EU Referendum

Showing posts with label Irish referendum. Show all posts

fear[i-fear]With the Irish referendum just gone, there is undoubtedly only one explanation for the sudden reversal of the vote: fear. It was that on which the "yes" campaign capitalised. And it worked – it always does.

Such is the utility of fear that it has been the driving force in government, probably since the dawn of time. Sane, intelligent men, gripped by fear, will do – or allow in their name – things which in a rational state they would neither accept not permit. Not for nothing did Edmund Burke observe that: "No passion so effectually robs the mind of all its powers of acting and reasoning as fear."

So consistent and reliable is that observation that it becomes the driver in any number of issues, not least "climate change", where the warmists are now becoming brutally frank about their tactics.

Thus do we have prof Clive Hamilton, professor of public ethics at the Australian National University. He is claiming that the majority of the population is still in denial about the risks of climate change. Scientists, he says, now have a duty to inform the public about the risks of climate change so action is taken and people are ready to adapt their lifestyles.

"There is a view we should not scare people because it makes them go down their burrows and close the door but I think the situation is so serious that although people are afraid they are not fearful enough given the science," he adds. "Personally I cannot see any alternative to ramping up the fear factor."

Hamilton quite deliberately compares the situation to the psychology of the British and German populations before the Second World War and said the only way to make people change their behaviour was to adopt that strategy.

Of course, one of the "experts" of that period was a character called Hermann Goering, and one would expect Hamilton to be familiar with his pronouncements. One of them, in the context of going to war, was this:

Why, of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people don't want war neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.

Take away the "war" aspect and this could so easily be converted into warmist theology. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to give up his SUV, his comfortable lifestyle, his holiday abroad – and pay more taxes – when the best he can get out of it is ... precisely nothing, except a poorer existence.

But it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along ... All you have to do is tell them they are being "attacked" by an invisible terror – carbon dioxide or, worse still, by "pollution", and denounce the peacemakers sceptics for lack of patriotism denying the science and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.

It was actually Herbert Hoover who put his finger on it. Every collectivist revolution rides in on a Trojan horse of 'emergency'," he wrote. "It was the tactic of Lenin, Hitler, and Mussolini. In the collectivist sweep over a dozen minor countries of Europe, it was the cry of men striving to get on horseback." "And," he told us, "'emergency' became the justification of the subsequent steps. This technique of creating emergency is the greatest achievement that demagoguery attains."

This is the credo of the "beneficial crisis", deployed equally by the warmists and the European Union, experts in demagoguery both - and you don't get more "collective". Said the president of the EU parliament, Jerzy Buzek, in response to the Irish vote: "Now we must start to work to overcome the difficulties. Our citizens are afraid of the energy issue, the unemployment rate, about immigration, demography and we can do that together, as it was before, also in the future, in solidarity."

"Our citizens are afraid ...". And Mother Europe will come to the aid of her children, having regaled them with stories of endless terrors.

There you have it. "The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary," said H L Mencken. But there is more.

Sceptics cannot be tolerated - everybody must buy into the fear. Robert Lindner had it: "Authority has every reason to fear the sceptic, for authority can rarely survive in the face of doubt." Thomas Jefferson added to it: "Fear can only prevail when victims are ignorant of the facts."

General Douglas MacArthur, an unlikely source, then put it all together. "The powers in charge keep us in a perpetual state of fear," he wrote. They "keep us in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervor with the cry of grave national emergency."

"Always," he added, "there has been some terrible evil to gobble us up if we did not blindly rally behind it by furnishing the exorbitant sums demanded. Yet, in retrospect, these disasters seem never to have happened, seem never to have been quite real."

By then, of course, it is too late. The "powers in charge" have got what they wanted. Yesterday, the "colleagues" got their way. The "warmists" are getting their way. They have one tool in common - fear. But, as Roosevelt told us, "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself." But still the timorous wee beasties fall for it.

COMMENT THREAD

french+lessons[i-french+lessons]
FINAL: It's over. All 43 results are in. The national result is 67.1 percent for the "yes" campaign and 32.9 percent for the "noes". It is being called "swing Saturday". Unlike the second Nice vote, where the "no" vote stayed firm and more "yes" voters turned out, there has been clear evidence of a shift in sentiment, on top of the six percent increase in turnout. Either way, the Irish have sold the pass. It's down to Klaus now.

UPDATE: The president of the EU parliament, Jerzy Buzek, said the result was "good news for Ireland and good news for Europe" but said it was "not the end of the story. Now we must start to work to overcome the difficulties. Our citizens are afraid of the energy issue, the unemployment rate, about immigration, demography and we can do that together, as it was before, also in the future, in solidarity."

"We should also think about those who were answering 'no' because it is our habit and it is our custom to think about all Europeans. I can assure (you) I will work very hard and do feel that it is our common Europe. Let us write our common European history."

UPDATE: Gerry Adams says the Irish political establishment had ignored the decision of the Irish voters after the first Lisbon referendum. They would regret the day they ignored the views of "no" voters this time.

Irish+poll11[i-Irish+poll11]UPDATE: More from Barroso: "Thank you Ireland ... the Irish people have spoken – they have said a resounding 'yes' to Europe. I'm extremely happy at this resounding vote for Europe." And when they said "no"?

