Second vote ? Why not .?

[bluewolf]

See above why the bit in bold is a myth!

Was it mandatory that the Irish should have the 2nd vote? Could they have just rejected the Treaty and left it there?

The 2nd vote was railed against by Eurosceptics. They howled about a lack of democracy and EU bullies. Even the British media shook their fists at the EU "Henry Ford" style of democracy.

Once again you're attempting to divert and dilute the (good natured and informative) discussion.

 

[bluewolf]

If you wanted to buy a new car and the choice was BMW or MERC, your family have a vote. They all vote BMW but you want the Merc.
Do you buy the BMW or wait a few months and have another vote?

Why not test drive both and then ask again? Point out all the features that were previously missed. Debunk the MPG figures and find them out for yourself. Quite simply the best way to do it.

 

[bobmac]

Why not test drive both and then ask again? Point out all the features that were previously missed. Debunk the MPG figures and find them out for yourself. Quite simply the best way to do it.

Even if the BMW road tax is £0 and the Merc is £500 (or £250m)

 

[Papas1982]

Why not test drive both and then ask again? Point out all the features that were previously missed. Debunk the MPG figures and find them out for yourself. Quite simply the best way to do it.

But we haven’t given brexit a test drive have we?

We’ve had years as part of the Eu, during that time eniugh people decided they wanted out. Why now should we refuse to honour their choice?

Until we leave, it’s all just ifs and buts, we can’t say it has been worse as we haven’t had it yet.

 

[bluewolf]

Even if the BMW road tax is £0 and the Merc is £500 (or £250m)

That's 2 very different cars 🤣

 

[bluewolf]

But we haven’t given brexit a test drive have we?

We’ve had years as part of the Eu, during that time eniugh people decided they wanted out. Why now should we refuse to honour their choice?

Until we leave, it’s all just ifs and buts, we can’t say it has been worse as we haven’t had it yet.

We weren't always in the EU.

 

[Hobbit]

After 43years of EU membership, Ireland became a net contributor in 2016. In terms of what they pay and what they receive in terms of subsidies and spending on infrastructure projects there's about €500m difference. Pocket change compared to what the 3 major contributors hand over but not to be sniffed at when you consider where the economy was from 2008 through to 2014.

What is a concern for Ireland is a demand for a big increase this year, up 35% on last year, and a projected increase by a further €400m for next year to cover the UK's departure. This represents an increase of 52% in 2 years. Beyond that there is the new budget under discussion for a start date of Jan 1st 2021, which includes funding for centrally controlled border guards(federalism at its worst) and the EU army that Macron and Merkel are pushing for.

 

[Papas1982]

We weren't always in the EU.

When we joined the EU it was for trade, not the all encompassing ruling body it is now.

We have been in it long enough now that those under 50 won’t have lived or worked much prior to it forming. So it’s not like most of the electorate really can compare before and after.

 

[bobmac]

That's 2 very different cars 🤣

Just like staying in the EU and leaving then, 2 very different situations.

 

[Foxholer]

Was it mandatory that the Irish should have the 2nd vote? Could they have just rejected the Treaty and left it there?
...

Well, the Lisbon Treaty would have been stymied, so the EU had to get Irish agreement.

So, effectively, Yes, there had to be a 2nd vote.

...
The 2nd vote was railed against by Eurosceptics. They howled about a lack of democracy and EU bullies. Even the British media shook their fists at the EU "Henry Ford" style of democracy.
...

Propaganda!

Their (anti-EU) reasons for doing so were nothing to do with the real reason for the 2nd vote - which was Irish (and EU) law!

The cries for a 2nd referendum on UK leaving EU are (at least seem to me to be) for completely different reasons!

...
Once again you're attempting to divert and dilute the (good natured and informative) discussion.

You jest, surely! If not please explain!

 

[bluewolf]

Well, the Lisbon Treaty would have been stymied, so the EU had to get Irish agreement.

So, effectively, Yes, there had to be a 2nd vote.


Propaganda!

Their (anti-EU) reasons for doing so were nothing to do with the real reason for the 2nd vote - which was Irish (and EU) law!

The cries for a 2nd referendum on UK leaving EU are (at least seem to me to be) for completely different reasons!


You jest, surely! If not please explain!

No, there didn't have to be a 2nd vote. The EU needed one but Ireland didn't have to hold one. They could have sat back and claimed that IREXIT was IREXIT.

