Poll: Yes or No to the Lisbon Treaty Referendum?

This is both an experimental poll and a sweep of what people's first hand ideas are about the Treaty and its implications. I don't know if there is much scaremongering or truth around the areas of us losing our tax powers over businesses - I think businesses would kick up enough stink here to get a NO vote through if that were the case, unless the tax was going to be forced down but I have a feeling that the consolidated tax thing has little if anything to do with my views of it above.

I also feel the negative talk about the European army is almost pointless though I think the prinicples of striving for a pacifistic world are worth shouting about though I just feel it's pointless as it has no real effect no matter what Ireland says. If there were neutral allies around the world we could link up with against the proliferation and growth of militarism then that would be a thing to shout about in my perspective. As I think about it I feel it IS worth shouting about though I'm not a shouter. If war breaks out then I'm off to Switzerland or hopefully by then I'll have my boat and can anchor off the coast of Madagascar with a fishing rod.

What are your fears and views?

I will vote Yes as I always do on European referendums.

As regards the tax issue, I don't think it is really relevant. In any case, the idea that Ireland should be an Anglo-American tax-haven is the complete antithesis of the ideals of those who fought for our freedom from 1916 onwards.

I don't particularly care about neutrality. I don't want to join NATO but I would have no problem with mutual defence arrangements within the EU. Most neutral countries are much more militaristic than Ireland.

The policy I most detest is the Triple Lock which unilaterally gives other countries a veto over our armed forces. I have no problem with the EU where all countries are on the same level.

Those last two paragraphs are interesting, deGaulle. I'm going to copy them to the Lisbon and Neutrality thread here to push that debate on a little...

I'm don't know at the moment. Still need to do more reading on it.

As I'm an anarchist I wont be voting. I do have an opinion on this topic though (no big surprise )

I don't agree with the Lisbon Treaty/Constitution.

We are being told that this treaty will only have a small effect on our sovereignty, but nobody's said how. That sounds an alarm to me. Let me give an example as to how this will effect our sovereignty. I'm loath to give this particular example as it will seem to argue that I'm not in favour of ending Ireland's facilitation of Extraordinary Rendition. So before I give the example allow me to nail my flag to the mast regarding Rendition. I'm completely against Extraordinary Rendition and our facilitation of it but whilst I admire Dick Marty and the EU Committee set up to investigate Rendition, I see it as our own sovereign responsibility to investigate and punish international and national crimes (don't get me wrong, I believe in handing our criminals over to the Hague). Last month it was announced that Ireland amongst others, had failed to respond to this committee, in regard to supplying more details to do with the coverup. The committee pointed out that countries were not bound by any law to tender these responses. They also said that this would not remain the case once the Lisbon Treaty came into effect. So there's one example, whereby our sovereignty would diminish. We become answerable to a foreign entity, regardless as to whether we wish to answer or not. As I said, this is not the best of examples, as we should have answered to this particular request. However if one extrapolates the possibilities, the conclusion becomes clear. As a sovereign nation, the final buck stops in Ireland, regarding policy (particularly foreign policy) - at least on paper, if not in practice. This ends if the Lisbon Treaty is passed. To destroy any facet of sovereignty is to destroy it in its totality.

One more point. It's strikes me as interesting that the Yes campaign has not pointed to the fact that most 'No' voters would have no issue in taking a case that had failed in the Irish courts, to the Eurpoean courts. I don't for a second believe that this particular argument hasn't been considered. I think the real problem with pushing this particular argument in the faces of the 'no' campaign, would be to raise issues about sovereignty, that would be better left unsaid.

DeGaulle wrote:

I will vote Yes as I always do on European referendums.

As regards the tax issue, I don't think it is really relevant. In any case, the idea that Ireland should be an Anglo-American tax-haven is the complete antithesis of the ideals of those who fought for our freedom from 1916 onwards.

The taxes being paid by British, American and many other countries' companies are crucial in funding our health, education and social welfare systems. If it wasn't for the pro-active campaign to bring foreign direct investment here we'd still be saddled with high unemployment, low productivity, very poor access to international markets and a poor pool of knowledge and intellectual property in this country. British, American and other countries' companies have been enormously beneficial to Ireland and they have been critical in creating the resources we require to tackle social problems and to build an Ireland in which all the children are cherished equally. Our low taxes and reputation as a very congenial place to base HQ operations and so on should be defended to the last.

