Friday, 13 June 2008

Irish have said NO to the Lisbon Treaty.

The BBC are reporting that early returns in the Irish referendum on the Lisbon Treaty are showing that the NO campaign will win.

I hope it's true. Now we will see the true nature of the EU. They will not accept this NO vote and will either force Ireland to hold another referendum or find a way to work around it. The Irish government has already held secret talks in Brussels to get around a 'NO' vote.

Democracy my arse.

UPDATE: RTE are now reporting that most constituencies are voting NO.

UPDATE 2: It looks like it could be about 60% NO 40% YES. That's a big NO to the EU.

UPDATE 3: Gordon Brown has apparently promised Sarkozy that he will press ahead with the ratification process. Why?

UPDATE 4: Looks like it is more likely to be nearer 55% - 45%.

UPDATE 5: It is official!!! Ireland votes NO (53.4%) to the Lisbon Treaty.

The results will be issued at 16:00 - ish.

10 comments:

Cassius said...

The Irish Times is reporting that Paddy Power has started last night paying out on those who've bet "yes" will win. Seems like they may have caught a cold, whilst I may be celebrating with something cold and Irish.

Daily Referendum said...

Cassius,

Now the fight begins to stop them forcing this constitution on us by other means.

Anonymous said...

I am an Irish person who voted No in yesterdays referendum. I am pro-europe, but voted No in the hope of getting a fairer deal for all the new members and smaller countries in Europe. I believe that the power that the UK, France and Germany will be able to exert under the current Lisbon treaty is proportionately too great compared to other member states.

Dave said...

The Times and Reuters websites are leading with the Irish No vote but the Beeb is still silent

It would appear that the Irish electorate have got it wrong and they may have to keep on holding referendums (referenda?) until they get it right.
Me? I'd have got it wrong too if I'd been allowed to vote.

I may have to post this anonymously or some men in black may lock me up for 42 days without charge for thinking the wrong way

Daily Referendum said...

Dave,

Yes we must all be careful what we say about Brown and Labour from now on. Not only did they get 42 days, the reasons you can be held have also become unclear.

Mrs Smallprint said...

Hi Steve

I'd love to leap up and down and celebrate but I think the normal EU stitch up machine will now go into overdrive finding a way to quietly bypass the Irish vote. The only real choice is exit stage left.

Mrs S.

p.s. there is another poem on my blog which might amuse you.

Anonymous said...

The Irish. God bless 'em. know deceit when they see it!

“Public opinion will be led to adopt, without knowing it, the proposals that we dare not present to them directly… All the earlier proposals will be in the new text but will be hidden and disguised in some way.” - Former French President V.Giscard D’Estaing, who helped to draw up the EU Constitution which the French and Dutch rejected in their 2005 referendums and which is now being implemented through the Lisbon Treaty, Le Monde, 14 June, 2007.

“The difference between the original Constitution and the present Lisbon Treaty is one of approach, rather than content … The proposals in the original constitutional treaty are practically unchanged. They have simply been dispersed through the old treaties in the form of amendments. Why this subtle change? Above all, to head off any threat of referenda by avoiding any form of constitutional vocabulary … But lift the lid and look in the toolbox: all the same innovative and effective tools are there, just as they were carefully crafted by the European Convention.” - V.Giscard D’Estaing, former French President and Chairman of the Convention which drew up the EU Constitution, The Independent, London, 30 October, 2007.

”The most striklng change (between the EU Constitution in its older and newer version) is perhaps that in order to enable some governments to reassure their electorates that the changes will have no constitutional implications, the idea of a new and simpler treaty containing all the provisions governing the Union has now been dropped in favour of a huge series of individual amendments to two existing treaties. Virtual incomprehensibilty has thus replaced simplicity as the key approach to EU reform. As for the changes now proposed to be made to the constitutional treaty, most are presentational changes that have no practical effect. They have simply been designed to enable certain heads of government to sell to their people the idea of ratification by parliamentary action rather than by referendum.” - Dr Garret FitzGerald, former Irish Taoiseach, Irish Times, 30 June, 2007.