UPDATE: Only three constituencies to declare: Carlow-Kilkenny, Dublin North Central and Longford-Westmeath. Sinn Féin Senator Pearse Doherty says he is delighted with the "no" vote in Donegal. It is a clear signal from people in the county that they will not be bullied by the government. A decisive victory for the "bully boys" says Farage. Out of fear, a small country has been bullied into changing its vote. Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny said the result was "a mature reflective decision and the Irish people had risen above cynicism, frustration and anger and had put their country first."

Nationwide turnout is 59.2 percent (1,674,897), up 6 percent on the 2008 referendum.

UPDATE: Klaus is keeping shtum. He has declined to say how he would proceed on the Czech ratification. "The question does not exist today. Today I have a ban...until the Constitutional Court releases something," he said.

UPDATE: Brown joins in the chorus - "The treaty is good for the UK and good for Europe. We can now work together to focus on the issues that matter most to Europeans: a sustained economic recovery, security, tackling global poverty, and action on climate change." Now 33 results in ... 66.8-33.2 percent.

gollum[i-gollum]UPDATE: "Now that all Member States have democratically approved the Lisbon Treaty," says Barroso, "I hope that the necessary procedures for its entry into force can be completed as quickly as possible in Poland and the Czech Republic. Today was indeed a great day for the European Union."

UPDATE: Brian Cowen has formally declared victory. There are now 28 results in ... 66.9-33.1 - a two-to-one margin.

UPDATE: With 23 (of 43) results in, well over half way, the "yes" vote is holding up, at 67.8 percent – as against 32.2 percent for "no". Turnout is 59.6 percent – higher than 2008. The result of the day will be Dublin South, which voted "yes" with a resounding 81.67 percent, only 18.3 percent voting against.

After all the nervous tension, the "colleagues" are now relaxing. There had been suggestions that Sweden might call an extra meeting to put pressure on Vaclav Klaus but Swedish prime minister, Fredrik Reinfeldt - holder of the EU presidency – says there is now no need for one. Discussions are going to be left for the European Council in October.

UPDATE: EU commission president, José Manuel Barroso, says the result "shows the value of European solidarity". Nigel Farage compares the referendum to a corrupt election in Zimbabwe or Afghanistan. Twelve results in now, and the trend is holding at 64.6 for the "yes" side. It's all over bar the shouting. The battle now begins.

Irish+poll8[i-Irish+poll8]UPDATE: Nine of 43 counts completed ... running at 64.8 percent "yes" and 35.2 "no", with an average swing of 20.2 percent. Turnout 58.9 percent. That looks to be a firm trend established. Results as they come in can be seen here.

UPDATE: Kildare North has recorded a "yes" vote with 76.19 percent of the vote (32,012). A mere 23.81 percent (10,002) voted "no". The constituency voted "yes" in 2008, but the margin increased by 21.57 percent. Donegal North East has voted "no" - as expected. The vote was 51.46 percent (15,005) for the noes, and 48.54 percent (14,156) for "yes". That gives a swing to the "yes" side of 13.24 percent. Tipperary North has fallen in with the "children" and voted "yes" with 70.38 percent (25,768) of the votes, against 29.62 percent (10,846) "no". The swing is 20.58 percent on a turnout of 52 percent (down from 58.5 percent in 2008 when the vote was 50-49.6 in favour of the "no" campaign).

UPDATE: David Cameron has issued a statement, retailed here: "This weekend we will hear the results of the referendum in Ireland on the re-named EU Constitution. I want to make one thing clear: there will be no change in our policy on Europe and no new announcements at the conference."

Kenneth Clarke will be happy. It would be a "disaster" if the conference was overshadowed by "a row about Europe", he says. He tells The Daily Telegraph, "Most people (i.e., himself), if you say shall we have a debate about the Treaty of Lisbon at our party conference will feel an inner shudder".

UPDATE: "This vote will strengthen the EU and enable it to act in a more unified manner in tackling the many global issues that it faces in today's world" says Joseph Daul, president of the EPP group in the EU parliament. "I particularly commend the Irish voters for the wisdom they exercised in distinguishing between the truth and the lies which unfortunately played such a prevalent part of this campaign," he crows says. And they still voted "yes"?

Liam Murphy, a Dublin cab driver and a "no" voter, says: "We have been fed lies and blackmailed with scaremongering about the economy. It is scaremongering by a government that just wants to hang on to its own jobs." At a polling station in the Dublin suburb of Tallaght, Kathleen Cummins said that the Irish had been "bullied and treated like children" into holding the second vote. And, like children, they've run to nanny.

Irish+poll7[i-Irish+poll7]UPDATE: First result in ... Tipperary South. 68.42 percent (22,712) voted "yes", while 31.58 percent (10,483) voted "no" - a 21.63 percent swing (last time 52.9-46.6 for the "no" campaign). Only ten of the 43 constituencies voted "yes" in 2008. Rhis time there will be a majority in nearly every constituency, says RTE.

UPDATE: Stephen Collins, political editor of the Irish Times offers his "take" on the "decisive victory" for the "yes" side. It is clear signal that the overwhelming majority of voters want Ireland to remain an outward looking country at the heart of the European project, rather than retreating back to an isolated position on the periphery, he says.