Quote :

I don't particularly care about neutrality. I don't want to join NATO but I would have no problem with mutual defence arrangements within the EU. Most neutral countries are much more militaristic than Ireland.

Wouldn't that be the case without the Treaty? The CFSP has been in operation for years and the EU seems to be getting on quite well at a defence, security and foreign policy level. The line on Iran was consistent, potentially-disastrous bust-ups with Russia have been avoided and the EU consensus has not been seriously threatened since 2003. Europe seems to have settled well into a consensus with the rest of the world and doesn't need some piece of paper to prove it. Javier Solana is our High Representative, Foreign Minister, Commissioner for External Affairs or whatever and seems to fulfilling the role with dignity and purpose. Why fix it if it ain't broke?

Quote :

The policy I most detest is the Triple Lock which unilaterally gives other countries a veto over our armed forces. I have no problem with the EU where all countries are on the same level.

Fair enough.

Is it safe for me to confess that I was a definite no and am now wavering?

My greatest concern is that Lisbon is a wasted opportunity to really make the EU more amenable to the average European. There should have been, for example, a separation of powers within the Commission - remove from it the sole right to propose legislation (which should be a more 'from the nations/from the people exercise and hence needs a representative from each country). I can't see how it would be easily done considering the current nature of the commission (with a small c) and the commissioners - but the effort would have been worthwhile because I find that the roles are incompatible even if the two institutions are compatible. That would have been radical and welcome - and probably would have negated all the hassle about losing a commissioner.

It would redress what I see as a considerable democratic imbalance and restore faith in an instution of so-called 'unelected beaurocrats.'

I'm not conviced that the Charter of Fundamental Human Rights is all that special. It's not about the general human rights of citizens of EU member states (or EU citizens as I believe we will be after Lisbon) but about the maintenance of human rights while implementing EU legislation. And I'm not sure that those rights are inviolable.

I haven't yet heard an adequate defence of the Lavalle judgement.

The Citizens' Initiative is a sop to democracy because there are no procedures for dealing with petitions - none of which have ever been successful in the history of the EU and its petitions committee.

I don't like the idea of enhanced co-operation because I am fearful of the actions that might be taken under a partial EU banner by countries like Britain and France. I am also conscious of the influence of the arms trade as a lobby group and have my concerns about what exactly will be required of us.

That we are being asked to vote on military issues without a solid debate on militarisation and neutrality in this country, is unfair to the public.

There is no earthly reason why the President should not be elected by citizens of EU member states.

And I'm concerned that the EU Commissioner Mandelson seems to have stepped outside his mandate in his dealings on agriculture in WTO.

My understanding also - and I'm sure ibis will correct me on this, if I'm wrong - is that when legislation is referred back to the Ireland for consideration, this will only be on the basis of subsidiarity. So even if the legislation sucks, the right of reply is only based on the principle of subsidiarity. I know it's not the only right, but the only right returned to Irish representatives who are not MEPs/Ministers/Commissioners.

On a related - but not entirely divorced issue - I'm disappointed that the remit of the Referendum COmmission has been narrowed so that it cannot put forward both sides of the debate.

I don't align myself with any of the No groupings out there at the moment (which is probably pretty obvious from the above...)

That's a start...

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

DeGaulle wrote:

I will vote Yes as I always do on European referendums.

As regards the tax issue, I don't think it is really relevant. In any case, the idea that Ireland should be an Anglo-American tax-haven is the complete antithesis of the ideals of those who fought for our freedom from 1916 onwards.

The taxes being paid by British, American and many other countries' companies are crucial in funding our health, education and social welfare systems. If it wasn't for the pro-active campaign to bring foreign direct investment here we'd still be saddled with high unemployment, low productivity, very poor access to international markets and a poor pool of knowledge and intellectual property in this country. British, American and other countries' companies have been enormously beneficial to Ireland and they have been critical in creating the resources we require to tackle social problems and to build an Ireland in which all the children are cherished equally. Our low taxes and reputation as a very congenial place to base HQ operations and so on should be defended to the last.

I am not arguing that the strategy has not been successful in the past, but surely a low-corporation tax strategy is only appropriate for a relatively poor country. If it is true that we are now a relatively rich country, then surely our economy should have our own multi-national companies.

I am not saying that we should immediately synchronise taxes with the rest of the EU, but we should recognise that the low-corporation tax regime may not always be appropriate. For example, where is the intellectual property in Irish hands? Possibly the low corporation tax rate is actually hindering the development of Irish indigenous companies by making multinational employment more attractive.

