote: Coir and Libertas are not company I want to keep. In my view there are dangerous times ahead, with or without Lisbon and a very energetic effort is needed from all parties interested in a democratic and peaceful Europe.

If I am understanding what you suggest in the second paragraph, and if the rest of the EU ratified Lisbon, would that not mean a federal state with Ireland half-hanging out of the back door ?

Aragon wrote:

Kate P wrote:

One prominent FF person I spoke to said that in the last week the women he met while canvassing were all asking questions about broader issues than the treaty - wondering about where Europe was going, whether we were giving away too much power and concerned that Europe was simply getting too big (which is one way of solving the enlargement issues!) Men, he said, were more keen to simply accept the facts whereas women were far more concerned about longterm implications.

He said he knew that the vote was going since Monday - and that if the referendum was next week, the Yes side would have been wiped out completely.

I wonder was there any one issue that hardened opinion against it? Lack of trust? I was inclined to laugh at an Irish Examiner editorial earlier this week which said Bertiegate had interfered. But now I if this issue must be relevant to any FF assessment of what went wrong. He dragged that it out in a disastrous way - personally and politically. His last appearance at the tribunal was terrible. Not having the status of Taoiseach made has protestations and explanations stand all the more starkly for what they were. Cowen must have been wishing the ground would swallow him up. The last thing FF needed at a time when they were asking the electorate to take a lot on trust in relation to the Treaty.

I don't think it was one issue that killed it and I think that is the whole point. I think Lisbon will be a watershed in terms of what the political establishment can realistically attempt to sell in a referendum. The amount of negativity and cynicism that surrounded this treaty, particularly from rural voters and working class voters, was palpable throughout what was an absolutely miserable campaign.

I think that suspicion and a fundamental lack of trust are now embedded in the minds of the Irish electorate. In fairness I don't really blame them. A referendum is not a suitable way to accept or reject this kind of treaty. When you're asked a relatively self-contained question about something like abortion or divorce it is reasonable to ask for a yes or a no. It is totally unreasonable and absolutely fucking ridiculous to expect a yes or a no as a catch-all answer to about a hundred different questions.

A lot of the No vote can be put down to a well-funded, well-organised campaign. Libertas put €1.3 million and lots of posters, leaflets, billboards and canvassing into this Treaty, as did Cóir and others, it was because the matched and out-matched the Yes side in this respect that they could get a No vote.

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

A lot of the No vote can be put down to a well-funded, well-organised campaign. Libertas put €1.3 million and lots of posters, leaflets, billboards and canvassing into this Treaty, as did Cóir and others, it was because the matched and out-matched the Yes side in this respect that they could get a No vote.

Yeah I agree. The No side had a far better strategy. After a dodgy start, I think Libertas ran a fantastically effective and professional campaign. They told the undecided voters that voting No would save them money, save the farmers etc. Many of the issues were obviously cherry-picked but they had the good sense to highlight tangibile, lightening rod type issues. All the Yes campaign could offer was vacuous, meaningless slogans. The Yes side were also pretty much explaining and on the defensive from the start which is a disaster for any campaign.

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

A lot of the No vote can be put down to a well-funded, well-organised campaign. Libertas put €1.3 million and lots of posters, leaflets, billboards and canvassing into this Treaty, as did Cóir and others, it was because the matched and out-matched the Yes side in this respect that they could get a No vote.

thats interesting - I Think Libertas have not done well out of this referendum at all - They targeted the ADC 1 vote and it seems pretty clear that that segment of society went firmly Yes.

I know in DSE - Where Libertas ran a very high profile expensive and nasty personal campaign against Lucinda and FG in particular - it has backfired spectacularly as we got Yes Margins well up on Nice 2 even.

The strong working class No means its Sinn Fein and the socialists who can claim the most credit for this - meaning it was a economic protest vote from those who are really feeling the financial pressure and who see themselves as socially marginalised who decided this on top of the already solid 25-30% Eurosceptic vote.

Of course Ganley will claim it - but it was the footsoldiers of on the left of the Anti-Lisbon spectrum whot won it - to paraphrase the Sun.