"The reasons for the big change of heart from the first referendum last year are many, but it is hard to escape the conclusion that economic crisis focused the minds of many voters on the importance of good relations with our EU neighbours in order to restore the country's prosperity."

UPDATE: A wipeout is being predicted - a clean sweep apart from Donegal North East, the only constituency where a "no" result looks certain.

UPDATE: Indications are that Cowen's constituency of Laois Offaly has again voted "yes". In 2008 the vote went 56 to 44 percent in favour of the treaty, but the early tallies with just under half the boxes open suggest that the "yes" vote could be as high as 70 percent. Nationwide, the "yes" vote is estimated to be in the region of 65 percent, up nearly 20 percent on 2008.

UPDATE: Foreign minister Michael Martin is claiming victory. "It looks like a convincing win," he says. "It's good for Ireland."

Irish+poll+6[i-Irish+poll+6]UPDATE: Ganley concedes defeat. "This is a very convincing win," the Libertas leader told reporters at the main Dublin counting centre. He accused the "yes" campaign of playing on the fears of many voters, particular in connection with jobs and said he would come back next October with the "Yes for Jobs" posters "and see how we are all doing".

UPDATE: Limerick East put up a turnout five percent above last time, with a high "no" vote in working class areas of the city, producing results in the 70 percent region. Tallies indicate a strong "yes" vote in South Roscommon, homeland of minister Michael Finneran. Some boxes were as high as 90 percent "yes". The vote seems to be split on "class" lines. Meanwhile, Jens Peter Bonde is saying that "Friday 2 October 2009 will be seen as a sad day in European history."

UPDATE: Ian Traynor for The Guardian writes that a "yes" vote will see Merkel and Sarkozy and others "move quickly to introduce the changes under the Lisbon treaty." Intense politicking, he writes, will immediately ensue over the two plum posts created by Lisbon: a president of Europe who will chair EU summits and serve for up to five years, and an EU foreign policy chief. And what about the Czechs and Poles?

UPDATE: The wages of fear - all boxes are opened in Kerry North and tallies are indicating a 60:40 margin in favour of the "yes" side. Turnout was 50 percent. Sinn Féin TD for North Kerry, Martin Ferris, said the campaign run by "yes" side put fear into voters and had a huge effect.

UPDATE: Early tallies across the six Dublin city constituencies suggest a decisive victory for the "yes" side. The Dublin South West constituency, which recorded the highest "no" vote in the state last time, is now indicating a clear "yes" vote, probably in the region of 60 percent. However, the predominately working class areas of Jobstown, west Tallaght and Killinarden are remaining two to one in favour of a "no" vote, according to tallies.

With 50 percent of boxes opened in Dublin South, some 73.5 percent of votes appeared to be in favour of a "yes", compared with 62.5 percent last time, indicating a 10 percent jump in the "yes" vote.

Irish+ref5[i-Irish+ref5]UPDATE: RTE reports unofficial results indicate that the "yes" side is surging ahead. "It looks like a convincing win for the 'yes' side," foreign minister Michael Martin says. The first partial tally came from the constituency of Carlow-Kilkenny - which was exactly 50:50 in the first Lisbon Referendum, but is now said to be running two or three to one in favour of the treaty.

There is a huge swing towards "yes" in the Dublin constituencies with early tallies indicating a 60:40 breakdown for the "yes" side. In Dublin South, with 90 percent of ballot boxes opened, 62.9 percent were "yes". The southern city of Cork was showing a 66 percent trend in favour of the treaty. A "sea change" had also taken place in Cork rural constituencies according to the RTE correspondent.

UPDATE: Statement by Anthony Coughlan (who thinks we've lost). "Not the will of the people, but the fear of the people, has led a majority of Irish voters to approve ratifyng the Lisbon Treaty in yesterday's re-run referendum.

Ireland's voters voted not on the content of Lisbon but on membership of the EU, on fear of political isolation if they did not say Yes to the same Treaty as they said No to last year, and on the promise of jobs and economic recovery which the Yes-side bullied and bamboozled them into believing was they would get if they only voted Yes.

Thus the bankrupt Irish political Establishment, which has ruined its country's economy, has opted through stupidity and fear to clamp an undemocratic Constitution on itself and most of Europe."

UPDATE: Statement from our revered co-editor - If there really is a strong "yes" vote and the Irish whinge in a few months because they did not get what they were "promised", I shall laugh and laugh.

Irish+ref4[i-Irish+ref4]UPDATE: The Independent is claiming that David Cameron faces "a major revolt" by Conservative party grassroots over his policy on Europe (it means the European Union). It cites a poll of "2,205 Tory members" which finds that more than eighty percent want him to call a referendum on the treaty, even if it has been fully ratified by the next general election. Where the Irish go, young David fears to tread.

UPDATE: Offical results expected at 5.30 this evening. Early tallies suggest "strong 'yes' vote".

UPDATE: Counting has started ... and more on that exit poll. A Fine Gael spokesman is claiming that the poll was conducted amongst a representative sample of 1,000 voters at 33 locations (approx 30 at each location). He claims "a massive 'yes' vote in Dublin, touching close to the 70 percent mark," while it was nearer to 60 percent in the rest of the country.

PREVIOUS: Europe is holding its breath after polls closed in Ireland's controversial Lisbon Treaty referendum re-run, we are told by the Press Association.