Quote :

Quote :

I don't particularly care about neutrality. I don't want to join NATO but I would have no problem with mutual defence arrangements within the EU. Most neutral countries are much more militaristic than Ireland.

Wouldn't that be the case without the Treaty? The CFSP has been in operation for years and the EU seems to be getting on quite well at a defence, security and foreign policy level. The line on Iran was consistent, potentially-disastrous bust-ups with Russia have been avoided and the EU consensus has not been seriously threatened since 2003. Europe seems to have settled well into a consensus with the rest of the world and doesn't need some piece of paper to prove it. Javier Solana is our High Representative, Foreign Minister, Commissioner for External Affairs or whatever and seems to fulfilling the role with dignity and purpose. Why fix it if it ain't broke?

You may well be right. The treaty seems to be more about administrative reform than anything else. But I will vote Yes anyway.

DeGaulle wrote:

I am not arguing that the strategy has not been successful in the past, but surely a low-corporation tax strategy is only appropriate for a relatively poor country. If it is true that we are now a relatively rich country, then surely our economy should have our own multi-national companies.

Well, Switzerland levied a flat federal rate of 8.5% from 1 January 1998. This rate is applicable to all corporations. As well as that tax havens like Luxembourg and Singapore-with 2002 effective tax rates of 1.4 percent and 11.4%, respectively- have also seen dramatic increases in the profitability of U.S. companies domiciled there.

Rich countries can be tax havens too. In fact, small rich nations like Ireland, Luxembourg, Singapore and Switzerland need to be particularly conducive wrt to tax since they lack the industrial core of giant economies of Germany, Britain, France or the US. We need something special to keep industry, and that is low and effective taxes.

Quote :

I am not saying that we should immediately synchronise taxes with the rest of the EU, but we should recognise that the low-corporation tax regime may not always be appropriate. For example, where is the intellectual property in Irish hands? Possibly the low corporation tax rate is actually hindering the development of Irish indigenous companies by making multinational employment more attractive.

Well, I see the MNC sector as the fertiliser of the rest of the economy. Highly skilled, highly productive business leaders are shaped in the corridors of IBM, Google, GSK, Vodafone, BMS, BNY Mellon Ireland and they release their talents to the wider Irish work-force when they leave these MNCs to set up businesses for themselves or go into Irish companies. Take Digital in Galway for example, the 1,000 or so job losses there were seen as a devastating blow back when they were announced. They were in fact entirely the opposite. A whole rank of post-Digital workers were released from that factory and went on to succeed either with their own firms or in other firms in the Galway area. This is the nourishing, transformative effect of MNCs. By bringing them here, we can skill our people with the tasks to take on the world. Low corporate taxes are critical to ensuring that this conveyor belt continues to go forward.

Quote :

Quote :

Quote :

I don't particularly care about neutrality. I don't want to join NATO but I would have no problem with mutual defence arrangements within the EU. Most neutral countries are much more militaristic than Ireland.

Wouldn't that be the case without the Treaty? The CFSP has been in operation for years and the EU seems to be getting on quite well at a defence, security and foreign policy level. The line on Iran was consistent, potentially-disastrous bust-ups with Russia have been avoided and the EU consensus has not been seriously threatened since 2003. Europe seems to have settled well into a consensus with the rest of the world and doesn't need some piece of paper to prove it. Javier Solana is our High Representative, Foreign Minister, Commissioner for External Affairs or whatever and seems to fulfilling the role with dignity and purpose. Why fix it if it ain't broke?

You may well be right. The treaty seems to be more about administrative reform than anything else. But I will vote Yes anyway.

Righteo, it does strike me that this treaty is more legislative legerdemain than anything more substantial.

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

DeGaulle wrote:

I am not arguing that the strategy has not been successful in the past, but surely a low-corporation tax strategy is only appropriate for a relatively poor country. If it is true that we are now a relatively rich country, then surely our economy should have our own multi-national companies.

Well, Switzerland levied a flat federal rate of 8.5% from 1 January 1998. This rate is applicable to all corporations. As well as that tax havens like Luxembourg and Singapore-with 2002 effective tax rates of 1.4 percent and 11.4%, respectively- have also seen dramatic increases in the profitability of U.S. companies domiciled there.

