13Sep/097
The return of Declan Ganley
Posted at 7:42 pm by Paul CunnaneIt seems that Declan Ganley has decided to campaign for a "no" vote in the second Lisbon referendum, having previously said that he would not do so if he failed to win a seat in the European Parliament elections.
It seems "no" doesn't always mean "no". Or has Declan discovered that people sometimes change their minds when circumstances change?
September 14th, 2009 - 10:28
Circumstances have changed? Looks like the Consititution rejected in 2005 to me, with a few empty promises tacked on with a guarantee that they’ll be implemented later, honest guv, you can trust me.
September 14th, 2009 - 12:01
With all due respect, Adam, if that’s how it looks to you, then you’re clearly approaching the issue with a firmly closed mind. Which is your prerogative.
September 14th, 2009 - 17:22
I’m with Adam on this.
I don’t see how you think our minds our firmly closed for having this factual opinion. What, just because the public finances are in ruins we should all just follow Lisbon like a flock of sheep?
There is nothing in the Lisbon Treaty about job creation or helping improve our financial situation. The bottom line is that it’s simply a rehash of a treaty that was rejected by the people or Ireland.
Don’t be fooled by the lies being peddled by our goverment. If we reject Lisbon it doesn’t mean we will no longer be part of Europe – it just means that the European Union will have to work a little harder at getting the treaty right for everyone.
September 14th, 2009 - 17:50
When have I suggested that anyone be sheep?
Maybe I’ve misread Adam’s comment, but at face value it doesn’t look like the product of an open mind. Contrast his comment with those of Fergus O’Rourke, and you might see what I mean.
I don’t think anyone should blindly support this treaty. Nor do I think it should be dismissed out of hand. Adam’s comment indicates rejection out of hand.
Not only that, it’s the same treaty. I don’t subscribe to the view that people should be forced to live with the consequences of their decisions in perpetuity. There’s nothing undemocratic about asking people whether they’ve changed their mind.
When you find a single act of the Oireachtas that “gets it right for everyone”, let me know – then we can look into getting a treaty negotiated between twenty seven sovereign countries that makes every single one of their half a billion citizens happy.
September 16th, 2009 - 11:39
I could do without the judgemental tone to be honest Paul, it makes you sound like the closed-minded person you’re accusing me of. Perhaps you could try refuting my comment instead of sinking to the tactics of the institutional Yes side of “distract” and “deny”. The simple fact is that Lisbon II is Lisbon I with worthless guarantees, therefore no circumstances have changed, therefore your smarmy comment about Ganley is moot. Being an asshole doesn’t necessarily make him wrong all the time.
September 16th, 2009 - 11:42
You don’t need to reply btw, I won’t be returning because: a) this blog doesn’t have notifications; and b) it seems obvious comments here aren’t going to be treated with respect anyway. Have fun.
September 16th, 2009 - 11:50
Hi dahamsta,
Well the thing about the guarantees is that they are only worthless if they don’t address your concerns. I’ll imagine that you weren’t worried about abortion, taxation or conscription, but other people actually were. So if those people’s fears could be addressed with guarantees that these things aren’t in the treaty, then surely those guarantees are worth something to them, even while being worthless to you.
I don’t know why you voted no the first time (if you did), perhaps it was nothing to do with the loss of a permanent nomination of a commissioner, but do you not feel that not reducing the commission is a material change from Lisbon I, even if it’s not enough to change your mind? Perhaps it will change someone else’s.