Opinions - The Lisbon Treaty and Drug Policy

[Lunar Loops]

SWILL was just wondering what all you Europeans (and anyone else who may be interested in the U.S.E) thought about the Lisbon Treaty and in relation to drug policy in particular?

We have a referendum on the treaty here in Ireland on June 12th. All of the major parties are pushing for a yes vote (the posters are absolutely everywhere), Sinn Fein seem to be the only ones pushing for a no vote. The reading matter has been landing on the doormats of every house in the land, but even the supposedly impartial document produced by the referendum commision does not seem so impartial at all and seems slightly geared to a yes vote.

With regard to drug policy, the general noises being made are along the following lines:

That the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty will make sure that the EU plays a stronger role in combating illegal drug importations and organised crime in Europe (the following qoute from Dermot Ahern, our Justice Minister):

"We live in an internal market, comprising 27 countries and encompassing a population of over 500 million people," he said.

"EU Governments must work more closely together so that we can defeat criminal networks in Europe who are involved in paedophilia, the illegal trafficking of human beings, illegal drug importations, financial crime, cyber crime and organised crime."

It will almost certainly lead to even less chance of individual thinking when it comes to drug policy.

So what think you all?

Reputation Comments on this post:

good topic

[Alfa]

I think this explains what is happening in the Netherlands. The Netherlands is making itself ready for European drug policy. To me that makes it look as if there is not much to choose, because if a country is breaking down the successful policy that it has been proudly building for 35 years, then his must be based upon something definate. Not on something that may be voted for. To me it seems like there is a plan. A road that already has been chosen. And we need a hard wind to sail in another direction. That wind can only be your voice. Your actions. And your ability to make waves.

Reputation Comments on this post:

Yup! Political consolidation. One-world government. This is how it's done.

[Nature Boy]

Voting YES won't improve anything as far as drug policy goes. It's obvious that it's been swept under the carpet as an issue by now. Europe is looking for an inoffensive right of centre drugs policy that pokes recreational users about and like headless chickens they attempt to take down the "big suppliers" that will always be replaced anyway. I can't exactly see anything beneficial in voting NO either. SWIM won't bother vote.

[Beanfondler]

No one's all that concerned with implications of the treaty? Even if it weren't as nefarious as it already is centralized power to such an extent could never expect to be have the smallest of chance ending well. Anyone have much of a hint to how the vote is likely to end up? If it is rejected will the Fourth Reich summon itself in to being right then and there, Power Ranger-esk into a giant gorillazilla of sorts? Would Poland be pink? Or is that just the fat American idiot in Swibf projecting his disapproval of the yet to be officially titled but otherwise competely in place NAU?

[Lunar Loops]

Originally Posted by Beanfondler

No one's all that concerned with implications of the treaty? Even if it weren't as nefarious as it already is centralized power to such an extent could never expect to be have the smallest of chance ending well. Anyone have much of a hint to how the vote is likely to end up? If it is rejected will the Fourth Reich summon itself in to being right then and there, Power Ranger-esk into a giant gorillazilla of sorts? Would Poland be pink?

Unfortunately, the main problem seems to be a lack of knowledge about the treaty. It comes to something when even the Taoiseach (Irish prime minister) admits to not having read the document. As stated earlier, the leaflets that have been supposedly delivered to every household in the country are not really as impartial as they claim and are also far from a rivetting read. Most people SWILL encounters have not read it and do not understand the issues. I think it will be a very low turnout.

Also, as mentioned earlier all of the main parties are pushing for a YES vote (the only exception being Sinn Fein) and most of the unions now also seem to be advising their members to vote YES.

The polls up until recently showed a fairly even split (with slightly more for the YES camp) with many still undecided. Recent statements from the likes of some Unions and the IFA (Irish Farmers Association) backing a YES vote are likely to swing it to the YES camp. Most of the ridiculous number of posters up all over the place are pushing for a YES vote. SWILL feels that the vote will result in a majority YES vote as a lot of people will simply vote as they are told and the fact that most parties seem for it will be enough to sway them (even if they do not understand what they are voting for).