Rich countries can be tax havens too. In fact, small rich nations like Ireland, Luxembourg, Singapore and Switzerland need to be particularly conducive wrt to tax since they lack the industrial core of giant economies of Germany, Britain, France or the US. We need something special to keep industry, and that is low and effective taxes.

Low tax is NOT something special. Any other country in the EU could duplicate it tomorrow.

Also, the decision is be a tax-haven is a fundamentally immoral decision. Suppose a company makes 100 million profit in Germany and 100 million profit in France. The idea that these profits should be transferred to Ireland to avail of our low tax rate is simply wrong. Low corporation tax was introduced to encourage development when we were a poor country, lacking in employment and industry. As such, it had a moral basis. The idea that we should essentially become a money-laundering operation for multinational companies is completely immoral.

Imagine an ideal EU. All member countries would be reasonably prosperous, with good public services. Is it really possible for such an ideal EU to exist if one country is essentially scavenging on the tax-take of the others? Essentially, an ideal EU will mean relatively similar tax rates in all countries.

There is also a cultural perspective to this. To become a tax-haven is to become an economy, not a country. To be a country is to have our own industries and to deal with our own strengths and weaknesses. To be a tax-haven is to fatten ourselves on the work of others, and to become a barren, soulless wasteland.

There's a lot of truth in what you say there, deGaulle.

Certainly if the farmers are to be believed then we are at risk of seeing our ag industry decimated under WTO, despite the fact that we have such fantastic natural resources here. Fishing is dying and sugar, which we couldn't produce viably here now costs 20% more in the shops than it did when we could produce it.

There are also several other countries who have lower corporation tax than us - it's not our USP, nor should it be.

I'd disagree with this point though;

Quote :

Essentially, an ideal EU will mean relatively similar tax rates in all countries.

Essentially an ideal EU would mean individual tax rates in each country according to their needs and conditions. Taxation cannot be a one-size-fits- all garment.

Kate P wrote:

There's a lot of truth in what you say there, deGaulle.

Certainly if the farmers are to be believed then we are at risk of seeing our ag industry decimated under WTO, despite the fact that we have such fantastic natural resources here. Fishing is dying and sugar, which we couldn't produce viably here now costs 20% more in the shops than it did when we could produce it.

There are also several other countries who have lower corporation tax than us - it's not our USP, nor should it be.

I'd disagree with this point though;

Quote :

Essentially, an ideal EU will mean relatively similar tax rates in all countries.

Essentially an ideal EU would mean individual tax rates in each country according to their needs and conditions. Taxation cannot be a one-size-fits- all garment.

I suppose what I am saying is that you cannot have a tax-haven within the EU, and that, as the economies of the EU states tend to converge, that their tax rates would naturally tend to converge also.

Given that food prices are rising rapidly, it is difficult to believe that the farmers have genuine problems at the moment. If we were still producing sugar, I doubt if it would affect the price in the shop.

I'm voting yes, as I've always done on the European referenda. I
am in favour of the main provisions and support the idea of a United
States of Europe as a social democrat counterpoint to
America.
I fully believe in subsidarity, where decisions are taken at the lowest
possible level, and that includes fiscal policy at National Parliament
level. Nothing I've read so far indicates a threat to that
position.

You know it's not the commonly admitted-to view that voting yes gives a mandate to a United States of Europe...

I've changed my mind I'm voting Yes - what is the likes of me going to lose anyway up or down? If it brings more efficiency and more democracy which it seems to be doing because the Commissioners are going to get shoved out in favour of more elected fellas then that suits my ideas.

That's if I vote...

Well, I have to say my corporatoion tax fears got put to rest today on P.ie.

Although it was on a 'look but can't touch' basis .

ibis must be knackered after the goings on there today.

He's the fiercest yes warrior there is along with edo and mmclo.... I'd nearly vote yes out of sympathy for his efforts

we don't lose our ability over the corpo tax, do we?

Apparently not. NotDevsSon tore the britches off FT today with two European Court judgements which clearly pointed out that tax affairs don't fall into the unfair competition bracket...

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

Apparently not. NotDevsSon tore the britches off FT today with two European Court judgements which clearly pointed out that tax affairs don't fall into the unfair competition bracket...

We'd have definitely heard about it popularly if our tax powers were going to get removed from us .. FT and DC share a lot of opinions don't they .. ?

cactus flower wrote:

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

Apparently not. NotDevsSon tore the britches off FT today with two European Court judgements which clearly pointed out that tax affairs don't fall into the unfair competition bracket...