Not Propaganda, unless you agree that all the recent Brexit coverage is also Propaganda. In which case, my original post stands.

Not joking. Your petty hair splitting is one of the reasons that good discussions deteriorate. You have no concept of the limitations of forum discussions. I'm not the first person to ask that you either put me on ignore or learn some restraint and don't respond please

 

[bluewolf]

After 43years of EU membership, Ireland became a net contributor in 2016. In terms of what they pay and what they receive in terms of subsidies and spending on infrastructure projects there's about €500m difference. Pocket change compared to what the 3 major contributors hand over but not to be sniffed at when you consider where the economy was from 2008 through to 2014.

What is a concern for Ireland is a demand for a big increase this year, up 35% on last year, and a projected increase by a further €400m for next year to cover the UK's departure. This represents an increase of 52% in 2 years. Beyond that there is the new budget under discussion for a start date of Jan 1st 2021, which includes funding for centrally controlled border guards(federalism at its worst) and the EU army that Macron and Merkel are pushing for.

The increased demand was known when they ran the recent poll. They still voted 9:1 in favour.

 

[Foxholer]

No, there didn't have to be a 2nd vote. The EU needed one but Ireland didn't have to hold one. They could have sat back and claimed that IREXIT was IREXIT.
...

Twaddle!
As membership of the EU was/is bound within the Irish Constitution - through various amendments, it would have unconstitutional to do so - unless a referendum took place to enact that action!

...
Not Propaganda, unless you agree that all the recent Brexit coverage is also Propaganda. In which case, my original post stands.
...

Propaganda and B/S!
Newspapers and politicians peddling their own views by making statements that mislead or are simply not based on facts!

And certainly much of Brexit coverage, by both sides, WAS propaganda - the Bus text being the most obvious (and successful imo) example.

...
Not joking. Your petty hair splitting is one of the reasons that good discussions deteriorate. You have no concept of the limitations of forum discussions. I'm not the first person to ask that you either put me on ignore or learn some restraint and don't respond please

I reserve the right to 'correct' any errors of fact I deem significant!

 

[bluewolf]

Twaddle!
As membership of the EU was/is bound within the Irish Constitution - through various amendments, it would have unconstitutional to do so - unless a referendum took place to enact that action!


Propaganda and B/S!
Newspapers and politicians peddling their own views by making statements that mislead or are simply not based on facts!

And certainly much of Brexit coverage, by both sides, WAS propaganda - the Bus text being the most obvious (and successful imo) example.


I reserve the right to 'correct' any errors of fact I deem significant!

You should probably use that God Complex to inform the then Irish Prime Minister who clearly wasn't as well versed in Irish constitutional law as you.

On the eve of the June 2009 European council meeting, the then Irish prime minister, Brian Cowen, wrote to his counterparts saying that without legally binding guarantees he was unwilling to hold a referendum. With such guarantees, the government was prepared to go back to the electorate to ask “is this your final answer?”

A direct quote from an article in the Guardian by Bridgid Laffan.

 

[Liverbirdie]

If you wanted to buy a new car and the choice was BMW or MERC, your family have a vote. They all vote BMW but you want the Merc.
Do you buy the BMW or wait a few months and have another vote?

I wont qualify this with an answer as its so unlike the subject matter.

 

[woody69]

Do I really have to explain. Just look at project fear from Cameron and Osborne.

So, you're saying you can't be specific?

 

[chrisd]

Lets boil it down to one thing - how is a second vote undemocratic?

I know it wasnt via referendum but if "we" hadnt changed our mind in 1940, we may still have been very much a forced part of Europe, even now!!!!

Because,it is undemocratic (as Murph has said)

You can't tell people that it's a one off vote where the result will lead down a certain path, then when the losers moan you give them a 2nd, 3rd vote

 

[Kellfire]

Because,it is undemocratic (as Murph has said)

You can't tell people that it's a one off vote where the result will lead down a certain path, then when the losers moan you give them a 2nd, 3rd vote

A true democracy would allow for a change of mind.

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

A true democracy would allow for a change of mind.

A 2nd vote would take away the democracy of the first one.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

If we have a 2nd, when would we get the third? Could we vote whether to stay in or out every 3 yrs?

Democracy is fine but you also need stability and to avoid chaos and confusion.