Personally SWILL feels it is important to vote on this issue; you can't complain further down the line if you don't inform yourself and vote now.

[Coconut]

Originally Posted by Lunar Loops

Personally SWILL feels it is important to vote on this issue; you can't complain further down the line if you don't inform yourself and vote now.

I disagree. If this treaty is defeated, it'll just be brought back again. It was done with the Nice Treaty and this one is already the EU Constitution 2.0. Governments have no regard for honest democratic process and will do anything they can to get what they want.

[Beanfondler]

Well when Swibf actually thinks about it... The extent to which it was made to both keep the vote from the people and even the way it was written and illegal to have reduced it into something intelligible before the 27 parliaments had voted on it... If there was even the slightest hint of it going unfavorably they've probably got those paper-trail lacking crackerjack box voting machines.

Originally Posted by Lunar Loops

Personally SWILL feels it is important to vote on this issue; you can't complain further down the line if you don't inform yourself and vote now.

Swibf always cynically whispers the same to himself. But good f*cking christ does Swibf really have to sit around and wait for people to have the first critical thought of their lives? Cuase there really is no coming back from that point. You've got the totally disillusioned cynical minority and that other 95% can't manage an independent thought process. Christ should descend from the heavens now, put Swibf out of his misery.

Originally Posted by Lunar Loops

even if they do not understand what they are voting for

A while back Swibf tweaked a tad beyond whats enjoyable and read quite a bit of the treaty, of that the he does remember is that he wrapped himself in the USA Patriot Act and Military Commisions act... He'd never felt so safe warm peaceful and above all free.

[Lunar Loops]

*BUMP*

Well brethren, today is the day that Ireland decides.

Apparently it is touch and go which way the vote will go, despite the best efforts of most of our leaders to push for a "YES" vote.

I can't really urge you which way to vote (SWILL knows how he is going to), but I would urge all Irish members to at least vote. If nothing else it is important to exercise your democratic right and have your say. It may appear like it has no bearing on your life, but ultimately the bigger picture looks down on all of us.

[Mr. Giraffe]

I will go ahead and urge people which way to vote. I feel strongly that this treaty should be rejected for 4 reasons:

1. the yes side haven't offered one single reason for the treaty's necessity. Instead they have tried to say 'if you are pro-Europe, vote Yes', while relentlessly abusing the NO side, which does in fairness include some pretty hairy organisations

2. The Lisbon Treaty gives much more power to the European Commission and Parliament, while substantially dimishing Ireland's influence. The German strenght will be doubled, Ireland will lose a commissioner and many decisions will now be taken by qualified majority voting.

3. The treaty specifically requires states to increase their military spending. This spending will be overseen by a body comprising representatives of the arms industry. The treaty also gives further war-making powers to the EU's nascent army

4. The Dutch and French voters have already rejected this. All they have changed is the name. It's no longer a consitution, now it's only a treaty. In the words of their own representatives, they've simply encoded the constitution and made it more difficult to understand. Ireland is the only country in Europe with a vote on this. Opinion polls in other EU countries indicate that a majority of people would vote NO if given the chance.

[Lunar Loops]

Well Mr G, having nailed your colours firmly to the non-mast(richt), SWILL can say that he too will be voting this way, but everyone is entitled to their own view.

The issues are not quite as clear cut as your four points, but we would be here for ever and a day if we tried to lay it all bare.

Neither camp has really covered itself in glory during the campaigning as both have resorted to scare tactics.

We await the outcome.

[Nature Boy]

Originally Posted by Mr. Giraffe

2. The Lisbon Treaty gives much more power to the European Commission and Parliament, while substantially dimishing Ireland's influence. The German strenght will be doubled, Ireland will lose a commissioner and many decisions will now be taken by qualified majority voting.

