What the Mainlanders are saying

arnaudherve wrote:

French conservative paper Le Figaro says today that it is important to ratify the treaty before the European elections, so that the French will have more MEPs in the European Parliament.

74 against 72 now. This is all becoming nonsense. The European Parliament was not supposed to be the place to represent national interests.

Ibis wrote:

Well, to be fair, he's representing the will of his people - they voted Yes at referendum to the EUC, by a margin of eight and a half million.

To be fair, what is illegal is illegal. It is states that ratify treaties. Accepting the numbers in population as a political justification may cause serious threats to the stability of the EU.

It's not a justification for anything except Zapatero being bolshie - which is what I said.

The Economist today writes against the Lisbon treaty.

I wish these guys would stop saying we were 'offered' a referendum, as if it was some kind of magnanimous gesture by an omnipotent government.
We had a referendum as a constitutional right, and our elected government were duty bound to organise it.

This thread on P.ie is about an article in the Telegraph in England by Ambrose and it refers to The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and how Gordon Brown's government could be breaking the law by ratifying the Treaty and thus breaking this International Treaties Law.
http://www.politics.ie/viewtopic.php?f=172&t=37495

The Economist article talks about Democracy again - is this really what the underlying reason is for the rejections - the paucity of democratic change? (although it's true that the Seanad get more of a say in Europe because of this Treaty I believe)

Quote :

Democracy and efficiency don't always go together

Every part of EU leaders' three-stage response is wrong-headed. The Irish rejection of the treaty is a
setback, certainly. But in the days after the vote, the Brussels machinery has acted normally, approving mergers, looking into state-aid cases, holding meetings and passing directives. The claim that an
expanded EU of 27 countries cannot function without Lisbon is simply not true. Indeed, several academic studies have found that the enlarged EU has worked more efficiently than before. Besides, it is not always desirable to speed up decision-making: democracy usually operates by slowing it down. And many of the institutional reforms in the Lisbon treaty would not have taken effect until 2014 or 2017 in any case.

For the record, Mary Lou McDonald was on Prime Time last night with a French Green and the Green was scoffing at the notion of renogotiation and the current dead Treaty which Mary Lou was firm on. Good on her.

This blog refers to a recent poll that says the Dutch would again reject the Treaty if the were asked - 54% against.
http://crossroads.journalismcentre.com/2008/poll-dutch-would-also-reject-eu-treaty/

The Economist I think is speaking for Merrie Olde England.

I would like to hear from some of the left - have the CAUEC said anything I wonder? Or the Trade Unions?

CAUEC were full of fire before the Referendum - where are they now? The only bit I found immediately in google was the indymedia article posted here last week by Aragon -
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/87981?comment_order=asc

Are these socialists only good for saying NO ?

Quote from the above:

Quote :

Government spokesmen have told us we need to consider how we can “move forward” after this result. For once, we agree with them – in Ireland, the Left which opposes militarism and neo-liberal attacks on the working class needs to ask how we can build on this victory. We have to set about constructing a new radical force, broader than any of the existing groups, that can mobilise people in communities and work-places all over Ireland to fight for an alternative to the status quo. The Irish Socialist Network will play its part in building that alternative.

I see that they are having a meeting on tomorrow night in Dublin. It would be good if someone from CAUEC would start a thread on what they see as the way forward here and on P.ie (and other boards).

Link to the tele-poll on voter motives, intentions and expectations .

Media watchers might be interested to compare the actual poll report to the spin put on it in the Independent last Tuesday and elsewhere.

It's gone - damn eurocrats!

Wow!

Well am glad I saved it then .

Can you host it somewhere ?

Is it cached here in html ?

CACHE

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

Can you host it somewhere ?

My place Saturday night.

BYOB.

(Not really up on this modern techie Hosting thing alas...always open to learning new things though.)

You have to skip about 7 ad pages though

Auditor #9 wrote:

You have to skip about 7 ad pages though

I tried it, and was sold 5,000 dollars worth of lazer hair removal. Thanks Audi.

cactus flower wrote:

Auditor #9 wrote:

You have to skip about 7 ad pages though

I tried it, and was sold 5,000 dollars worth of lazer hair removal. Thanks Audi.

Is it up then, or are you emailing it to me ?

News at one - Sarkozy and Mandelson are at each other about this now ...

cactus flower wrote:

Auditor #9 wrote:

You have to skip about 7 ad pages though

I tried it, and was sold 5,000 dollars worth of lazer hair removal. Thanks Audi.

And special thanks to EVM for a truly valuable public service in putting this report back into the public gaze.

Auditor #9 wrote:

News at one - Sarkozy and Mandelson are at each other about this now ...

Gordon Brown's Government have had to hold up ratification until a judicial decision is given next week - the judge doesn't sound too happy with being ignored by government. The case is based on the Treaty being essentially the same document as the Constitution, for which a Referendum was required.

Britain’s final ratification of the EU’s Lisbon Treaty will not take place until after the British High Court rules on a legal bid to force a referendum, British prime minister Gordon Brown said today.
High Court judge Lord Justice Richards today said he was “very surprised” that ministers appeared to be planning to press ahead with ratification before he handed down his ruling next week.
He called on the British government to delay ratification until ministers had heard his decision on the application by eurosceptic millionaire Stuart Wheeler to have the decision not to put the Treaty to a public vote ruled unlawful.
If ministers declined to issue such an assurance, the judge said he would be ready to hear an application from Mr Wheeler for an injunction to prevent ratification (Breaking News .ie today).

Oooohhh. That's very interesting.

Tis interesting for sure - politicians are mad to shove this thing through it seems, regardless of Stuart Wheeler, the Raymond Crotty of Britain

Quote :

High Court judge Lord Justice Richards today said he was “very surprised” that ministers appeared to be planning to press ahead with ratification before he handed down his ruling next week.

He called on the British government to delay ratification until ministers had heard his decision on the application by eurosceptic millionaire Stuart Wheeler to have the decision not to put the Treaty to a public vote ruled unlawful.

plus Sarkcrowzy has insulted the irish too, the bollox http://www.politics.ie/viewtopic.php?f=77&t=37527

Personally, I took it as a compliment

The Economist's Europe cover is priceless:

I read the lead article - which doesn't say an awful lot that's new or terribly informative. Which only goes to prove that the level of debate and discussion of the treaty has been far higher than the fairly superficial gloss that it merits in this publication. But then we knew that already too. A bit of a non-report, really.

This page with that article also links to Libertas.