POLL - how would you vote in a re-run Referendum ?

Today's Irish Times says that current opinion is in favour of carrying a second Referendum on Lisbon.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2008/1117/1226700659487.html?via=mr

Is it the economy ?

To balance so few a view.

Frankly, I don't believe the Irish Times about this.

Aragon wrote:

Frankly, I don't believe the Irish Times about this.

Neither do I, although I wish I did, because I'm coming to the sorry conclusion that we are screwed unless we do vote this thing in. Sadly, even where their finances are in a worse state than ours, the "market" appears to be giving the biggest nations the benefit of the doubt, while screwing over smaller places for the smallest infractions. Now is not the time to be out on a limb...

It's a rather bizarre poll and not helpful to anyone.

But if I was voting in the morning, it would be one of those moral victory-type yes votes. You know, where you don't get the result you want but you've done your best.

I can't answer the poll because it doesn't give an option to decide when actually you see what you are being asked.

No, come what may...

johnfás wrote:

I can't answer the poll because it doesn't give an option to decide when actually you see what you are being asked.

The OP says to base it on the referendum being substantially the same...

Kate P wrote:

It's a rather bizarre poll and not helpful to anyone.

But if I was voting in the morning, it would be one of those moral victory-type yes votes. You know, where you don't get the result you want but you've done your best.

I always thought you were a No voter Kate?

The treaty can't be any different to what everyone else has ratified and I'm not impressed at the response to the No vote - and I did vote No. The circumstances of us being asked to vote again have pushed the treaty into the background. This time we're being asked - I feel - to vote for Libertas and its philosophy, whatever it is or Europe and its philosophy which is infinitely more appealing, credible and defensible. I don't like what's happening in the Czech republic and I don't like what's happening in the Irish republic regarding the resistable rise of a very, very undesirable element. In the long run, my conscience will be clearer for voting Yes to Lisbon and No to a subversive, dangerous and potentially lethal Europe-wide,anti-European movement. It's a case of sacrificing the battle for the winning of the war.

toxic avenger wrote:

johnfás wrote:

I can't answer the poll because it doesn't give an option to decide when actually you see what you are being asked.

The OP says to base it on the referendum being substantially the same...

I'd vote Yes then as I voted Yes before. However, on principle I don't decide how I will do something until I see what is happening. There might well be opt outs gained or assurances given. Whilst it is unlikely that these would affect the way that I would vote because I voted Yes last time, I would not like to speculate prior to having sight of these conditions.

Opt outs and assurances aren't going to change the substantive issues, johnfás. The document will have to remain the same as what everyone else voted for. Assurances are simply reinforcements and while opt-outs might be significant for specific areas, the integrity of the document as a whole will remain unaltered.

Absolutely, but I might disagree with an opt out. Unlikely but I haven't seen them yet so I cannot give an informed choice on the issue until then. If the Referendum was rerun as was, I would vote Yes again as my opinion on the matter has not changed. I don't believe that Lisbon is the perfect solution but I think it is a compromise which is alot better than what other compromises might have occurred. It is also substantially better than Libertas would have you believe. There are many positive aspects of Lisbon, the placying of the Charter on a semi treaty footing, the right of legislative information for national parliaments, the meeting of the council in public and so on.

It would be an awful shame if the effectiveness of the Treaty had to be blunted by opt-outs in order for it to be passed. I would be very happy with declarations but, for example, it would pain me to see Ireland stuck with a permanent commissioner, who would get paid more than 200k a year to carry out a redundant and unnecessary role.

The Charter is also an extremely positive aspect of the Treaty, I hope to God we don't get an opt-out from that one (I don't think we will, since it seems to only be the hardcore Eurosceptics who oppose it). Interesting to see you only see Lisbon as placing the Charter on a "semi treaty footing", johnfás. Care to ellaborate? I believe it gives the Charter "the same legal status as the treaties", which would be a full treaty footing in my mind.

evercloserunion wrote:

It would be an awful shame if the effectiveness of the Treaty had to be blunted by opt-outs in order for it to be passed. I would be very happy with declarations but, for example, it would pain me to see Ireland stuck with a permanent commissioner, who would get paid more than 200k a year to carry out a redundant and unnecessary role.

The Charter is also an extremely positive aspect of the Treaty, I hope to God we don't get an opt-out from that one (I don't think we will, since it seems to only be the hardcore Eurosceptics who oppose it). Interesting to see you only see Lisbon as placing the Charter on a "semi treaty footing", johnfás. Care to ellaborate? I believe it gives the Charter "the same legal status as the treaties", which would be a full treaty footing in my mind.

Same legal status but not within the treaty. It was a compromise to the British. Doesn't de facto mean very much but technically it is not within the treaty.

The whole thing doesn't mean alot anyway because the ECJ was already referring to it in its judgements but it is a welcome development and it will make it easier for individual citizens to know and enforce their rights.