5 Reasons to vote Yes including a polar bear. And The Da Vinci Code.
Posted at 11:27 am by Jason O'Mahony1. We really have enough problems as it is without getting more by voting No. I mean, NAMA, An Bord Snip, tax rises, the economy, Jordan single again, and now we want to go and piss on our generous German aunty's apple strudel?
2. The mysterious faceless Coir are against it. Yeah, the "We live in the same house as Youth Defence but we have never met the fella" crowd. Coir: The people who thought Tom Hanks was the baddy in The Da Vinci Code.
3. For the polar bears. We can either have global climate change treaties negotiated by major players like the EU, the Chinese and the US, or we can watch Ringsend go under water. And run out of polar bears. Not in Ringsend, obviously. I mean generally. You can't move for polar bears in Ringsend, all over the place, standing on clear mints and pontificating.
4. It improves the EU in loads of technical ways which you really don't want me to list here. I mean, we'll get them for you if you want, but only if you promise to read them. There'll be a test.
5. The sky won't fall on our heads if we vote No. But the rest of Europe will probably respect our decision, believe us, and move on to integrate without us and the Brits. Great, we're effectively back in the UK. Nice one, Mary Lou. See, this is where the No campaign falls apart. They hint that they can stop the rest of Europe moving on. They can't. And anyway, would you really rely on the shinners to negotiate? The one time they were sent in to negotiate with anyone, they went in looking for a united Ireland and came out with a food safety board. Bag of magic beans, anyone?
September 15th, 2009 - 11:49
HAHAHAHAHA point 5 = win
September 15th, 2009 - 19:55
preaching to the choir, here, but I really would like to see that list you mentioned in point 4.
September 15th, 2009 - 20:37
Yes, let’s have that list. Care for a bet on whether you can prove that every single one of them is an “improvement” ?
But, of course, this is all a distraction. The real issue is not whether the current structure would be improved by Lisbon – it certainly would be, in some ways – but whether the structure is fit for purpose at all. For anyone who values democracy as a means of giving real sovereignty to the people (the people of the EU in this case), the answer has to be negative.
September 16th, 2009 - 05:29
The Lisbon Treaty improves the European Union in intolerably slow and boring manner, but on a balance it is a step forward.
The Treaty of Lisbon improves the democratic legitimacy of the directly elected European Parliament and it enhances the role of national parliaments, although it still leaves the European Union as a confederation of member states.
September 18th, 2009 - 06:57
Jon and Fergus,
No need for Jason to invent the wheel, so why don’t you take a look at FCO Cm 7311 (with some comments on my blog).
September 21st, 2009 - 11:16
Made the indo saturday
http://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/brussels-will-snatch-kids-tony-blair-will-be-president-and-ringsend-will-disappear-1891157.html
September 21st, 2009 - 11:49
Great fun in that Indo piece, which, incidentally, had the most peculiar quick-linking policy that I have ever observed.
September 21st, 2009 - 11:51
Ralf,
That FCO document does not serve the purpose of delivering the list that Jason has promised.
September 22nd, 2009 - 03:45
You seem very misinformed about this whole Lisbon treaty, in fact. I doubt if you could come up with a shopping list, never mind the very short list that point 4 would warrant. A poor article devoid of any substance or indeed, relevant information. And it made the Indo, hurrah. An eejit’s rag, if there ever was one. At least the Sun newspaper doesn’t dress itself up trying to be something it’s not. Just goes to show that you you have nothing of substance to add to the debate. Pretty sad.