To me, that doesn't necessarily sound like a dire consequence or anything. Whether it's Irish influenced or European influenced, it's still fat cat politicians with agendas. I hate Irish politicians. I couldn't give a rat's ass if Fritz from Austria makes decisions for us from now on. Given our track record, it would probably be more effective.

Or just avoid the thing entirely, which is what I'm doing. I could pop down the road and vote right now but there really is no motivation. I expect a low turnout.

[Beanfondler]

Originally Posted by Nature Boy

To me, that doesn't necessarily sound like a dire consequence or anything.

History and the way in which it repeats itself could change one's mind, potentially at least. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely and such. The situation is even more dire when those seeking the power are arguably already corrupted, haha.

[Lunar Loops]

Originally Posted by Nature Boy

To me, that doesn't necessarily sound like a dire consequence or anything. Whether it's Irish influenced or European influenced, it's still fat cat politicians with agendas. I hate Irish politicians. I couldn't give a rat's ass if Fritz from Austria makes decisions for us from now on. Given our track record, it would probably be more effective.

Or just avoid the thing entirely, which is what I'm doing. I could pop down the road and vote right now but there really is no motivation. I expect a low turnout.

Too late now, but it does potentially make a difference. If, for example, Ireland decided tomorrow that it would be a good thing to legalise cannabis, this would become far more problematic in the United States of Europe.

A crude and unlikely example I'll grant you, but there will be less and less scope for individual policy making in the new US.

Originally Posted by c0c0nut

I disagree. If this treaty is defeated, it'll just be brought back again. It was done with the Nice Treaty and this one is already the EU Constitution 2.0. Governments have no regard for honest democratic process and will do anything they can to get what they want.

Beanfondler and Mr Giraffe have answered you on this, but what exactly do you propose then? We all sit around on our arses whining about the way things should be done?

The current 'democratic process' is all we have at the moment and until a better way is found it is the only way we have of making our voices heard. Change can be very slow, but it does happen. It won't happen by people doing nothing.

The greatest weapon that governments have in their armoury is the apathy of the people.

[Beanfondler]

Originally Posted by Lunar Loops

The greatest weapon that governments have in their armoury is the apathy of the people.

One can't forget the entire trifecta.. apathy, fright, and idiocy.

[Coconut]

Originally Posted by Lunar Loops

Beanfondler and Mr Giraffe have answered you on this, but what exactly do you propose then? We all sit around on our arses whining about the way things should be done?

The current 'democratic process' is all we have at the moment and until a better way is found it is the only way we have of making our voices heard. Change can be very slow, but it does happen. It won't happen by people doing nothing.

The greatest weapon that governments have in their armoury is the apathy of the people.

Of course people who don't vote have a right to complain.

I oppose the treaty, but in the end I don't really see the point of voting. I'm not apathetic on this issue but I'm not naive either. We're given the illusion that the people really make a difference by ticking a box on a piece of paper. I don't believe that politicians actually care what we think, no matter how many "No" boxes we tick. They're hardly going to stop pushing treaties and agendas just because we don't want them to. After all, what are we going to do about it? Keep electing the same scum over and over like for the past eighty odd years? Pssh.

Referenda and elections are dominated by people who vote for idiotic reasons. I've spoken to so many people who decided their position from coin tosses, eenie-meenie-miney-mo, guilt by association (Sinn Féin are opposed to the treaty so I'll assume that voting yes is the right choice!), emotional attachment (my family, friends, favourite politician are voting this way so I will too) and so on.

[Mr. Giraffe]

Yes, the campaign has been poorly fought on all sides.

Nonetheless, my opinion is that the onus is on the YES side in the same way as the onus in a trial is on the prosecution. To my mind, their campaign has been a massive scare campaign aiming to bewilder and bully the electorate. Witness yesterday's newspaper front pages warning of economic meltdown if we vote NO. They left this big scare for last because the NO side couldn't rebuke it in the broadcast media because of the blackout. They have been dishonest to the point of disgrace.

