EU relief as Ireland says Yes
Treaty still faces obstacles
Ireland voted resoundingly in favour of the EU's Lisbon Treaty in a rerun referendum, overturning a previous No vote and taking a key step towards ending the expanding bloc's deadlock, leaders said yesterday.
Irish Prime Minister Brian Cowen called the Yes vote by 67 per cent "a good day for Ireland and... a good day for Europe", while EU counterparts also hailed a crucial move for its future.
"Today the Irish people have spoken with a clear and resounding voice - it's a good day for Ireland and it's a good day for Europe," said the Irish Taoiseach, or premier.
In Brussels, European Commission chief Jose Manuel Barroso thanked the Irish people "for this sign of confidence", saying it "showed that the European Union was ready to listen" to the misgivings which led to last year's No vote.
The result was also welcomed in the Balkans, where EU membership candidates including Serbia had feared a second Irish No would torpedo their chances of ever joining the bloc.
In a first referendum in June 2008, Irish voters stunned the EU by rejecting the Lisbon Treaty - designed to streamline decision-making - by 53 per cent. A second No vote would have effectively killed the treaty, which notably creates a new full-time EU president and foreign minister for the 27-nation EU, home to some 500 million Europeans.
But with votes counted in 40 of Ireland's 43 constituencies after the referendum last Friday, 67 per cent had voted Yes compared to 33 per cent against, according to official results.
The No camp conceded defeat even before official results were published in Ireland, the only EU country constitutionally obliged to put the treaty to a referendum.
"The Irish people have asserted their trust in the political establishment of this country who have promised them jobs for a Yes vote and economic recovery," said Declan Ganley, who led the victorious No campaign last year.
Dublin agreed to hold another poll after securing guarantees on key policy areas which it felt were behind last year's rejection, such as its military neutrality, abortion and tax laws.
But there had been concerns that some voters would use the referendum to kick Cowen's increasingly unpopular government over the spectacular collapse of Ireland's long-booming economy.
Even with an Irish Yes vote, further obstacles remain: while 25 EU states have now formally backed it, Poland and the Czech Republic are the only others yet to ratify the treaty.
In Prague last Friday, the Czech constitutional court ordered President Vaclav Klaus - who in any case is a fierce opponent of the Lisbon Treaty - to hold off signing it into force. The Irish result is also being closely watched in Britain where opposition leader David Cameron, tipped to win elections due by next June, has pledged to hold a referendum if he takes power and Lisbon has not yet been ratified.
There have been suggestions in the European Parliament that British former prime minister Tony Blair could be given the job of EU president which would be created if the Lisbon Treaty comes into force.
British Prime Minister Gordon Brown said the Irish Yes vote clears the way for the bloc to move forward on key areas like the economy.
"We can now work together to focus on the issues that matter most to Europeans ," he said.
In Belgrade, the Serbian government hailed the Irish vote, saying EU hopefuls in the western Balkans would also benefit from it.
Spain, which takes over the EU's rotating presidency for the first half of next year, vowed to make its implementation a key priority.
10 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
lgalea
Oct 5th 2009, 09:35
p.s. as for Giuliano Amato's speech it was published in the foreign press and no one including Giuliano Amato himself denied it. Typical of europhiles sowing doubts where they cannot deny what was said.
As for illegal immigrants I always said that they should be expelled back whence they came not allowed to drown Scullion. There is a difference between letting them face the consequences of their irresponsible actions and risking the lives of our soldiers to save them.
Robert Scullion
Oct 4th 2009, 19:03
@lgalea
Ah yes the death penalty issue. Seem to remember you mentioned this before, yet you couldn't highlight the section of the Lisbon treaty that contains it.
Surprisingly enough I suspect its a huge lie, as you scramble to clutch at straws.
Still if the death penalty is contained in the treaty can you explain:
How it wasn't referred to by the anti-Lisbon groups in the recent referendum last Friday in Ireland?
How come no news organisation has brought this to everyones attention, even news organisations outside the EU? (or do you suppose the EU controls all of them)
Why hasn't the Council of Europe complained as Protocol 13 concerns itself with the abolition of the death penalty?
How come the only person that seems to believe that the Lisbon treaty contains the death penalty is you?
