I think the Treaty will ensure that future Irish governments will live within their means. This alone is a good reason to vote YES. A YES vote will also bring a little more certainty to a very uncertain situation. We are a small open economy on the edge of Europe, we simply can’t afford to turn our backs on the EU and the Euro – reality check!!!

Eh, David, its being widely acknowledged that had the treaty been in place ten years ago it would not have prevented our crisis. Our crisis was caused by the banks, not soverign spending.

We don’t have a history of living outside our means and any confident and reputable government should be ensuring we live within our means while balancing that with infrastructure investment. Do we really need the Germans enforcing this upon us or do we have the cop on ourselves to govern our own country? The rest of your argument is back to default Yes mode – scaremongering and telling us why not to vote No! So I’ll ask again, give me one GOOD SENSIBLE reason why to vote Yes?

here’s another reality check

“Ireland’s general government debt for last year was €169.2 billion, or 105.1% of
its GDP (€161bn). The debt is expected to peak at around 125% of GDP in the next
couple of years before we start chipping away at it again. If GDP was to remain flat –
although, naturally, we all hope it won’t – Ireland
would need to knock €8 BILLION off its debt EVERY YEAR for EIGHT YEARS before it got
debt back to 60% of GDP (€96bn).”
Gavin Reilly

And David,
that’s without any argument about the loss in the quality of democracy.

We obviously don’t have the cop to govern our own economy – shame to say it but true – we have failed. The Troika in charge are evidence of that fact.

That’s lame david, very limp.

So because of one bunch of economic illiterate morons and crooks we sign away our sovereignty and the future of our children on the whim of one of the countries who were responsible for the biggest ever genocide visited upon planet earth. They’re the guys we should trust over ourselves is it? They’ll care about our children and sick and poor and old will they?

Too Trueleft – our crisis was cuased by exessive public spending and the banks. Bertie doubled public spend over ten years with taxation from unsustainable sources ie, taxes from the construction sector borrowed from the banks.

Our future is in Europe not outside it. We need them more than they will ever need us. Sure we can go it alone but that will mean us returning to the dark ages – I ain’t going there!! One way ticket out of here.

@ Reg. Government spending was not the problem, it only became a problem when the tax take collapsed due to a reliance on transactional taxes. Now, I agree that a Keynesian model was the way to go and I am the first to lambaste FF for its stupdity, but the simple fact was we did not breach the soverign limits that will be contained in this treaty prior to the crash.

Let’s not forget also that after the destruction and carnage the Germans wreaked upon Europe, they weren’t crying out for prudence when they were going cap in hand to London to re build their economy and country. A mere 50 years on they have forgotten alot and got very self righteous indeed. And here we have Irish mugs falling for it again, same ole washed out lines about jobs and investment that never come to fruition, merely make it handier for the Germans, for us to wire them our taxes to bail out their banking system, while ensuring we are starved of investing back into our own country. Ya, real sensible lads. Anyone who votes YES should be drawn up for treason!

@David Who is talking about leaving the Euro? Will you stop the presumptions and scaremongering and give me a reason why to vote YES!

Too Trueleft – it is true that the tax base was/is a huge problem. However the fact that public spending doubled between 1997 and 2007 cannot be ignored. Bertie was a great man for solving problems by throwing money at them. He was a disaster.

Have a look at this , it is long , but well worth the view. He is a German doctor condemning his countrymen and need for controlling Europe. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GZlKxrmdyA

David. What this treaty means is that borrowing to invest is no longer an option, that borrowing to offset a decline is no longer an option. Infrastructure projects are going to disappear all over the continent.

This treaty is an attempt to go against all business acumen, all international experience, all logic.

If they implement it, and act on it, then this crisis will reach new depths.

David. The party that is going to be the leading plank of the next Dutch Govt. are utterly opposed to this treaty. So are you saying that the Durch are going to leave the Euro.

If being against this loolah treaty means leaving the Euro, then the currency is going to loose several key members in next year.

In fairness david Whelan has never heard of the Maastricht treaty and what Ireland signed up for under it. That was twenty odd years ago maybe david should read up about that before talking about nations living beyond their means.