[Beanfondler]

That doesn't mean that a precedent of non resistance should be set by the people. No matter the likely resulting situation afterward, the voice of the people should at least be audible.

[Mr. Giraffe]

True. The only solution is to keep saying no until they listen.

Incidentally, my ears tell me that the government has scared enough sheeple into the YES pen to bag this one. So that'll save them the hassle of having to ask us again and insult our intelligence by pretending that they've changed it.

Anyways, I'm off out to the polling station to do my bit for what remains of our independence.

[Beanfondler]

Eventually one can only hope the those sheeple will have woken up once they finally realize they are in the jaws of their wolvernment. Swibf only hopes that realization comes before the time for it to have any effect is too late.

[vinylmesh]

that's why i voted no!

[Beanfondler]

Swibf doesn't care if one complains about their government and elects not to vote, he just thought it was erroneous to suggest that no action is as effective as protest on some level. Our fellow sheep need to stand up on their hind legs and possess an independent thought process as to avoid the waddle onward to the dinner table. Votes will not be completely falsified and those lemmings might just wake up if they think a substantial portion of the population is already.

[Coconut]

Originally Posted by Beanfondler

Swibf doesn't care if one complains about their government and elects not to vote, he just thought it was erroneous to suggest that no action is as effective as protest on some level. Our fellow sheep need to stand up on their hind legs and possess an independent thought process as to avoid the waddle onward to the dinner table. Votes will not be completely falsified and those lemmings might just wake up if they think a substantial portion of the population is already.

I agree with you. If it were up to me the people would be rising up and trying all politicians as criminals of the highest order, but that reality isn't likely.

c0c0nut added 40 Minutes and 16 Seconds later...

Originally Posted by RTÉ

Ireland rejects Lisbon Treaty

Irish voters have rejected the Lisbon Treaty.

With results in from all 43 constituencies, the Lisbon Treaty has been defeated by a margin of 53.4% to 46.6%.

A total of 752,451 people voted in favour of the treaty and 862,415 voted against.

Just eight of the constituencies - Clare, Dublin South, Dublin South East, Dublin North, Dublin North Central, Dún Laoghaire, Kildare North and Meath East - voted in favour of the Treaty.

As the first results came in, it became apparent that opponents of the Treaty had in many places improved on the share of the vote they won in the first Nice referendum.

And unlike that vote, the defeat of the Lisbon Treaty cannot be blamed on apathy, with a high turnout recorded for a referendum.

Waterford was the first constituency to declare an official result - and it was unequivocal, rejecting Lisbon by 54-46.

This morning's tallies showed the strength of the No vote across the country, with just a handful of constituencies looking like they would vote Yes.

The margin of victory for the No side may be a bit tighter than was suggested in the initial tallies - but there seems little doubt that it is a victory.

The No vote was strong in many rural areas and in working class districts of cities, while middle class areas appeared to be less supportive of the treaty than had been anticipated.

In urban areas, middle class areas by and large appeared to have voted in favour of the treaty - but not by the normal large margin, and not by enough to counteract the large No in working class areas.

Each constituency is counting its own votes separately, before sending the result to the Referendum Returning Officer in Dublin Castle, who will announce the overall result.

Turnout is thought to have been higher than in the first Nice Referendum, which was defeated, but lower than in the second, which was passed.

I'm actually surprised. I was expecting a landslide Yes vote. Looks like Lisbon is well and truly dead.

(*silent celebration*)

[FuBai]

Originally Posted by c0c0nut

I agree with you. If it were up to me the people would be rising up and trying all politicians as criminals of the highest order, but that reality isn't likely.

c0c0nut added 40 Minutes and 16 Seconds later...



