Ireland holds vote today that could determine EU's future

Re: Ireland holds vote today that could determine EU's futur

Francis wrote:

BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:
At the moment, this little country is holding a sword over the whole of Europe.

Well, people like these political reporters never learn.

This has been said about the former project of European constitution.

The sword felt and nobody was killed.

It's happening again and, if the Irish vote against the Lisbon treaty, some other solution will be found.

Should I remind that this problem is a no-problem?

EU can live without this treaty. Obviously it would work better with it.

But if there is no treaty, the EU will continue with the current ones..

Eventually another solution, maybe a better one, will be found.

While I generally agree with the point of view expressed by Francis above, I also recognize the likely existence of an underlying political issue as recently expressed by voters in Ireland and earlier by others in France. It is precisely the same issue that led other EU member states to direct the approval of the Lisbon treaty to their legislatures as opposed to their voters in referenda, following the earlier rejection of the then new EU Constitution by French voters.

The underlying issue appears to center on the relative powers of the EU government and national governments. The EU can get on, more or less as it does today, without the Lisbon treaty -- just as Francis says. However, whatever reforms or new powers were contained in the now defunct treaty appear to have become dead letters. Regional and national issues with the much expanded EU government will continue to exist, and will continue to be resolved, or at least managed, by the various organs of the EU government. However, the underlying political tensions that promoted the effort to find a Constitution or at least a codification in the substitute Lisbon Treaty will continue and likely grow.

How all this might evolve is something about which I can only speculate. However, it certainly appears that the result in Ireland is a serious setback for those who advocate greater powers for EU governance.

0 Replies

That's where this quote of Anatole France comes in handy:

Quote:

If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing

0 Replies

Possibly so, but Anatole was speaking about Frenchmen. If 4.5 million Irishmen say a wise thing, it is surely a wise thing. :wink:

0 Replies

Well, it looks like it's not so wise, I mean what the "other" 4.5 million Irish say. :wink:

0 Replies

Re: Ireland holds vote today that could determine EU's futur

georgeob1 wrote:

However, it certainly appears that the result in Ireland is a serious setback for those who advocate greater powers for EU governance.

I don't think this is a setback, it is rather the expected result. Leadership knows that the people are not ready to affirm the next step in EU creation, that putting the measure to popular vote would result in a "no". The problem is that they will not be ready anytime soon, if it is to get done it must be by way of representative democracy process rather than direct democracy process. As far as I know Irish law does not currently support Ireland signing on without direct approval from the masses.

0 Replies

Re: Ireland holds vote today that could determine EU's futur

hawkeye10 wrote:

The problem is that they will not be ready anytime soon, if it is to get done it must be by way of representative democracy process rather than direct democracy process. As far as I know Irish law does not currently support Ireland signing on without direct approval from the masses.

I'm in favour of referanda - but I have quite a lot of concerns when we would be governed by vox populi in every day politics.

0 Replies

Oy the head Irish respresentative is here Laughing

George, in essence what the Irish object to is that about every 4 years
the EU commissioner of each country has to sit out a turn. They're
fear of isolation, that their votes don't count and so on. It's understandable
to have this reservations, however, from a country who has nothing
but benefited from the EU so far, it is hard to swallow, and I am sympathetic
to the Irish.

Now they're talking about a second referendum....

0 Replies

Francis wrote:

Well, it looks like it's not so wise, I mean what the "other" 4.5 million Irish say. :wink:

I suspect you are here referring to their brothers in America.

The truth is I have no ill-feeling towards the EU. I think it has so far been remarkably successful, in many areas far exceeding what most observers believed could reasonably be accomplished just a few decades ago.

However history is not dead, and the regional and national differences that affect Europe (and the rest of the world as well) will have their effect. Moreover the unifying motivation of the previous generation of Europeans may not be so widely shared by its successors. It took America over a decade to proceed from a Confederation to a Constitutional republic, and a subsequent Civil war to test it. I'm not suggesting that is inevitable for Europe, rather that just skirting by it all isn't likely either.