Casting his ballot in his home county of Offaly in the Midlands, Taoiseach Brian Cowen was cautiously optimistic of a pro-Lisbon Treaty win. "The people's decision is sovereign and of course that will be the case, but I'm hopeful that in the context of today we'll have a good outcome," he said.

Words fail me!

COMMENT THREAD

Irish+poll3[i-Irish+poll3]"The European Union will find a way to implement the Lisbon treaty, leaving Ireland potentially isolated within the EU. And there will be another Irish referendum at some point, probably in the first half of next year."

That was the view (or expectation) of Wolfgang Münchau, columnist for The Financial Times, written on 15 June last year, three days after the Irish had gone to the polls, delivering a "no" victory with 53.2 percent of the vote, against 46.1 percent "yes".

Münchau was wrong only on the timing. And, with the polls having closed at 10pm last night, for the re-run, the Irish Times rushed out the results of a "preliminary" Fine Gael exit poll, which suggested 52 percent for the "yes" side and 48 percent for the "no" campaign. This was quickly revised to become 60 percent "yes" and 40 percent "no", which stands as the definitive prediction.

After the 2008 referendum, there was no published exit poll, but the results of an unattributed poll were circulating, claiming 54-46 percent in favour of the "yes" campaign, with a margin of +/-3. This, as we soon found out, was not to be.

As to turnout, the Irish Times is reporting that Dublin and Munster was substantially up "on last year", in contrast to many other parts of the country, where it was described as "slow and low". The total turnout across the 43 constituencies was reported to be about 50 percent by the time the polls closed, which compares with the 53.1 percent for the last referendum so, on the face of it, there seems to be little change. As before, there seem to be sharp variations in different constituencies.

The turnout was said to be particularly strong in Dún Laoghaire, which had the biggest vote in favour of the treaty in 2008. It was also high in Dublin South West, one of the constituencies with the biggest "no" vote last year. The turnout in commuter counties in Leinster, which have large populations of people working in Dublin, showed a sharp rise towards to close and was as high as 60 percent in some areas.

What no one knows yet is the influence of the "God effect". Last time, the "yes" campaign had the support of the Pope, whereas this time the Vatican seems to have turned away from the "project".

One could possibly draw inferences from the reversal, but it would be unwise to do so. Instead, I will remind you of the words of my co-editor who, in the aftermath of the "no" victory last year, wrote that the treaty was not dead. "It ought to be but it ain't," she added. "Dracula will rise from the grave again."

Until the thing has a stake through its heart, a silver bullet lodged in its brain, is buried under tons of soil taken from consecrated ground, sprinkled with holy water and ringed with crucifixes, it ain't never going to be dead. But whether it will rise again later today remains to be seen. The fat lady ain't sung yet.

COMMENT THREAD

For those wishing to follow the results today, blow-by-blow, we have reproduced here a consolidated list of the results from the last Irish referendum, plus the Nice results. Click the pic to enlarge. We'll be live blogging tomorrow, from about 10 am, to pick up news and reaction as it comes in.

Irish+results3[i-Irish+results3]
I am opening up a separate comment thread on the forum, headed "Irish referendum results", and will keep that live for the duration (link below). To avoid confusion and duplication, I'll lock the previous threads.

COMMENT THREAD

irish+poll[i-irish+poll]There is a very large measure of comfort in prospect of a "yes" vote in the Irish referendum. For, if as widely predicted - although by no means in the bag - the Europhiles prevail and the vote clears the way for the full ratification of the constitutional Lisbon treaty, today, 2 October, will go down in history as the day the EU started to unravel.

To understand why this might be the case, one has to delve into the deeper recesses of the "project", way down into the engine room. There, one will discover, as I did an obscure animal, known as the "dual international quasi-legislation/comitology mechanism". In this creature, which is far more common than most would even begin to imagine, lies the reason why the EU has been successful.

And, if the EU had stuck to their "diqules", as they have come to be known, it would have lasted forever. But hubris has intervened in the form of the constitutional Lisbon treaty, and that will be its downfall, its nemesis. Let me explain - for the secret of the current success of the EU lies in six reasons.

Firstly, at the heart of modern government (in fact central to all levels of government, local to international) is a terrible secret. Government is boring. In fact, it is more than boring. It is mind-numbingly, crashingly tedious - the sort of tedium that, if it was instituted as a form of torture would even be banned by the Peoples' Republic of China as inhumane.

Secondly, most government is invisible. What you see on the television and read in the newspapers is only the tiniest fraction of what actually goes on. We get to know about less than one percent of one percent, and the politicians even less. And so boring is it that we don't even want to know.

Thirdly, most politicians have no aptitude for government and few even understand how it works. They are, therefore, in the main, entirely content to let their officials run the nuts and bolts, while they act as front men for the system, going on the jollies and working the media.

Fourth, the European Union has become part of a nexus of legislative bodies, linking international agencies of the United Nations with regional, national and local bodies, to form one continuous, seam-free administrative machine. So embedded is it in the administrative fabric of this and other nations, that the national systems could not function with it.

Fifth, this situation, far from being unwelcome, is highly convenient to the ruling and administrative classes. It saves them no end of work and relieves them of the obligation of having to pay lip-service to democratic procedures.