Edo wrote:

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

A lot of the No vote can be put down to a well-funded, well-organised campaign. Libertas put €1.3 million and lots of posters, leaflets, billboards and canvassing into this Treaty, as did Cóir and others, it was because the matched and out-matched the Yes side in this respect that they could get a No vote.

thats interesting - I Think Libertas have not done well out of this referendum at all - They targeted the ADC 1 vote and it seems pretty clear that that segment of society went firmly Yes.

I know in DSE - Where Libertas ran a very high profile and nasty personal campaign against Lucinda and FG in particular - it has backfired spectacularly as we got Yes Margins well up on Nice 2 even.

The strong working class No means its Sinn Fein and the socialists who can claim the most credit for this - meaning it was a economic protest vote from those who are really feeling the financial pressure and who see themselves as socially marginalised who decided this on top of the already solid 25-30 Eurosceptic vote.

Of course Ganley will claim it - but it was the footsoldiers of on the left of the Anti-Lisbon spectrum whot won it - to paraphrase the Sun.

Their billboards and campaign slogans were populist in the extreme so I disagree that they were targetting that particular bracket specifically. I don't think there was any ever doubt that constituencies like DSE and DL were likely to vote Yes. I agree with you about SF though, I think they had a good campaign and they will have generated considerable political capital from it.

Edo wrote:

thats interesting - I Think Libertas have not done well out of this referendum at all - They targeted the ADC 1 vote and it seems pretty clear that that segment of society went firmly Yes.

I know in DSE - Where Libertas ran a very high profile expensive and nasty personal campaign against Lucinda and FG in particular - it has backfired spectacularly as we got Yes Margins well up on Nice 2 even.

The strong working class No means its Sinn Fein and the socialists who can claim the most credit for this - meaning it was a economic protest vote from those who are really feeling the financial pressure and who see themselves as socially marginalised who decided this on top of the already solid 25-30% Eurosceptic vote.

Of course Ganley will claim it - but it was the footsoldiers of on the left of the Anti-Lisbon spectrum whot won it - to paraphrase the Sun.

Hmm, you could be right there. Sinn Féin could use this result to rehabilitate the party in the run-in to next year's local and European elections.

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

Edo wrote:

thats interesting - I Think Libertas have not done well out of this referendum at all - They targeted the ADC 1 vote and it seems pretty clear that that segment of society went firmly Yes.

I know in DSE - Where Libertas ran a very high profile expensive and nasty personal campaign against Lucinda and FG in particular - it has backfired spectacularly as we got Yes Margins well up on Nice 2 even.

The strong working class No means its Sinn Fein and the socialists who can claim the most credit for this - meaning it was a economic protest vote from those who are really feeling the financial pressure and who see themselves as socially marginalised who decided this on top of the already solid 25-30% Eurosceptic vote.

Of course Ganley will claim it - but it was the footsoldiers of on the left of the Anti-Lisbon spectrum whot won it - to paraphrase the Sun.

Hmm, you could be right there. Sinn Féin could use this result to rehabilitate the party in the run-in to next year's local and European elections.

Somebody pm factual over on politics.ie for the crack.....just joking......just jokin.......stop hitting me...

SeathrúnCeitinn wrote:

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

Edo wrote:

thats interesting - I Think Libertas have not done well out of this referendum at all - They targeted the ADC 1 vote and it seems pretty clear that that segment of society went firmly Yes.

I know in DSE - Where Libertas ran a very high profile expensive and nasty personal campaign against Lucinda and FG in particular - it has backfired spectacularly as we got Yes Margins well up on Nice 2 even.

The strong working class No means its Sinn Fein and the socialists who can claim the most credit for this - meaning it was a economic protest vote from those who are really feeling the financial pressure and who see themselves as socially marginalised who decided this on top of the already solid 25-30% Eurosceptic vote.

Of course Ganley will claim it - but it was the footsoldiers of on the left of the Anti-Lisbon spectrum whot won it - to paraphrase the Sun.

Hmm, you could be right there. Sinn Féin could use this result to rehabilitate the party in the run-in to next year's local and European elections.

Somebody pm factual over on politics.ie for the crack.....just joking......just jokin.......stop hitting me...

No, that would be wrong Seathrún and very bad for (your)health.