Republic poised between Yes and No..

Hugh Green’s flip flop [perhaps.. – Ed] seems indicative of the way the Lisbon debate is going. Some people simply not voting yes because of the high handed manner in which they’ve been lectured to. Now, after a coherent week of campaigning (whilst we were fretting over a manufactured crisis), he’s changed his mind. And that’s the way the money is going too. Paddy Power is giving 2/1 on a No vote and Betfair 9/4. But according to Ruth Dudley Edwards, it’s really a class thing. If the middle classes are getting minded to vote, then it could be all over for the Noes.

, , ,

  • Wilde Rover

    So, according to Ruth Dudley Edwards if there is a no vote then it would be because the proles turned up but the middle classes didn’t?

    Is there any evidence to back up this claim? There are people from a middle class background I know that I had pegged for Yes that have turned out to be solidly No.

  • Mick Fealty

    I think she means trends WR… I’ve spoken to people on both sides of the argument, and they seem to agree with her, on that point at least…

  • RepublicanStones

    Don’t forget the weather Mick…..such is the electorates laissez-faire attitude to elections/referendums etc, it could be a powerful variable in deciding who is victorious.

  • Oilifear

    From the Irish Times/MRBI poll of 5th June: “The poll showed that farmers are opposed to the Treaty by 34 per cent to 31 per cent. The No majority among working class C2DE voters … the Yes campaign is only ahead among better off ABC1 voters.”

    That said, I think she’s getting ahead of herself when she says that, “it’s largely a class thing.” ABC1 covers “the posh” (A), but also a whole raft of those who are “in fear of bad times” (BC1) (see NRS social grade).

    Unfortunately, being three days late to register (I was outside of the country until recently), I will not be taking part in the most important referendum in Ireland since 1937, or even the election of 1919.

  • I have to say I didn’t read Hugh Green’s second post as changing his mind so much as taking the michael.

  • I predict a no vote. The bookies are basing their odds probably on betting-patterns, but I have been informed of a number of them refusing to take bets on a no vote, suggesting to me that something sus is going on. The FF/FG millionaires are doing their bit trying to rig the odds. I believe a huge shock is on the cards on Friday, unless people were fooled by yesterday’s scaremongering on the frontpage of the Irish Independent falsely warning that unemployment will grow even more if we vote no. It fell in Holland to 2% while FDI in France doubled. I will not be fooled.

    I voted yes to the other treaties but am angry about the govt’s refusal to regulate immigration from Eastern Europe and its support for Turkish EU entry. A lot of people are voting no because of immigration, which I believe will come out on Liveline and other radio phone-ins after this vote. Historically the no vote has always been greatly understated in Irish EU polls.

  • Oilifear

    “… yesterday’s scaremongering on the frontpage of the Irish Independent falsely warning that unemployment will grow even more if we vote no. It fell in Holland to 2% while FDI in France doubled. I will not be fooled.”

    Remind me again … the French and Dutch referedums were in 2005, yes? Credit crunch. Oil crisis. Recession in the USA. 0% growth predictions. Golly, you must keep up with the news under that rock of yours.

    “I voted yes to the other treaties but am angry about the govt’s refusal to regulate immigration from Eastern Europe and its support for Turkish EU entry. A lot of people are voting no because of immigration, which I believe will come out on Liveline and other radio phone-ins after this vote.”

    Oh … so you and others are voting ‘no’ for issues outside of and unaffected by the outcome of this referendum. Clever.

    Please, don’t leave your rock today.

  • Suilven

    @ Brian Boru

    Ah yes, those damned economic immigrants. Maybe the USA from the mid-1800s onwards and the UK after partition should have been more choosy as well, eh?

  • BfB

    Sul..

    mid-1800s to ‘6os = USA ‘MIGRANTS’..hard working, law abiding, assimilating, learning the language…

    After 60s = ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS, identity theft, no respect for law, welfare cheats, drug runners, refusal to assimilate…. these are the chaps the euww want to get to Ireland…

    Vote NO..