Sixth, the system acts as a useful lightning conductor, diverting dissent into the labyrinthine maw of international institutions, where activists can be contained, absorbed and then neutralised (or bought off), leaving national actors untroubled… you can always blame the EU.

Over and above that, the system is now so complex that no one (not even the players) really understand it, so no one will be brave enough to touch it in case they break something they don't know how to fix. And, since it defeats even the players' attempts, the critics do not have a chance. The likes of Eurosceptics can be left to blather uselessly round the edges, their criticism so unfocussed and wide of the mark that it has little effect.

Here, one can take a core objection of the sceptics – that sixty, seventy, or is it eighty percent of our laws are now "made in Brussels". Much of this, of course, is dry technical stuff, like the dimensions of rear view mirrors on busses, the composition of cheeses from various regions, or the level of permitted toxic emissions from crematoria.

Now, while this sort of law may come from "Brussels", it would be more accurate to say that it has a Brussels label. But the bulk are no more EU than they are national laws.

Behind that screen, there are hundreds – possibly thousands - of what are known as "quasi-legislative bodies", working on a global and regional scale. These act under the aegis of obscure organisations such as the OIE, which deals with animal health issues, CODEX alimentarius, created in 1963 by FAO and WHO to develop food standards, guidelines and related texts such as codes of practice, the IPCC which, of course, deals with climate change matters, and the World Health Organisation, which deals with public health and infectious diseases.

unece[i-unece]Another of these fascinating organisations is UNECE, the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe – with not 27 countries but 56, including Turkey and Kazakhstan and also, for historical reasons, the United States.

One of its particular functions is to deal with transport, acting via a skein of agreements and conventions, such as the "Agreement Concerning the Adoption of Uniform Conditions of Approval and Reciprocal Recognition of Approval for Motor Vehicle Equipment and Parts, done at Geneva on 20 March 1958", copy here.

It is actually through this Agreement that international standards are worked out for things like the size of rear-view mirrors for busses, which are then handed down to the EU. It then implements them as law in the member states.

The standards themselves are not law, but become law in the EU once implemented, which is done through the comitology system, the twin-track process – through UNECE and the EU – which has acquired that rather cumbersome title of "dual international quasi-legislation/comitology mechanism".

Interestingly, the EU does not get a look in when it comes to formulating these standards, but countries like Norway do. The EU is then used to write the specific legislation for Norway as a member of the EEA. So much for "fax-machine" law. The commission is simply acting as a service provider, making laws for states which have already agreed at a higher international level to implement them.

That digression aside, so useful to the member states are the technical/legislative services provided by the EU – and so necessary are they to the functioning of modern economies – that it is unthinkable that any member state could or would even wish to dispense with them.

Therein lies the genius of the EU. It has harnessed these essential administrative functions to its own ambitions, creating structures and institutions to deal with them in the hope, one day, they will be transformed into something more than a technical organisation. Then, they hope, the EU will be able to assume wider responsibilities in the "high" political areas which include foreign policy and defence. That is what the constitutional Lisbon treaty is all about.

As we observe, so far the Union has been successful. It is still in the game, its ambitions are intact and it is exercising power. But, in the new treaty, it has over-reached itself. It is moving from its "invisible" base to take on board the "high politics" spectrum. But with the additional powers it acquires, it becomes much more intrusive and much more visible. Therein lies its vulnerabilty.

For as long as the "elephant in the room" could be ignored, for as long as it confined itself to the engine room, the political classes have been content to let it continue. They have been able to carry on with their preening and posturing, keeping up the pretence that they were still in change. But, as it becomes ever-more evident who is really in charge, even our most enthusiastic myopics will change their tunes.

With "Lisbon" in the bag, the EU will flex its muscles even more and there will come a point where the number of people it upsets will outnumber those who appreciate its value. The balance of utility will change and the EU will go. Strangely, therefore, getting a "no" vote in Ireland would be the best thing that could have happened to the EU.

But the "colleagues" could never leave well enough alone. If they get their "yes", it will not be the end, or even the beginning of the end. But, as a certain person once said, it will be the end of the beginning. Soon enough, we will see that tipping point in the balance of utility, and from there it will be downhill all the way. For that, if they vote "yes", we will have the Irish to thank.

COMMENT THREAD

Irish+ref[i-Irish+ref]Actually, the voting on the outlying islands started two days ago. And, according to The Times, the very first vote was cast in Barry Edgar Pilcher's living room in Raven Cottage on Inishfree - it went to the "no" campaign.

Mr Pilcher, 66, a London-born artist and musician, serenaded locals on his saxophone as they voted. "I voted 'no' because I think we shouldn't give our power away," Mr Pilcher said. Turnout was high, with five of Inishfree's seven eligible voters casting a ballot. Patsy Dan Rodgers, the "king" of neighbouring Tory Island, said most of the 150 islanders would vote "no" – rather appropriate for the "Tories".

With the vote expected to favour the "yes" camp, however, God – or, at least, the Vatican, which is not quite the same thing – has made an unexpected intervention, warning that the European Union threatens Ireland's "identity, traditions and history".

This is Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Vatican secretary of state, who spoke during the Pope's visit to the Czech Republic, noting that: "Individual European countries have their own identity. The EU prescribes its laws or views to them and they do not have to fit with their traditions and history. Some countries are logically resisting this – for example, Ireland."

