Democracy denied

With the debate on the Lisbon Treaty entering its last week in the 26 counties ahead of the referendum on 12th June, CAEUC will be holding a public meeting in Belfast on what it all means for people in the 6 counties and the denial of any voice by the British Government.

Conway Mill Education Centre, Belfast at 7pm on Monday June 9th.

Main Speakers:

Bairbre de Brún (Sinn Féin)
Daithí Mac An Mhaistír (éirígí)
Alban Maginness (SDLP)
Christopher Stalford (DUP)

Chaired by Roger Cole of the CAEUC.

UPDATE: Cllr Christopher Stalford will also be at the meeting representing the DUP.

  • You should have invited one of us from a pro-referendum, pro-treaty POV Mark.

  • Mark McGregor

    Sammy,

    Do you mean the SDLP voted against a referendum at Westminister (I didn’t follow it)? Because they are certainly pro-Treaty. The people named are ‘main speakers’ and I’m sure if you think you have an important or distinct position you’ll avail of the opportunity to be heard from the floor.

  • slug

    That is not a very cross community gathering. You might have invited a nonnationalist?

  • Turgon

    Mark,
    I hope you are enjoying the irony of people like me willing you lot to defeat the constitution which is not a constitution in a country which we do not wish to be a part of.

  • Jer

    sounds like an interesting session. Please do a report on how it goes.

  • Mark McGregor

    Slug,

    The issue is Lisbon. ‘Community’ doesn’t come into it, for and against comes into it both of which are given space. If people think there is a particular Unionist perspective on either Yes or No they should feel free to articulate it from the floor.

  • Ahem

    Presumably Mark would allow Dogs and the Chinese to enter? But all the same, a bracing vision of the Ireland of Equals held out in front of us (unionists).

  • Mark McGregor

    Clearly the term ‘public meeting’ means something entirely different to some Unionists.

    The only sides to this debate are Yes and No. Both are represented even though the meeting is organised by a No Coalition group, the CAEUC.

    There isn’t a Prod and Catholic debate on this, its a non-sectarian issue.

    If Unionists wish to make a contributon they are welcome to attend and do it from the floor like the wealth of other groups not represented on the platform.

  • Wilde Rover

    Slug,

    “That is not a very cross community gathering. You might have invited a nonnationalist?”

    You mean someone who doesn’t believe in the nation state as a form of government? Isn’t that why the pro-constitution SDLP are there?

    Or perhaps I have missed an anti-Union wing of unionism that has been skulking in the background, waiting to implode under the weight of its own contradictions.

  • Mark McGregor

    Folks,

    A clarification:

    The DUP were contacted and invited (they never responded), and Daithi (the éirígí contributor) had also suggested the PUP might be interested in contributing.

    So it seems as well as being welcome at an open meeting, Unionism was also offered a place on the platform.

  • Turgon

    Sorry to drag this back to Europe but I oppose the treaty. My opposition is not to Europe per se but to the ever increasing power of unelected unaccountable officials who cannot even have their accounts signed of. I am no economist but cannot believe one interest rate is appropriate for an area as diverse as Europe.

    I am not interested in little Englander anti Europeanism but more that of Tony Benn. The biggest problem seems to be that a democratically elected government of any country can have its wishes arbitrarily stopped because unelected European officials object and the only option seems to be the nuclear one of leaving Europe.

    Weird as I find it I wish those opposed to the constitution well. If by some chance the RoI threw out the treaty I would be delighted. I know you would all then laugh at me but I would not care on this one.

    Good luck Mark et al. (except of course as a fundamentalist Prod I do not believe in luck). And no I personally do not think Europe is necessarily the anti Christ state mentioned in Revelation. But I suspect few slugger regulars expected to see me wishing Mark McGregor well on a political campaign.

  • ggn

    Very good FF vs. SF debate on the Lisbon treaty in this months nos* – http://www.nosmag.com/eagrain/eagrain.html

  • Mark McGregor

    Turgon,

    I’m sorry to have to raise this but SF are the largest party/group involved in the No campaign and while much of their campaign seems to be more focused on saving a very shakey seat for MaryLou in 2009 (and I’d bet against her) than an absoute focus on the job at hand, you still need to hope SF’s damaged 26 county machine helps achieve a TUV hope. Funny old world.

  • Poll out tonight with no side ahead 35-30.

  • PaddyReilly

    And no I personally do not think Europe is necessarily the anti Christ state mentioned in Revelation.

    A foolish and heretical view. Get the truth here:-

    http://www.johnoconnell.org/

  • Mark McGregor

    That’s confirmed as the Irish Times poll stats:

    Yes 30 (-5) No 35 (+12)

    Massive shift in the undecideds to NO but its only a poll.

  • Henry94

    Mark

    It’s the polls catching up with what the politicians are hearing at the doors.

    There’s a poll in the Business Post on Sunday too. It should pick up the same trend.

  • Yes but I hear there’s also a Sunday Independent poll on the way aswell. One thing that causes me concern is that it seems to be another one of their telephone polls. If that is true, it could be one of their recent way-off polls of just 500 people, compared to 1000+ for TNS-MRBI in the Irish Times and Red C in the Sunday Business Post. Remember that the Sunday Indo poll a few weeks ago only had SF on 2% down here, compared to around 9% in later polls by the others. They are a pro-Lisbon outfit, so I hope temptation doesnt get the better of them. 😉

  • Wilde Rover

    Turgon,

    “I hope you are enjoying the irony of people like me willing you lot to defeat the constitution which is not a constitution in a country which we do not wish to be a part of.”

    Yes, but considering all the bitter irony floating around it’s good to have a little of the sweet variety.

    “Sorry to drag this back to Europe but I oppose the treaty. My opposition is not to Europe per se but to the ever increasing power of unelected unaccountable officials who cannot even have their accounts signed of. I am no economist but cannot believe one interest rate is appropriate for an area as diverse as Europe.

    I am not interested in little Englander anti Europeanism but more that of Tony Benn. The biggest problem seems to be that a democratically elected government of any country can have its wishes arbitrarily stopped because unelected European officials object and the only option seems to be the nuclear one of leaving Europe.”

    The true irony here is that this is quite possibly the best, and certainly pithiest, plea for the citizens of the Republic of Ireland, on behalf of the citizens of the EU, to vote No that I have seen, politics.ie included.

    Deciding the future of Europe is a heavy burden. The French and the Dutch were not allowed another crack at the whip and if there is a No vote then it seems the electorate owes the people of Europe the courtesy of saying, upon being asked a second time for a second time, “Do I fucking stutter? I said No.”

  • Mark McGregor

    Entry updated. The DUP have agreed a speaker.