  • Dave

    Oilifear, you are making assumptions that are conspicuously devoid of the supporting evidence. If you assertion is that those factors when combined with a ‘No’ vote will lead to increased unemployment, then make your case.

    Indeed, if you are arguing that temporary economic factors are a valid reason to transfer more national sovereignty to the EU on what is a de facto irreversible basis, then I am relieved that you missed your deadline for registering to vote and must stay under your own rock today.

    Suilven, no country supports uncontrolled immigration, least of all the UK and the USA (which is booting out the illegal Irish and has a physical barrier between itself and Mexico to keep the immigrants out). Indeed, even the EU (which uses immigration as a tool to engineer the homogeneity it requires to harmonise its member states into a de facto unified entity in preparation for de jure unity) recognises that it is forced by political expediency to impose an upper limit of 10%. Small states can be overwhelmed by large numbers of people flooding in from poorer countries, with their social infrastructure – health case, schools, unemployment benefits, etc – unable to cope with the sudden increase in demand. In Ireland, illegal and unregistered immigration means that the actual figure for immigrants is twice the size of the official figure (which is an increase in population size that is unprecedented) as recorded in the census. Only Ireland, the UK and Sweden fully open their doors to accept immigrants from the eight Eastern European countries that joined the EU in 2004. The UK expected 15,000, and it got 500,000. The UK wisely decided to reverse its earlier policy and to impose limits. Irish politicians are too chickenshit – scared by the brainwashed liberal dolts who will squeal at them via the pages of The Irish Times – to impose limits, thereby creating a serious problem which we are all going to have to deal with in the years ahead.

  • Oilifear

    “mid-1800s to ‘6os = USA ‘MIGRANTS’..hard working, law abiding, assimilating, learning the language..”

    Except by all accounts the Irish ones!! Never mind the 19th and early 20th century anti-immigrant riots in New York, Boston, Phillidelipha, Orlando, etc. etc. in which the main buring (and I do mean quite literally ‘burning’) issue was that immigrants were percieved as anything but hard-working, law-abiding, assimilating or learning the language.

    What, however, has any of this got to do with Lisbon? This issue was to be debated and resolved 1986. Lisbon has no effect on it what-so-ever.

    It seems your understanding of Lisbon is about as great as your knowledge of American history.

  • Oilifear

    Dave,

    I was responding your recycled argument from Libertas, apparantly about how positive a ‘No’ vote would be (“[Unemployment] fell in Holland to 2% while FDI in France doubled [after a ‘No’ result there].”) That was three years ago, before the current internatal turbulence, and there is no reason to fix the cause of them to the ‘no’ results.

    As for the merits of the Indo’s “scaremongering” (of which there is plenty from the ‘no’ camp too you will agree), no-one can really tell – and what we are being asked to vote on is too long-term in its nature to crouch our decisions in temporary economic pros or cons – but you will agree that further turbulence and uncertainty is not what is needed. A ‘no’ result would add to uncertainty and turbulence.

    With regard to your answer to Suilven, would you mind answering my comment on the matter? What effect would a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ result have on immigration/migration since all of the woes you cry of already exist? Thay have nothing to do with Lisbon. (Or are you maybe secretly hoping the Indo is right and that a rise in unemployment arising from a ‘no’ result would lead to a decrease in inward migration?)

  • Dave

    “I was responding your recycled argument from Libertas, apparantly about how positive a ‘No’ vote would be (“[Unemployment] fell in Holland to 2% while FDI in France doubled [after a ‘No’ result there].”) That was three years ago, before the current internatal turbulence, and there is no reason to fix the cause of them to the ‘no’ results.”

    Then perhaps you should address the moniker that made that argument rather than the one that didn’t?

    “As for the merits of the Indo’s “scaremongering” (of which there is plenty from the ‘no’ camp too you will agree), no-one can really tell – and what we are being asked to vote on is too long-term in its nature to crouch our decisions in temporary economic pros or cons – but you will agree that further turbulence and uncertainty is not what is needed. A ‘no’ result would add to uncertainty and turbulence.”