Anodyne though this might be, it has been seized upon by the "no" camp in what is regarded as an increasingly acrimonious campaign, with prime minister Brian Cowen still lying through his teeth, claiming that he had secured "legal guarantees" from the EU on Irish concerns about the treaty.

Whatever the "yessies" might say about their level of support, Dr John O'Brennan, European politics lecturer at NUI Maynooth, is warning that the level of anger among Irish voters towards an unpopular government should not be under-estimated.

"If you talk to people all around the country," he says, "a level of anger is very, very high. Are people rational enough to put that aside and think of the interests of the country in the longer term? I'm not so sure." That is obviously from a Europhile and he may not have picked up another factor – more than a few Irish are a tad annoyed with being made to vote again, their first vote having been ignored by their political classes.

Results are not due until Saturday, and it will be mid-morning before we get an idea of which way the sentiment is going, but there is still some hope that the "piss off" factor will prevail and the Irish will have the sense to give the "colleagues" in Brussels a bloody nose.

COMMENT THREAD

Is this the message to which Mr Cameron is listening on the constitutional Lisbon treaty?

... That is what David Cameron and his highly Eurosceptic Shadow Foreign Secretary, William Hague, will need to face up to — immediately, at their party conference next week. To threaten to reopen the whole thing when they enter government would be pointless. Worse than pointless, it would be destructive both to British and to Conservative interests.

COMMENT THREAD

Michael O'Leary, the boss of Ryanair, has admitted in a television interview that one of the reasons he was campaigning for a "yes" vote in the Irish referendum was that the government was "incompetent". Yet he says, "I needed to persuade them to sell me Aer Lingus."

I think we knew that , but it is good to have it confirmed.

O'Leary had in fact said that it would be undemocratic to make the Irish vote again on the treaty after it had been rejected last June. He has now spent €500,000 (£460,000) on advertisements and free flights to support the "yes" camp. A better advertisement for voting "no" is hard to imagine.

COMMENT THREAD

DSC01660-505x739[i-DSC01660-505x739]That is the question put by The Independent, reflecting on the possible outcome of the Irish referendum, now less than a week away.

Certainly, if the latest poll is to be believed, the Irish are about to become yes-men. According to a Red C/Sunday Business Post poll, 55 percent of voters back the constitutional Lisbon treaty, compared with 27 percent against, and 18 percent undecided.

Excluding the "undecided" that equates to a 67 percent score for the "yes" side, with the "no" campaign trailing on 33 percent. There is still a huge – some say unbridgeable – gap to close.

Earlier last week, the Irish Times, under the headline "Relief for Yes side but opponents can take heart too", was parading the results of an Irish Times/TNS mrbi poll.

Here, the result – again excluding the "undecided" – came out at 59 percent for the "yes" side with 41 percent for the "no" campaign, compared with 61 percent and 39 percent at the beginning of the month.

With three polls in the bag, therefore – although not necessarily comparable – we see the "yes" side scoring 61, 59 and now 67 percent, against 39, 41 and 33 percent for the "no" campaign. This does not seem to make sense, as the report on the Red C/Sunday Business Post poll talks of the "yes" side having dropped seven points since "the last poll two weeks ago" as against the "no" side having increased by four points.

Whatever the precise situation, though, it looks as if the "yes" vote is holding firm, offering a gloomy prognosis for next Friday. The situation is even more gloomy when one appreciates that, at a similar stage coming to the end of the first referendum campaign, the "no" side had gone into the lead by 35 percent to 30 percent, with 35 percent still undecided.

Enter then Christopher Booker into the lists, with his column headed "Ireland's EU referendum is the last stand against the 'project'". On the basis of the polling, it looks more like Custer's last stand, the dwindling band of naysayers surrounded by the Sioux, on the verge of defeat.

If we do see an EU-inspired version of Little Bighorn, however, it will come as no surprise. Short of Karzai-style stuffing of the ballot boxes, Booker observes, the European and Irish political establishments could scarcely have done more to push this referendum in the way they want. He writes:

To ensure a "yes" vote, all the normal rules governing balanced media coverage were suspended. The European Commission has poured €1.5 million into an unprecedented advertising blitz. EU commissioners, led by President Jose-Manuel Barroso, MEPs and officials have been flooding in to promote the cause. However, when one or two British outsiders – including Nigel Farage, leader of a group in the European Parliament, and Lorraine Mullally, director of the think-tank Open Europe, and of good Irish stock – came over to campaign for a "No" vote, their "foreign intervention" was greeted by orchestrated howls of abuse.

From thereon, Booker deals with the reasons why the political class of "Europe" has been so desperate to get its way over this treaty. His story, straight out of The Great Deception tells of a "hugely cumbersome, inefficient, corrupt and remote form of government, riddled with dishonesty and wholly undemocratic," which the people of Europe could never again call to account.

When the voters of Ireland go to their polling booths this week, they will be the last in Europe with a chance to say "no" to the political class which now rules over us – thanks to what has amounted to the most extraordinary slow-motion coup d'état in history. And, sadly, it looks as if the yes-men might have it.

But, if this is to be Custer's last stand, the eventual outcome for Sitting Bull wasn't that happy either. Barroso beware!

