» Home » Politics
The Behaviour Of European Politicians After The Irish Referendum Has Been Shameful
EU politicians and leaders of member states should be ashamed of themselves for so clearly dismissing the verdict of the Irish people, who voted to reject the Lisbon Treaty. This Treaty was the EU's blatant attempt to revive the Constitution which had already been rejected by French and Dutch voters in 2005. Political leaders like Britain's Gordon Brown, France's Nicolas Sarkozy and the European Commission's Manuel Barroso have all indicated that the Treaty--aimed at giving the EU more powers--should go ahead, regardless of what voters think. They clearly have no respect for democracy.
 mackenzie  15 Jun 2008 08:16
                           (What's this?)  Add to Firefox  RSS
I agree, Yet with all the dumbing down that has been going on we have a country full 'o people who don't give a hoot .Voter apathy is at an all time high. It should be made compulsory to vote.
If people weren't so conditioned by the media especially TV we might have a chance of electing proper representatives instead of this lot, and their EU counterparts.
Big Brother isn't popular with right minded people.
 
 keepmindok  24 Jul 2008 13:41
 Add a Comment
 
 
As always mack I probably have a simplified view on this but I think you have nailed it. How can we criticise Mugabees ideal of democracy when ours is idealistically not much different? Come back when you vote the right way. The most right wing party in Britain is actually the only one that warned us away from what has come to pass. Ireland may well find itself placed in a metaphoric prison by the European super state for its failure to conform.
 
 2free  15 Jun 2008 14:45
 Add a Comment
 
 
British Prime Minister Gordon Brown's behaviour following the Irish rejection of the Lisbon Treaty takes the prize when it comes to slimy, two-faced and hypocritical politics. Brown, who had previously promised to hold a referendum in Britain on any European constitution, cowardly backed out of his pledge, because he did not want to lose his stature in Brussels, if the British were to reject any such attempt at giving the EU more power. Now that the Irish have rejected the Treaty as well, Brown's solution is to go on with business as usual, as if nothing ever happened. This approach is especially nonsensical, considering that every EU politician had previously agreed that the Treaty must be ratified by each and every member state for it to come into effect. Otherwise, it would be dead in the water.

Sarkozy, Barroso and most EU leaders also embrace Brown's approach, and some have even suggested that the Irish should be forced to vote again, until they get it right. Even if EU leaders are topnotch when it comes to deluding themselves and living in a safe, comfy and protective glass bubble in Brussels--which cannot be punctured by that nasty concept in democratic systems concerning the will of the voting public--the rest of the world will be even less prone to take the sham union and their delusional leaders seriously, after their most recent display of childish arrogance.

Ironically, one of the only leading politicians to actually grasp the meaning of a democracy is from the formerly Communist eastern half of the continent. Czech President Vaclav Klaus was sober enough to read the tea leaves and understand that the Lisbon Treaty had been rejected by voters. It would also be rejected in most other EU states, if politicians would dare put it up for referendum. To most European leaders, however, voters are simply a nuisance.
 
 mackenzie  15 Jun 2008 08:34
 Add a Comment
 
It would be a curious definition of democracy if 3-4 million Irish people were allowed to decide on the future of a European Union consisting of 300-400 million people.

I don't see anything shameful about the reaction. The people's of Europe, at a minimum, have an input into the process by choosing their own national governments. One of Margaret Thatcher's few worthwhile observations was the referendums were the tools of demagogues and dictators. Listening to media interviews with some of the Irish people who voted no, it's hard to take their votes seriously. Most of them had no clue what the treaty even contained, much less had any well-thought out objections to it.

No one has suggested forcing the people of Ireland to do anything. But they shouldn't be allowed to stop others from doing what they want to do, either. A multi-faceted European Union, in which subsets of countries agree to the deeper levels of integration they feel comfortable with, seems the obvious solution.
 