I’m voting No but even I wanted to call up FG HQ and tell them not to send frigging Pascal out, woeful presentation, delivery and content. It’s like he doesn’t even believe it himself, same with Varad on VB last night, he doesn’t beleive the treaty is good for us either. Half-hearted,limp wristed sale of it.

Fagen’s he doesn’t believe it but he does parrot pretty good in fairness.

The only way we will get debt forgiveness is to do what the Greeks did.

Enda picks up phone:
“eh, hello ECB, we won’t pay and we have no choice but to go back to the punt”

*you have 2,345 missed calls and 2,000 voice mails from the ECB*

@trueleft, seriously if your gonna put your thoughts into the public domain then atleast read a book or two first, you clearly don’t have a clue what you are talking about and are just repeating rhetoric…

Which bit is incorrect? Do educate us please

Diarmaid I am completely convinced by the no Argument. However you do us all no favours with your clearly racist comments.

Orla, my comments are not racist. They are facts, stop being so PC about one of the biggest events that ever happened. We hold abuse that happened 50 years ago against the church, which I totally agree with by the way, why not a World War when we are being lectured on prudence by a country that not too long ago had a few caps and hands of their own?

Orla. How the hell is that racist??

Germany has had the 2 biggest defaults of the last century. It received the biggest aid package on record.

If America did not bail out, write off German debt after the war, give them a massive aid package, then Germany would have starved. England would have collapsed as well but for write offs and aid.

Agree with Orla your posting racist stuff otherwise you might know that it was not just Germany who put us were we are.

If my comments are racist I invite the journal to judge and remove IF they see fit. How it’s racist to highlight the fact that the Germans had to beg, borrow and steal, after a world war they were at the centre of, to re build their own country, is beyond me! Another case of racism card being used a bit heavily. Didn’t realise highlighting facts that show a flaw and a deep hypocrisy in a particular countries argument for the introduction of a backwards law, that they are pushing, that negates any sovereignty we have was racist to be honest?

Kenny and Gilmore will pay with their jobs for this treaty, if it is passed. The additional cuts that it will bring in are going to be mean a very harsh budget in 2013 and on.

@diarmuid … U didn’t read my answer we will get out current expenditure deficit under control and move to a balanced budget but we still have the 150+ billion deficit to service so that’s why we have to continue going to the bond markets

@ fagans
Very true but we will have these traitors in their jobs for a few more years before we get a chance to oust them.

Imagine the damage they will have done before their tenure is up

Kieran, I’ll try to look past the smugness and arrogance of your post and re direct you to the relevance of your post? The treaty has nothing to do with capital markets. It has to do with the legality of our country borrowing beyond certain levels. Spend less time on smugness and more time on addressing the actual treaty please.

@diarmuid I think you will find the treaty has everything to do with the capital markets, what the treaty is is an attempt to make the deficit to GDP target of 3% and the debt to GDP target of 60% (that we already agreed to in the Maastricht treaty) legally binding so that regardless of what government is elected they cant bring down the whole monetary union. Perhaps you should actually read what is in the treaty before calling me arrogant…

@ Kieran, would you lend money to a country that pours it into zombie banks with no chance of a return? No? Neither will the markets, that’s why we are dealing with the troika
The monetary union is on the brink even after Maastricht. Austerity is not working, our growth figures are being cut again, The fiscal compact will not solve any of our problems. Once growth is achieved and stability returns to all of Europe’s markets, then it’s time to bring in budget controls. To do so now is like wearing a straight jacket while drowning

Point me to the line that speaks about the capital markets so Kieran. The treaty indirectly may have to do with the capital markets but certainly not directly. It’s disingenuous to suggest otherwise. Your point still is wrong. There is no direct reference to the markets in the treaty. Indirectly there is a correlation but thats about the size of it?

Is he not entitled to his opinion without questioning his motives as much as you are?

No Jay he’s not entitled to his opinion. He was speaking as the Governor of the Central Bank meaning he is a public servant payed by the tax payer he has no business interfering in a political issue. His only option now is to resign.