Also considering you prefer to let illegal immigrants sink and drown rather than land in Malta, I'm surprised you seem so anti death penalty.
Still if/when you invent your explanation I'll read it, just as I listened to Giuliano Amato (can we be sure it was actually him, no faces) but it'll still be made-up.
lgalea
Oct 4th 2009, 18:31
Robert Scullion
We will see who will be left back to the dark ages caves etc that you mention. Your adored eu shall disintegrate in the not too distant future. Your eu is simply a DERMOCRACY and not a democracy Scullion. Hear Giuliano Amato himself say that they made the treaty unreadable on purpose so that the people do not understand it and do not demand a referendum Go to http://www.cnimalta.org/amatoE.html and download the audio file Scullion. Go on Scullion, hear him yourself say so. If they had nothing to hide why did they do so? Why did they include the right to introduce the death penalty Scullion? The eu is the worst and cursed thing that ever happened in Europe.
David Ellul
Oct 4th 2009, 15:43
Does this mean that Ireland sobered up and voted in favor of the Lisbon Treaty? Will there be a push for best out of three now? I suppose not, Ireland got an offer it could not refuse. Do you think that there would have been a second referendum if the first vote would have been in favor of the Treaty?
Why is it that even though there is such easy excess to mass communication and information, this world's population still allows it's leaders to manipulate them?
All I can say is that I am looking forward to the "New Jerusalem" .
Robert Scullion
Oct 4th 2009, 15:17
@lgalea
lol, talk about harking back to the dark ages
I'm surprised you haven't said the world is really flat and the EU is hiding the truth from us all.
Still you can do your hocus pocus poems from the 16thC .. the rest of civilisation will move forward into the 21st and leave you behind in your cave.
edward bartolo
Oct 4th 2009, 13:37
Quote: "The only thing we learn from this is that all Governments couldn't care less for the people they claim to represent."
But that's not democracy! Are you saying that politicians manipulate the people's will whom they should represent?
I know the answers, but it's so ironic in an era that glorifies so much democracy!
lgalea
Oct 4th 2009, 11:55
How about applying this to the eu and its petty dictators and their quislings in the member countries? http://www.bbc.co.uk/cumbria/features/2003/07/restoration/the_curse.shtml
Jim Coleborn
Oct 4th 2009, 10:55
I'm afraid your hopes are misplaced, Mr Apap. In the UK we were promised a referendum but when it became clear that the result would be a 'NO' a few clauses were altered so that the government could say it was a different treaty and renage on their original promise. Even if we had a referendum, whichever party was in power they would behave just as the Irish one did. "If you don't give the result we want you do it again" (presumably until the right result is obtained)
The only thing we learn from this is that all Governments couldn't care less for the people they claim to represent.
Rocco Cauchi
Oct 4th 2009, 10:50
The Irish vote sets me pondering about the meaning of democracy as mathematically formulated. While in no way expressing my opinion about Ireland's decision, I beg to question how any referendum or electoral outcome could be based on a 67.13% favourable vote over a turnout of 50%. True to say that while in 2008 only 10 out of 43 parliamentary constituencies voted in favour, now 41 did so, I still feel that abstaining registered voters have much to say but which they can not express pending representation by an official party or pressure group.
I fail to understand how in Malta a tiny majority of a few thousand voters elect Parliament for five years with no clear sweeping majority of say 5-10% being ever registered. I think democratic governability should be entrusted to a better representation of the total number of eligible voters, whether they cast their vote or not. What matters if we start having coalitions? This would only eliminate the arrogance we currently witness. It would also trim down the urge of both parties to have opposite party's assumed supporters being struck off the list on very flimsy grounds showing there exists a grapevine of misleading political information.
Danny Apap
Oct 4th 2009, 10:00
The British public has not yet voted on the Lisbon Treaty that is to come next year first we get vote the labour party out thou I have voted for the Labour party in the past like many others we feel that we have been betrayed by Gordon Brown by signing for the Lisbon Treaty without a referendum for he knows that the vote would have been NO and he would have had to call a general election and wanted to hang on to power.
The British public will have a say on the Treaty after June next year and the outcome of the referendum will be NO NO NO!!!