0 Replies

CalamityJane wrote:

Oy the head Irish respresentative is here

George, in essence what the Irish object to is that about every 4 years
the EU commissioner of each country has to sit out a turn. They're
fear of isolation, that their votes don't count and so on. It's understandable
to have this reservations, however, from a country who has nothing
but benefited from the EU so far, it is hard to swallow, and I am sympathetic
to the Irish.

Now they're talking about a second referendum....

OK Elsa, I'll behave !! Cool

The Irish have indeed milked the EU quite well, (and I rue the day in 1991 when I passed by the opportunity to buy the Power family (cousins) estate just east of Dungarvin).

However the local fears & concerns of some Irishmen have their analogues among some Poles - and as we saw a few years ago, among some Frenchmen as well.

0 Replies

Yes, George, even the Dutch declined 2 years ago, and that's why
the new treaty of Lisbon was drafted to appease all nations concerned.
If out of 26 nations only Ireland - who benefited the most so far - declines, what should happen in your opinion?

0 Replies

georgeob1 wrote:

Francis wrote:
Well, it looks like it's not so wise, I mean what the "other" 4.5 million Irish say. :wink:

I suspect you are here referring to their brothers in America.

The truth is I have no ill-feeling towards the EU. I think it has so far been remarkably successful, in many areas far exceeding what most observers believed could reasonably be accomplished just a few decades ago.

However history is not dead, and the regional and national differences that affect Europe (and the rest of the world as well) will have their effect. Moreover the unifying motivation of the previous generation of Europeans may not be so widely shared by its successors. It took America over a decade to proceed from a Confederation to a Constitutional republic, and a subsequent Civil war to test it. I'm not suggesting that is inevitable for Europe, rather that just skirting by it all isn't likely either.

The theory is that current leaders must move as rapidly as possible in creating uniform EU systems, because long term the only way the EU holds together is if the individuals begin to identify as EU citizens more than as national citizens. This will take time, though it is rapidly happening. The younger generations already feel very free to cross national borders for work, and most everybody is now comfortable crossing borders to shop. As with all good leaders EU leaders are more concerned with where the people will be in ten or twenty years then they are about today's popular opinions. This treaty is about the future, and moving towards it. Current resistance is just that, resistance. It must be and it will be overcome.

0 Replies

I agree, the younger generation sees itself very much like EU citizens,
however the ones who sit on an island (GB) Laughing

are a bit stubborn. Just
look at them driving on the left side of the road, weighing everything in
stone and measure up to a yard. They vehemently reject the metric
system while the rest of Europe is conform.

0 Replies

Calamity,

Well, I'm not sure the Irish have benefitted more from the EU than any other member. Clearly it was Germany and France that were the chief beneficiaries in the early years, and I suspect the residue of this is part of the resentment some smaller members have today. Particularly in areas of governance, the domination of Gernamy & France is likely to stimulate resistence among the smaller members: similarly the prospect of the cumulative political power of central Euroipean nations likely had something to do with the earlier reluctance of French voters on the matter.

The hell of it is that the large and small European nations must find a way to share political power in the new EU. These issues haven't been squarely faced yet, but continued progress towards a closer union requires that these issues be faced.

hawkeye 10 wrote:

As with all good leaders EU leaders are more concerned with where the people will be in ten or twenty years then they are about today's popular opinions. This treaty is about the future, and moving towards it. Current resistance is just that, resistance. It must be and it will be overcome.

Sounds like something Louis XIV might have said. What if some of the EU leaders aren't as wise or perceptive as you believe? What if the people in some countries don't believe them?

0 Replies

georgeob1 wrote:

Well, I'm not sure the Irish have benefitted more from the EU than any other member.

Well, you just have to check out how Ireland became the second richest country of EU.

Oh, I just forgot! They are so wise..

But I'm the last to oppose to what they get from EU.

I think that the generalization of wealth in EU is a really good thing for all members..

0 Replies

In the early days France and Germany controlled the EU, but they also paid for most everything. Seems fair enough. I think that everyone is in agreement that as the EU ages control must continue to move towards empowering the rest of the EU citizens. There is no opposition to this view, so the Irish can't claim it as their basis for resisting membership in the EU.

Quote:

Sounds like something Louis XIV might have said. What if some of the EU leaders aren't as wise or perceptive as you believe? What if the people in some countries don't believe them?