“The substance of the constitution is preserved. That is a fact.” - German Chancellor Angela Merkel, speech in the European Parliament, 27 June, 2007.

“The good thing is that all the symbolic elements are gone, and that which really matters - the core - is left.” - Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Danish Prime Minister, Jyllands-Posten, 25 June, 2007.

“The substance of what was agreed in 2004 has been retained. What is gone is the term ‘constitution’ “. - Dermot Ahern, Irish Foreign Minister, Daily Mail Ireland, 25 June, 200.7

“90 per cent of it is still there…These changes haven’t made any dramatic change to the substance of what was agreed back in 2004.” - Irish Taoiseach Bertie Ahern, Irish Independent, 24 June, 2007.

“The good thing about not calling it a Constltution is that no one can ask for a referendum on it.” - Giuliano Amato, speech at London School of Econmics, 21 February, 2007.

“They decided that the document should be unreadable. If it is unreadable, it is not constitutional, that was the sort of perception. Where they got this perception from is a mystery to me. In order to make our citizens happy, to produce a document that they will never understand! But, there is some truth [in it]. Because if this is the kind of document that the IGC will produce, any Prime Minister - imagine the UK Prime Minister - can go to the Commons and say ‘Look, you see, it’s absolutely unreadable, it’s the typical Brussels treaty, nothing new, no need for a referendum.’ Should you succeed in understanding it at first sight there might be some reason for a referendum, because it would mean that there is something new.” - Giuliano Amato, former Italian Prime Minister and Vice-Chairman of the Convention which drew up the EU Constitution, recorded by Open Europe, The Centre for European Reform, London, 12 July. 2007.

“The aim of the Constitutional Treaty was to be more readable; the aim of this treaty is to be unreadable … The Constitution aimed to be clear, whereas this treaty had to be unclear. It is a success.” - Karel de Gucht, Belgian Foreign Minister, Flandreinfo, 23 June, 2007.

"…The proposed draft Constitution does not contain the possibility of restoring individual competencies to the national level as a centralisation brake. Instead, it counts on the same one-way street as before, heading towards ever greater centralisation … Most people have a fundamentally positive attitude to European integration. But at the same time, they have an ever increasing feeling that something is going wrong, that an untransparent, complex, intricate, mammoth institution has evolved, divorced from the factual problems and national traditions, grabbing ever greater competencies and areas of power; that the democratic control mechanisms are failing: in brief, that it cannot go on like this.” - Former German President Roman Herzog and former president of the German Constitutional Court, article on the EU Constitution, Welt Am Sonntag, 14 January, 2007.

Geraldine said...

I voted no and I'm so proud today :) I can wake up tomorrow knowing that we did not hand over our freedom to the EU fat cats.

Just for interest, I'm going to list some of the things that made me decide months ago to vote no and also the recent thing that confirmed my decision.

I voted no so that Ireland would still be a free state.

I want Ireland to stay neutral and do not agree with militarisation.

I want Ireland to have a Commissioner every year. Had the 'Yes' won, it would have meant a Commissioner every 5 years.

I voted no so that our taxes would remain as they are and we would not be told that we need to change our taxes inline with the EU.

I voted no so that our wages stay the same.

I voted no so that our abortion laws remain the same.

I voted no because the EU fat cats warned our government not to let the sensitivities of the treaty be known to the Irish people until after the referendum. Basically, we were only told half the truth and then it would have come out what these sensitivies were and what the treaty is really about,it would have been too late for us.

I voted no so that our constitution would not be changed.

We showed the EU fat cats, our government and the German and French ministers who threatened us over the last few weeks that we better vote yes or else....Guess what!!! The Irish have guts to stand up to you rich fat cats.

I'm very glad that Ireland voted no for the 480 million europeans who have been denied a voice.

Guess what Barroso! When Irish people say no, we mean NO!!!!

Mrs Smallprint said...

Geraldine

You are right to be proud of your country, the problem with the EU is its overwhelming need to control and turn us all into mere satallites of Brussels.

Free trade yes, EU superstate NO NO NO!

Mrs S.

John Trenchard said...

nice touch with the shamrocks Daily Ref.

we Irish appreciate it.