COMMENT THREAD

Irish+poster[i-Irish+poster]Emerging through a number of blogs and other sites are reports of a Gael Poll on voting intentions for the Irish referendum. The poll, we are told (rather dubiously), suggests there has been a massive surge in support for the "no" campaign, with 59 percent against the treaty and only 41 percent prepared to vote "yes".

This is claimed to be one of the largest polls of its kind ever carried out and the pollster Gael Poll has a good record on the last referendum, predicting a 54-46 percent margin for the "no" campaign, against the actual result of 53.4 percent "no" and 46.6 percent "yes".

What is puzzling though is that, despite the profound implications of this poll, none of the media in Ireland or the UK seem to have reported it. That in itself is not unusual – these days, the media are more characterised by what they do not report, than what they do. But even our dire MSM might, one have thought, be vaguely interested in this piece of news. However, given the dubious nature, it is perhaps just as well.

Nevertheless, scanning the Irish media today, it is very hard to find any serious reporting of the referendum, and it has been the case that the issue has been played low-key by a media that is wholly in favour of the EU treaty. That might tell us something, a sign that the "yes" side lacks confidence and is expecting a thrashing.

A "no" victory would, of course, set the EU issue on fire in the UK, with the referendum coming just a few days before the start of the Tory conference. As always, there is no specific "Europe" debate on the conference agenda, but some statement on the result will be expected, possibly in the leader's speech on the final day. Then, no doubt, Cameron will be under pressure to make his intentions clear as to the UK referendum.

Although the offer on the table is for a referendum on the treaty, if it has not yet been ratified by the time a Tory administration takes over, there is no logic to this stance. If the Irish do vote "no", the treaty is effectively dead. There seems no particular advantage in having a referendum on something which is not going to happen.

In response to a "no" victory, the "colleagues" would, in any event, have to come up with a position – presumably at the autumn European Council, held under the Swedish presidency. Then it is possible that a formal obituary will be written, plus a term of mourning declared. It is hard to see how the "colleagues" could get away with another "period of reflection", although their capacity for navel gazing is endless.

The broader problem though is that ditching the constitutional Lisbon treaty solves nothing. We will still be in the EU and, as much of the new treaty has already been implemented, it will very much be business as usual. The only obvious effect is that the "colleagues" will not be able to preen themselves with a full-time council president and their new "foreign minister".

From the Tory perspective, however, the "death of Lisbon" might afford the opportunity to "park" the EU as an issue, which will be the default mode of a Cameron administration. This will leave us once again in that twilight world, where the EU remains a festering sore in the background, unloved and unresolved.

Against all that though, the "colleagues" will not take a defeat lying down. If Lisbon does fall, it will only be a matter of time before a replacement treaty is on the cards, and Cameron will have to look to fending off calls for a new IGC. That, though, is so far into the future that it is not even on the political horizon and, before even that, there is the little matter of a general election.

There, despite the very obvious lead in the polls, the outcome is not absolutely certain – and it is by no means guaranteed that Cameron can attract enough votes to give him a comfortable majority in the House.

The unknown factor is the behaviour of the electorate towards the minority parties – whether there is enough disaffection with the mainstream parties for the "UKIP effect" to kick in or whether, as in 1997, there is the classic "two party squeeze", with the tiddlers being left out in the cold.

Certainly, one detects in the general public mood a lack of enthusiasm for the Tories, and many people will be watching closely for Cameron's reaction to the Irish referendum, irrespective of the result. The EU may not be a battleground on which the Tories prefer to fight, but a very significant number of votes are going to be decided by what he says (or does not say).

As always, therefore, the "elephant in the room" will continue to cast its baleful effect and, sooner or later, the politicians are going to have to deal with the stink.

COMMENT THREAD

leprechaun[i-leprechaun]It is difficult to know what precisely has changed since last July when it was learned that a group of senators in the Czech Upper House were planning to refer the constitutional Lisbon treaty back to the country's constitutional court – a process which could delay ratification for between three and six months.

However, The Times is getting rather excited about this, having picked up some gossip from last week's informal European Council meeting in Brussels, held to prepare for the G20 meeting in Pittsburgh on 24-25 September.

The issue was, apparently, brought up at that meeting when "EU leaders" were said to be "furious" at the delay, which means that the treaty could still be unratified by the time the UK goes to the polls, even if the Irish roll over and vote "yes" in their referendum.

With Mr Cameron somewhat on the rack over the treaty, one can only suppose that he is hoping for a "no" vote out of the Irish, which will enable him to park the issue, claiming the treaty is dead in the water, making a UK referendum irrelevant.

But if the Irish fail to do the decent thing, and the Czechs manage to hold out, this puts Cameron in something of a quandary. With the treaty not ratified, he will be obliged to honour his promise and hold a referendum. He will then be in the awkward position of supporting the "no" campaign, in the middle of trying to establish his own administration.

If this prospect might be unattractive to Cameron, we are told that it horrifies most EU leaders, not least the poison dwarf, Nicolas Sarkozy, who has warned Prague that it faces "consequences" if it does not swiftly follow an Irish "yes" (they hope) with its own ratification.

The outburst apparently followed a private warning from Jan Fischer, the Czech caretaker prime minister, that he had little control over president Václav Klaus, and could not force him to sign the ratification document.