You educate the people, you wise them up enough so that they understand that track record matters. EU leaders have done very well in the first 40 years or so to make wise choices, to not trample on individuals or individual nations. The fears are unsupported by the history of the EU nor by the facts, therefore fears and not believing EU leaders is not a justified basis for rejecting EU plans. I understand that some people deeply desire to cling to their national identity, but this can not stand if Europe, and all of the people of Europe, are to prosper. The leaders understand what the citizens need long term better than the people do, and they have proven it.

0 Replies

georgeob1 wrote:

Clearly it was Germany and France that were the chief beneficiaries in the early years, and I suspect the residue of this is part of the resentment some smaller members have today.

Could you please explain this "clearly"?

Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom become members in 1973 - Germany and France were founding members, since 1958.

Quote:

The first EEC budget is very small and covers administrative expenditure exclusively. As the EEC's objectives are translated into policy commitments, the budget grows to implement these, for example through the European Social Fund. The European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) is launched in 1962, and agricultural expenditure soon makes up the majority of the budget. In the early years, financial contributions from each of the six Member States account for the Community's revenue.

History of the budget

0 Replies

Yes George, your concerns are exactly the same as the Irish have,
they feel that their voting power will be diminished with the new treaty.

You know for yourself that if you put 10 people into one room, everyone
will have a different opinion, and it's very hard to arrive at a consensus.
Take 26 countries and it seems impossible, however, I see it as quite
an accomplishment that all nations with the exception of Ireland, have
come to such a consensus, and in my opinion it is would be up to the 25 other nations to convince the Irish, as opposed to going back to the drawing board and revise what's initially a good treaty.

What if the revised treaty is acceptable to the Irish, but all of a sudden
the Italians disagree? There has to be a give-and-take compromise accepted in order to make it work. Sure, Germany and France benefited
early on, yet both countries have contributed enormously thereafter.

0 Replies

listening to my german relatives and friends , most seem to feel that the integration into the E.U. has cheapend the german currency .
they sem to think that the german mark was a stronger currency than the EURO (which they call the TEURO :wink: , meaning the DEAR and EXPENSIVE one).
all i hear is : "we pay and pay ... and the others collect " .
certainly strong pro-european feelings are seldom if ever expressed by them .
hbg

ps. reading canadian commentars , i get the impression that many irish are still against abortion and are worried that a european government would over-rule the irish laws against abortion .

0 Replies

Francis wrote:

georgeob1 wrote:
Well, I'm not sure the Irish have benefitted more from the EU than any other member.

Well, you just have to check out how Ireland became the second richest country of EU.

Oh, I just forgot! They are so wise..

But I'm the last to oppose to what they get from EU.

I think that the generalization of wealth in EU is a really good thing for all members..

Oh I think the Irish themselves had a good deal to do with it. History had left them with no industrial era residue, and they made good use of the relatively pristine conditions there. They had a well-educated, but under employed population, well poised for growth once governmental barriers to development were eliminated. The government made a wise early bet on the IT industry as early as the 1980s and started training centers in Limerick and other areas. Their favorable tax policies with respect to ownership of intellectual property created a cadre of inventive entrepreneurs that benefitted the country handsomely: their favorable corporate tax policies continue the pattern today. Ireland is simply a good place to start a business - and you don't have to give a board seat to the government as in some other EU countries.

I do agree with you that the EU has had a beneficial effect on the generation of wealth throughout the union, and that this is a very good thing for everyone.

0 Replies

hamburger wrote:

ps. reading canadian commentars , i get the impression that many irish are still against abortion and are worried that a european government would over-rule the irish laws against abortion .

Hamburger, Germany had the same problem when East and West were
united. Abortion was legal in East-Germany and prohibited in West-Germany. They had to arrive at a mutually agreed upon solution.

Ireland was also against divorce laws and only has allowed couples to
do so in recent years. Turkey is not part of the EU because of their rigid
law pertaining to womens rights and the death penalty.

Becoming a member of the EU and benefiting from it means to obey
certain conditions and laws the majority of EU nations implemented already 50 years ago.

0 Replies

Ireland holds vote today that could determine EU's future

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know