Diarmaid and fagan it is racist to bring the holocaust into the current argument. There are plenty current reasons to complain about the Bundesbank Angela murkel and Eurocrats without resorting to blanket blame on the current German people for the holocaust. You run the risk of sounding like basil faulty

Orla, you raised the holocaust, not me. I am speaking of their actions and begging post the world war. Maybe it’s you who have the inner prejudice as I am extremely certain of what I am speaking about. http://diarmaidtwomey.blogspot.com/2012/04/i-am-racist.html

Give me one argument in favour of the treaty without scaremongering please David or without referring to a 2nd bailout? The yes side can give plenty reasons why not to vote NO but haven’t got one reason to Vote YES!

Don’t forget David like you, he only has one vote.

A reason why I think voting yes is good is that in the future when we try return to the bond markets the ESM gives potential investors security knowing that their sovereign debt investment is 100% safe

As well if other peripheral states are members of the agreement they would be more attractive from a debt auction point of view ( because of the access to the ESM as security)

You do realise that we won’t be going to the bond markets because we won’t be borrowing for infrastructure investment cause of the straight jacket this treaty will have us in yes? So your argument is deeply flawed! We won’t be borrowing anymore cause we will be living within our means but we also won’t be borrowing to invest because of this treaty. So why then will we be going to the bond markets tell me?

@ Jay. The potential investors money is only as safe as the Euro itself, which will remain on life support until the debt problem is taken care of. This treaty does nothing to allieviate the main cause of instability.

The ESM will solve nothing. Eurobonds might, but it would take the spirit of solidarity the EU was founded on to make it happen. Merkosy and the ECB could solve this tomorrow. Instead there putting 10 million europeans through the grinder.

This vote will give them even more powers to punish us, the people who saved their banks.

And safer for whom ??
and as for the caption on enda with the posters
Now that I have all the granny’s , jobseekers and higher paid civil servants frightened half to death , this should really get what I want !

@Diarmid,
there we have it Diarmid..plain old racism

@ David Whelan
The Maastricht treaty (1992) required nations to keep to a 3% deficit,
It also required a debt to GDP ratio of no more than 60%…treaties might sound good to right wing law & order merchants but in reality there are too many different economies for the Euro to work. What’s good for Germany might not be so for the PIIGS

Hahaha, good laugh that david,
you call them “The big guns”!!
I call dem same shower of gits “Big Snouts”
who have a personal investment in the outcome of this.
You really thing they will get hurt financially by a yes vote??
Not on your nellie.
It’ll be us, the scum, who they will be tightenin the screws on,
certainly not them.
Hope ya like havin ur financial nuts in a vice,
for years, relentless, grinding,
and if a yes vote, it’ll be by consent.
F*cking unbelievable!!!!!!!!!!!!

@Madeline Don’t dare accuse me of racism when I am merely highlighting a FACT that 50 years ago when Germany was in the toilet it wasn’t crying out for laws on prudence! That’s a FACT, if you have a problem with that, I suggest growing a thicker skin and not using inflammatory language to discredit someone!

No investment will ever be 100% safe, it doesn’t matter how many treaties we sign or what they say.

Pity that the tide of leadership in several European countries to date is moving away from the treaty. Holland, France and Spain, with Italy giving some grumblings.

The treaty was dead before it left the negotiating room. Pure stage politics for Sarkozy and Merkel’s election bids.

@diarmuid we don’t just go to bond markets for money for infrastructure over the next few years well still have a budgetary deficit which we will have to borrow for and when we finally reach the .5% target we still have our current debts to service… So paying off maturing 10/9/3 year bonds etc

@jay But by the time we have availed of and exited the 2nd bailout, the bailout we need so much according to the yes side, the same side who said we weren’t going to need it until it suited them to say we did need it, we will have no deficit according to the treaty so why then will we need the bond markets again tell me?

The “Big guns” caused the mess in the first place.

Shut up

Here’s an interesting article for you called “why experts get it wrong”:

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/04/why-experts-get-it-wrong/73322/

No.

Diarmaid you did intact raise the holocaust you said “responsible for one of the greatest genocides”. Whilst hitler and many Germans at the time were responsible I don’t believe you can blame the current people of Germany. It does nothing to further your argument which I agree with

I did, in order to put their actions post the World war into context. Germany were no shining star in the middle of last century. A default, a world war and alot of begging. Are we now going to be lectured by them? That’s a fair and non racist argument to make!