    This is asinine hogwash. No sane person makes a decision about the long-term future of his country based on short-term expediencies that are nothing more temporary turbulence and pure speculation on the part of hacks. Indeed, if economic stability is your sole concern, then why create that economic stability by proposing the treaty? Surely, by your own feeble logic, this is wanton recklessness by the EU – the type that we must prevent the EU from engaging in future by the simple expedient of disbanding it.

    If economic stability is your sole concern, then what role does the Court of Justice have in promoting it? How is it best advanced by giving EU law primacy over Irish law? Why is economic stability best advanced rotating the EU Presidency among only three member states, excluding all the others? How is Ireland’s economic stability advanced by giving the EU exclusive competence over common commercial policy, removing the authority of the IDA in promoting DFI in Ireland, something that the IDA has been extremely successful at? How is Ireland’s economic stability advanced by tax harmonisation when the CCTB will mean that a portion of tax on goods sold within the EU is paid in the country where they are exported instead of the country that exports them resulting in a shortfall of tax revenue for the Irish government that can only be compensated for by upward mobility in the rate of corporation tax, thereby rendering the governments oft-touted veto null and void and forcing tax harmonisation upon us? How is Ireland’s economic stability advanced when one of Ireland’s most senior economists, Professor Ray Kinsella, has said that this will result in tens of thousands of job losses as companies that were attracted here by the IDA and by our competitive tax rate cut and run to lower wage economies within the EU post-harmonisation? How is Ireland’s economic stability advanced by giving sovereignty to the EU is cultural matters that have fuck all to do with the economy?

    “With regard to your answer to Suilven, would you mind answering my comment on the matter? What effect would a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ result have on immigration/migration since all of the woes you cry of already exist? Thay have nothing to do with Lisbon. (Or are you maybe secretly hoping the Indo is right and that a rise in unemployment arising from a ‘no’ result would lead to a decrease in inward migration?)”

    It’s quite simple: we need to retain our sovereignty over our internal affairs, not concede that sovereignty to the EU. The EU already has competence over the immigration policy of member states that it has no business interfering in. If we support this treaty, we will be past the point of no return toward EU integration of its member states into one new nation state. I will be voting ‘No’ because I have no fucking intention of abandoning my right as a citizen of the nation state of Ireland to determine my own affairs in solidarity with my fellow countrymen from democracy and the principle of self-determination. I will not put the interest of other nation states before the interests of my own nation state. I want to see the EU disbanded and returned to first principles and will do what little I can toward that goal.

    Now, quisling child, perhaps you will tell me what effect that voting Yes to giving the EU sovereignty over cultural affairs of Ireland will have on economic stability? Or will you have to grasp against your quisling mentality that this power grab by the EU has fuck all to do with improving it and everything to do with using the pretext of the need for reform as an excuse to grab more sovereignty from member states?

  • Dave

    Typo: “Indeed, if economic stability is your sole concern, then why create that economic [b]in[/b]stability by proposing the treaty? Surely, by your own feeble logic, this is wanton recklessness by the EU – the type that we must prevent the EU from engaging in [b]in the[/b]future by the simple expedient of disbanding it. “

  • Dave: Ray Kinsella is a member of Opus Dei. has that any bearing? Where do Opus dei stand on this?
    Who gets all those plum do no work Euro jobs anyway? I new one Labour Party hack who made $$$$$ out if it. Prionsias de Rossa, who was never in OIRA, has done well too. Not like poor Sean garland. How did his case end up?

  • foreign correspondent

    Anyone know who qualifies to vote in the referendum? Is it only Irish nationals residing in the Republic?