 Hidell  15 Jun 2008 17:47
 1 Comment
 
 This whole definition of democracy confuses me. Yes we do vote in our leaders on the strength of policy and trust for them to do what is right for the country, but if a referendum is as corrupt a mode of addressing an issue as great as who is actually in control of policy, then why did the Nationalists in Scotland not declare it an Independant country as soon as they were elected into power in the Scottish Parliament?
As in some other issues, the people surely have the right to decide for themselves exactly where they want their country to be going, for better or for worse. We were denied such a referendum on Europe. Most countries if allowed a referendum would probably have rejected it. I hope we are being led to the integrated utopia you speak off. I don't feel we have much of a say in it though.
For me at least, it is a curious definition of democracy when a select elite dictate the future of all the Nations of Europe.
I find it shameful that they don't think they can sell it, so they dictate it.
Am I naive?
I am not against the ideal, but fear the methods used by those who are taking us there.
by  2free
 15 Jun 2008 18:35
Comment
  
Comment
  
 
Much as I appreciate the sentiment, and indeed the European leaders have shown a certain scorn for the people, I disagree that their actions have been shameful or even undesirable.

Democracy and letting the people have power is a desirable aim, but not the only desirable aim. We live in a series of representative democracies because we accept that the people do not always know what is good for them and we need a set of elected representatives to protect things like minority rights.

The EU treaty has been rejected largely because of an uninformed eurosceptical majority who erroneously believe that the EU intends to steal liberties and fails to realise the influence it already has on their nations. The Irish No campaign was particularly guilty of campaigning that was at least potentially libellous and slanderous.

Were people to have read the treaty and compared it to what already exists they would likely have changed their minds. However, people do not have time to discuss and debate the minutia of policy, this is why we elect a series of people whose jobs it is to do this for us. We must trust them to make the right decisions, at least on occasion.

EDIT: To answer 2Free: Indeed I would argue that referendums on issues that people vote emotively and not rationally or fact based are errors. The Irish constitution requires a referendum but this does not mean that it helps their country.

If we accept representative democracy then we accept that the people delegate their power to elected officials. Whilst the peoples views should still be considered they should not be the only considerations.
 
 Quincel  15 Jun 2008 14:52
 1 Comment
 
 Then the mistake was allowing Ireland to have a referendum? The elected Irish government obviously never knew what was good for them, and Europe should have rode roughshod over it and "protected" them from their foolishness? For the sake of democracy?

Edit back(sorry you can use comments)
Don't they have a duty to sell their policies? The Irish got a referendum, we got told what we were doing. Yet you see that as democracy?They have spin doctors for everything else, why can't they spin Europe? If they thought that we would vote the way they want us to vote, there is no doubt we would have got a referendum. So it may well be a corrupt tool.
I don't doubt Europe is the inevitable way forward, but what that means for democracy I do not know. Aren't you worried that it is being built on the foundations of dictatorship?
by  2free
 15 Jun 2008 15:13
Comment
  
Comment
  
Sign In / Sign Up
 For and Against Recent Activity
Related Debates
If An Asylum Seeker Or Economic Migrant Breaks The Laws In Their Adopted Country They Should Be Deported...
There's Too Much Media Coverage Of The US Elections Here In UK
It Is Sad A Commentary On Political Discourse In America That People, I.E. 'Teapartiers', Who Only Want...
Nation Is Psychedelic
In The Last 60 Years, The American Federal Government Has Nothing To Show For Billions Of Investment...
The UK's Prime Ministers Need To Step Up A Bit Have A Little Confidence And Not Do Everything The American's...
All Murderers Should Have Death Penalty
The Godbot Got Herself Killed
English, Rather The Americanized Version Of It, Should Be The National Language. (of America)
Big Oil Is Responsible For High Prices At The Pump.
New Debates
Stop Making Fun Of Homosexuals. It's Offensive.
There Are No Original Ideas Left In Hollywood Cinema Anymore.
Is It The Case That The Majority Of People On This Site, Including Myself, Are Undiagnosed Cases Of Asperger's...
Alfred Hitchcock Said "A Good Film Is When The Price Of The Dinner, The Theatre Admission And The Babysitter...
The Definition Of Marriage Goes Beyond Culture And Religion. They Corrupt The True Meaning Of Things...
Are People Who Say They Don't Care If People Are Gay, But They Just Can't Stand And Don't Have Any Respect...
Resolved: The US Government Should Add A 15% Tax To All Unessential Food Items
It Is So Wrong To Call Lesbians *DYKES*
Teenagers Are Not Irresponsible Because Of Media
Voting Should Be Compulsory.