Nevertheless, Sarkozy was not a happy bunny, declaring darkly that "... if the Irish say 'yes', there is no question that we will accept to stay in a no-man's land with a Europe that does not have the institutions to cope with the crisis." Asked about what could be done to persuade Klaus to sign, he added: "It will be necessary to draw the consequences — but those will be the subject of another meeting."

What precisely Sarkozy could then do, he was perhaps wise not to specify, as one rather gets the impression that Klaus is rather enjoying tweaking the tail of the "colleagues", and is trying to hold on until after the British election. Cameron is unlikely to gain quite the same degree of enjoyment.

Over the next few weeks though, little do the Irish realise quite how much power they have – although it makes their referendum choice that much more difficult. Do they stuff the "colleagues" with a "no" vote, or stuff the next English prime minister by voting "yes"? Either way, of course, there will be consequences.

COMMENT THREAD

Genyes2[i-Genyes2]Asked about the "spontaneous" demonstration against the arrival of Nigel Farage, in Ireland to campaign on the Irish referendum, Sharon Waters, a spokesperson for Generation Yes, said that the protest was simply a gathering of private individuals who arrived to make their feelings known.

Ms Waters said there was no place in an Irish referendum campaign for politicians from outside Ireland. And she certainly does not like UKIP, if this statement is any guide. The United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP), a byword across Europe for right-wing extremism, xenophobia and bigotry, it says, continuing thus:

Generation YES are outraged at this intervention by foreign interests into this crucial debate on Ireland’s vital national interests. We can be sure that UKIP are promoting their own repugnant agenda, with no concern for the welfare of the ordinary people of Ireland. They want to use the Irish referendum for their own ends – to get England out of the EU. They seek to dismantle the Belfast Agreement, reintroduce the death penalty and abolish social security, they prevent disabled people from standing for election on their ticket, and they also deny climate change and the Holocaust. We need to reject these offensive people, and to continue our own progressive, positive relationship with Europe that has served us so well.

But Ms Waters admitted there had been no protest against Lech Walesa, the former President of Poland, who was also in Dublin to campaign for a "yes" vote. Nor would there be protests against José Manuel Barroso, the newly re-elected EU commission president, when he arrives in Ireland, also to campaign for a "yes" vote.

This is, incidentally, the same Sharon Waters who is a campaigner on human rights and environmental issues, most notably for Amnesty International and the Australian Red Cross.

She might also have a word with her colleague, Clodagh Power, on the Generation Yes team. This little lady has just spent a year at De Paul University Chicago. While she was there, she worked as an intern at the International Human Rights Law Institute and was a volunteer at the Obama presidential campaign at his Chicago Campaign Headquarters.

One can see a glittering future set out for these little lovelies in European politics … just the right brand of total hypocrisy that should go down well in Brussels.

COMMENT THREAD

heart_control[i-heart_control]Fresh from his victory, courtesy of the Tory MEP group, EU Kommisar José Manuel Barroso tells us: "As president of the commission, my party is going to be Europe. Anyone who wants to can come on board in this exciting journey that is the integration of Europe."

"This is the moment of truth," he adds.

And the question is, Mr Barroso, what happens if we do not want to "come on board"? What happens if we don't want to join you on "this exciting journey that is the integration of Europe"?

Here, of course, actions speak louder than words. Flushed with his success, we told, Mr Barroso, in an example of monumental hubris, will this weekend travel to Ireland to campaign for a "yes" vote in the referendum.

At least the Irish have a choice, of a sort, and can tell Borroso - with his unwarranted interference - where to go. As it stands, we have none. But the man has crossed the line. His is the unacceptable, unspeakably smug face of "Europe" (not that any "face" would be acceptable).

link[i-link]
There is now a predictable end to the "exciting journey" on which he is embarking ... and never mind the quality, feel the width. It is 7.62mm. If he reads his history books, he should know that that is the rendevous he is choosing.

COMMENT THREAD

GANLEY[i-GANLEY]One would have thought that Declan Ganley, after his drubbing in the euro-elections, might stay in his little hole – especially as we heard that he was to quit politics.

The ego will always out, though, and the great man has now re-emerged to take command of the second Irish referendum, giving the Wall Street Journal the benefit of his pearls of wisdom.

For a man who chose a former MoD publicity officer as the leader of his election campaign, and who offered a platform where to describe it as "incoherent" would be an undeserved compliment, to have him on the "no" side is something of a mixed blessing.

The chances are, though, that he has picked the winning side, as sentiment hardens against the “colleagues” and the Irish people realise they are being taken for fools – and have the fortune to have the opportunity to deliver the shamrock version of a Bronx cheer to their masters.

If the Irish people prevail, it will most likely be in spite of rather than because of Ganley's efforts, this dim little man still prattling about being a "committed European." He is not a eurosceptic, not in any way, shape or form, he tells us, chirping that he believes, "that Europe's future as united is the only sensible way forward."

While saddled with Ganley, however, the "no" campaign is able to benefit from the increasingly crass hand being played by the Irish government, which is relying on a procession of visiting commissioners in an attempt to sweet-talk the Irish into believing that the EU can turn water into wine.

If the Irish do fall for this blarney, we will have to revisit all those Irish jokes but, on the face of it, the only jokes currently in town are the Irish government and Ganley.

COMMENT THREAD

With a message for our Irish friends.

[Loband: Object Removed -]


A simple request ... vote "no" to Lisbon. Just do it!

COMMENT THREAD