The crash was largely enabled by cheap money, which was enabled by the ECB. How we regulated our banks exacerbated this yes, but you wanted an example of how The EU has and is bad for us, it still stands.
And he hit out at claims that the EU was “some kind of war monger. It is the absolute opposite of that”. He said “the EU is born of a vision to end wars”.
He added that “neutrality isn’t about inactivity of or excluding oneself from difficult situations. It’s about being proactive but not aligned” to any military grouping.
Let’s have a vote on it, plenty of water under the bridge since to justify a democratic re-evaluation!.
Sure what could go wrong?
We already did that twice and the second vote was passed by quite a clear majority on a better turnout.
Opinion polls show an increase of support for the EU since then.
Do you see any reason that your dislike for the EU should be indulged in a divisive vote without a clear goal?
The ‘Ignored’ are not quite true, though. The EU Constitution was abandoned following multiple rejections, with lesser treaty amendments (not altering the fundamental state of subsidiarity) put forward in Lisbon.
You may deride the changes Ireland sought and got following Lisbon’s rejection, but they appeared to satisfy the objections raised.
It’s the principle of having to keep voting until you get the right answer.
Quite naturally many citizens were cheesed off with such carry on.
The idea of even deriding it is meaningless. IMO, shouldn’t have even gone there, 2nd vote was a vote against democracy.
The first and second Nice treaties were different. They were so different that they should have been called different names, but alas that didn’t happen. The differences were implemented in what’s called a triple lock: Irish law, European Law and International law. The differences are spelled out in the Seville Declarations.
The changes between the two Nice treaties are a prime example of one of the smallest countries in the EU successfully negotiating changes to the fundamental treaties. Changes that affect all other countries as well.
Is your point that the Irish state shouldn’t be able to negotiate changes to the fundamental structure of the EU?
It’s fairly straightforward point, no need to deconstruct it or over analyse it.
The point is straightforward.
Can the Irish state negotiate changes to proposed EU treaties? If the answer to this is yes, how is this a vote against democracy?
The Government can “negotiate” all they want.