I'm actually surprised. I was expecting a landslide Yes vote. Looks like Lisbon is well and truly dead.

(*silent celebration*)

I doubt that. The grim determination with which they have desparately pushed various reformed versions of the constitution leads me to doubt that they will give up on it. Already the EU has said other countries should continue ratifying the treaty as if nothing had happened. We will find out more in a week when there's a meeting.

[Coconut]

Originally Posted by FuBai

I doubt that. The grim determination with which they have desparately pushed various reformed versions of the constitution leads me to doubt that they will give up on it. Already the EU has said other countries should continue ratifying the treaty as if nothing had happened. We will find out more in a week when there's a meeting.

You have a point. I guess I was just caught up in the excitement of reading this news. ;_;

It looks like some are deliberating over whether the EU will crumble or Ireland will secede as a result of this.

[FuBai]

Looks like it's been rejected by Ireland:

Originally Posted by BBC

Irish minister says EU vote lost

Irish Justice Minister Dermot Ahern says substantial vote tallies across the country show the European Union Lisbon reform treaty has been rejected.
Tallies are not official, but Mr Ahern says it is clear the No vote is ahead in a vast majority of constituencies.
This would scupper the treaty, which must be ratified by all members. Only Ireland has held a public vote on it.
Mr Ahern is the first senior figure from the Irish government to admit that it looked like the treaty had failed.
"It looks like this will be a No vote," Mr Ahern said on live television. "At the end of the day, for a myriad of reasons, the people have spoken."
He said it looked like other EU countries would ratify the treaty, so an Irish No vote would leave the EU in "uncharted waters".
Earlier, Europe Minister Dick Roche had admitted "it is not looking good"
In Irish polls, tally counters in each constituency watch votes being sorted and make their own count, giving early indications of how a vote is going.
State broadcaster RTE said initial results and projections suggested a certain win for the No camp.
The BBC's Oana Lungescu in Brussels says EU leaders are bracing for defeat but are expected to press on with the treaty, which is meant to streamline decision-making in the now expanded EU.
However, she says, the third failed referendum in three years on the EU's reform plans is bound to undermine the bloc's public legitimacy and dent its confidence when it faces other big players on the world stage.
European leaders earlier said they had no "plan B" for how to proceed if Ireland's electorate voted No.
"If the Irish people decide to reject the treaty of Lisbon, naturally, there will be no treaty of Lisbon," French Prime Minister Francois Fillon said on Thursday night.
Declan Ganley of the anti-treaty lobby group Libertas said that if the No vote had indeed triumphed that it was "a great day for Ireland".
"The people of Ireland have shown enormous courage and wisdom in analysing the facts presented to them and making the decision they have," Mr Ganley said.
The No campaign was a broad coalition ranging from Libertas to Sinn Fein, the only party in parliament to oppose the treaty.
Confusion
Correspondents say many voters did not understand the treaty despite a high-profile campaign led by Prime Minister Brian Cowen, which had the support of most of the country's main parties.

The BBC's Europe editor Mark Mardell on what a No vote would mean

Mr Cowen accused the No camp of "misrepresentation", saying voters had voiced concern about "issues that clearly weren't in the treaty at all", the Irish Times reported.
Turnout is said to have been about 45%. Commentators had predicted that a low turnout figure would suggest a rejection.
The treaty, which is designed to help the EU cope with its expansion into eastern Europe, provides for a streamlining of the European Commission, the removal of the national veto in more policy areas, a new president of the European Council and a strengthened foreign affairs post.
The treaty is due to come into force on 1 January 2009.
Fourteen countries out of the 27 have completed ratification so far.
The Lisbon Treaty replaces a more ambitious draft constitution that was rejected by French and Dutch voters in 2005.
Just over three million Irish voters are registered - in a European Union of 490 million people.
In 2001, Irish voters almost wrecked EU plans to expand eastwards when they rejected the Nice treaty. It was only passed in a much-criticised second vote.