  • Oscail do shúile

    So disappointed this started by discussing in serious terms something spouted by Ruth Dudley-Edwards. I see that RTE are backing the yes campaign also:

    http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0610/lisbonscenarios.html

    Something offered as a benefit of this treaty is the possibility that government representatives of nation states will be given more of a say in more decisions. I don’t know about anyone else, but the thought of any of the Leinster House parties, bar Sinn Fáin, and especially the FF ‘shower’ currently in government being given more power to make decisions for Ireland in Europe I find a bit disturbing… I know, I know, democracy sucks etc. But this is the crowd that likes to GIVE away our natural resources to faceless foreign corporations!

  • Oscail do shúile

    So disappointed this started by discussing in serious terms something spouted by Ruth Dudley-Edwards. I see that RTE are backing the yes campaign also:

    http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0610/lisbonscenarios.html

    Something offered as a benefit of this treaty is the possibility that government representatives of nation states will be given more of a say in more decisions. I don’t know about anyone else, but the thought of any of the Leinster House parties, bar Sinn Féin, and especially the FF ‘shower’ currently in government being given more power to make decisions for Ireland in Europe I find a bit disturbing… I know, I know, democracy sucks etc. But this is the crowd that likes to GIVE away our natural resources to faceless foreign corporations!

  • “Members of the Poor Clares community of sisters based in Ennis cast their votes after morning prayers, one of the few occasions on which they leave their enclosed community.”

    Let’s hope the Poor Clares set the right example. Ulster Ireland says No.

  • Oilifear

    “Then perhaps you should address the moniker that made that argument rather than the one that didn’t?”

    Apologies, it was Brian Boru that recycled that particular falacy.

    “This is asinine hogwash. No sane person makes a decision about the long-term future of his country based on short-term expediencies that are nothing more temporary turbulence…”

    As I wrote: “what we are being asked to vote on is too long-term in its nature to crouch our decisions in temporary economic pros or cons”.

    —-

    Moving on to your rant:

    * “giving the EU exclusive competence over common commercial policy” – not a part of Lisbon, happend long ago

    * CCTB – not a part of Lisbon (ragardless of what scare-mongering muck Libertas expell about enhanced-cooperation)

    * Ray Kinsella/EU post-harmonisation – not a part of Lisbon

    * “It’s quite simple: we need to retain our sovereignty over our internal affairs …” – not a part of Lisbon, happened year ago

    “Now, quisling child, perhaps you will tell me what effect that voting Yes to giving the EU sovereignty over cultural affairs of Ireland will have on economic stability?”

    Voting yes will not give the EU sovereignty over cultural affairs of Ireland. Cultural affairs will be a supplementary competence of the EU (i.e. exclusive to national parliaments but the EU may assist).

    “…will you have to grasp against your quisling mentality that this power grab by the EU has fuck all to do with improving it …”

    Lisbon give few (argumable no) new competencies to the EU. The “power grab” happened years ago as you slept. Lisbon just makes it more clear.

    Below is a recap of the competencies of the EU, since have clearly been mal-informed about exactly what is and what isn’t a competence of the EU. None of these are new.

    Exclusive competence:

    (a) customs union;
    (b) the establishing of the competition rules necessary for the functioning of the
    internal market;
    (c) monetary policy for the Member States whose currency is the euro;
    (d) the conservation of marine biological resources under the common fisheries
    policy;
    (e) common commercial policy.

    Shared competence (i.e. shared with national parliaments):

    (a) internal market;
    (b) social policy, for the aspects defined in this Treaty;
    (c) economic, social and territorial cohesion;
    (d) agriculture and fisheries, excluding the conservation of marine biological
    resources;
    (e) environment;
    (f) consumer protection;
    (g) transport;
    (h) trans-European networks;
    (i) energy;
    (j) area of freedom, security and justice;
    (k) common safety concerns in public health matters, for the aspects defined in this
    Treaty.

    Supplementary competence (i.e. exclusive to national parliaments but the EU may assist):

    (a) protection and improvement of human health;
    (b) industry;
    (c) culture;
    (d) tourism;
    (e) education, vocational training, youth and sport;
    (f) civil protection;
    (g) administrative cooperation.