Oh balls. What did I do ?

Was that your thread CF ? I only go over there every second day now, and the Lisbon thingy has gone mad.

My apologies if I misrepresented.

Auditor #9 wrote:

He's the fiercest yes warrior there is along with edo and mmclo.... I'd nearly vote yes out of sympathy for his efforts

we don't lose our ability over the corpo tax, do we?

No - God No - Actually you will see on another thread started by Ard that there are 2 large British corporations announcing their move to Ireland for tax reasons in the last 3 weeks - this happens all the time - unless Sinn Fein take over the government our tax rates will not change in regard to corporate taxation - a complete non-runner. As thick as I think FF can be at times - on Europe to give Bertie his credit - they have done a great job and have protected our interests to the last.

Ibis, fair fucks to him - I dont know how he does it - I have to stick my head in the freezer after debating with some of the No boys who are multiplying faster than rabbits on esctasy over there. Its the same ole arguements rerun again and again and again.

I totally respect anybody who is against the treaty for sound reasons - they feel its a step too far and like me mum have voted against it since we joined - thats fair enough - but to say everything was dandy up to now and now this treaty - easily the most stationery and most pro democratic since we joined - will push us over the edge in something terrible - well I dont know.

I've been canvassing over the weekend and there is so much misinformation out there - FF and the Gov have to got to get the finger out and really engage - I'm thinking about proposing a ceasefire between ourselves and FF and Lab in DSE at the next meet up this week -The pro-treaty troops have to show a serious united front to the electorate and emphasis how important this is - if it comes down to me and Chris Andrews on the same doorstep - so be it - this is far more important than domestic squables -this will be a fight to the death - its 50/50 in my opinion whether this treaty will pass. Sourer economic times , the immigration into the country over the last 4 years, and need for a scapegoat in the party hangover period looks like many folks want to give the Gov a good kick in the goolies without toppling the gov in the process - its France 2005 all over again.

Thats me for tonite - Im going to need therapy by the time this referendum campaign is over!

Jaysus it sounds like there's skin and hair flying on p.ie.

Of course if we vote No we'll get another shot in a few months again.

Edo wrote:

Auditor #9 wrote:

He's the fiercest yes warrior there is along with edo and mmclo.... I'd nearly vote yes out of sympathy for his efforts

we don't lose our ability over the corpo tax, do we?

No - God No - Actually you will see on another thread started by Ard that there are 2 large British corporations announcing their move to Ireland for tax reasons in the last 3 weeks - this happens all the time - unless Sinn Fein take over the government our tax rates will not change in regard to corporate taxation - a complete non-runner. As thick as I think FF can be at times - on Europe to give Bertie his credit - they have done a great job and have protected our interests to the last.

Ibis, fair fucks to him - I dont know how he does it - I have to stick my head in the freezer after debating with some of the No boys who are multiplying faster than rabbits on esctasy over there. Its the same ole arguements rerun again and again and again.

I totally respect anybody who is against the treaty for sound reasons - they feel its a step too far and like me mum have voted against it since we joined - thats fair enough - but to say everything was dandy up to now and now this treaty - easily the most stationery and most pro democratic since we joined - will push us over the edge in something terrible - well I dont know.

I've been canvassing over the weekend and there is so much misinformation out there - FF and the Gov have to got to get the finger out and really engage - I'm thinking about proposing a ceasefire between ourselves and FF and Lab in DSE at the next meet up this week -The pro-treaty troops have to show a serious united front to the electorate and emphasis how important this is - if it comes down to me and Chris Andrews on the same doorstep - so be it - this is far more important than domestic squables -this will be a fight to the death - its 50/50 in my opinion whether this treaty will pass. Sourer economic times , the immigration into the country over the last 4 years, and need for a scapegoat in the party hangover period looks like many folks want to give the Gov a good kick in the goolies without toppling the gov in the process - its France 2005 all over again.

Thats me for tonite - Im going to need therapy by the time this referendum campaign is over!

Thanks for that post Edo.

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

Apparently not. NotDevsSon tore the britches off FT today with two European Court judgements which clearly pointed out that tax affairs don't fall into the unfair competition bracket...

Oh balls. What did I do ?

Was that your thread CF ? I only go over there every second day now, and the Lisbon thingy has gone mad.

My apologies if I misrepresented.

No EVO - it was only the britches ripping caused my blushes.