  • Greenflag

    dave ,

    ‘I want to see the EU disbanded’

    Oh you do . Not going to happen . The Republic is not going to turn it’s back to the future for 500 million european citizens .

    ‘and returned to first principles’

    And what would they be ? Sinn Feini economics a la 1920 to 1956 ? . Not going to happen . And no we’re not Norway or Switzerland.

    It’ll be a YES vote by a bigger majority than people on slugger have been led to expect .

    The final prompt for voting YES came ftom todays Daily Torygraph in the UK which urges Ireland to vote NO .

    Why would anybody Irish vote as per the directions of the Daily Telegraph the ‘polite’ mouthpiece of anti Irish political sentiment in the UK for centuries ?

    Everybody I know will be voting YES . Europe has been good for us and for many of the smaller nations who have joined in recent years and who will join in the future .

    Our ‘national interest’ is bound up with the ‘national interests ‘ of many of the European states . In the final analysis we can always leave . We left one Union that did’nt deliver on it’s promises to the Irish people . We can do the same again if need be .

  • Greenflag

    For those Nay sayers willing to put their money where their mouths are Paddy Power is offering 9/4 for a NO victory in the referendum .

    But it’s 2/7 for a YES victory which is what it will be .

  • kensei

    GF

    Everybody I know will be voting YES . Europe has been good for us and for many of the smaller nations who have joined in recent years and who will join in the future .

    I agree with this. I do not support leaving Europe.

    but that has nothing to do with the merits of the treaty or otherwise, and you, like everyone else who has put a pro treaty line, has yet to make a substantive argument for it.

    All that is offered is:

    — Europe is great
    — We’ll embarrass ourselves
    — Look who wants you to vote against it

  • Oilifear

    Kensei,

    “… that has nothing to do with the merits of the treaty or otherwise, and you, like everyone else who has put a pro treaty line, has yet to make a substantive argument for it.”

    That’s because there very little substantive to say about the treaty and it’s consequence. Reading the consolidated texts is like reading a description of what happens now only with the bureaucracy and unofficial hoop-jumping removed.

    The fear of a rejection has to do with the investment attached to it: saying ‘no’ is in effect saying ‘no’ to what is heppening right now.

    Like Dave above, who didn’t seem to be aware that the EU had competency over our internal affairs for the past 20-odd years, if we make it explicity, as Lisbon does, and people freak out, the whole project just flops on it’s face. Do people really not want to EU?

  • Greenflag

    All that is offered is:

    Europe is great ,

    Europe is where we are . In a trading world future world which will be dominated by the East Asians from 2020 the EU needs to have ‘negotiating ‘ clout when it sits down with India , Russia , China , Brazil , Japan and the USA . The EU bureaucracy needs to be reformed to facilitate that future . The EU will make up just about 10% of the world’s population by 2050 . Ireland would have even less say outside the EU than inside . The Lisbon Treaty should have been called the EU Bureaucracy Reform Treaty and we all know that that’s been long overdue

    ‘We’ll embarrass ourselves ‘

    True but we’ve been down that road once .

    ‘Look who wants you to vote against it’

    Indeed . This will be a powerful factor for many .

    Croatia lead Germany by 1-0 so if you’ll excuse me the Germans will be costing me if they don’t pull up their socks 🙂

  • Greagoir O Frainclin

    So here we had another Referendum, and all the lefties were out in force urging us to vote NO.
    I remember in the past when we had the Maastricht and Nice Referenda the same clique were out in force; ie Sinn Féin, (The Green Party – but not this time as they are in government), The Socialist Workers Party, The Unemployable Workers Party, The Party of the Unemployables, Christian Solidarity, Christ on my Right Side Party, Christ on my Left Side Party….etc, etc… urging us all to vote No and thet if we voted Yes, we would all be doomed for eternity and the country would go down the tubes forever. Gas, but some of the cunts were MEPS in Europe, Trish McKenna of the Greens, Mary Lou McDonald ran for a European seat and now lives in a prosperous middle class suburb of Dublin….what hypcrites!