Exactly Stephen. If our government dont have the basic cop-on to formulate a plan in the event of a NO vote, then how on earth are we supposed to have any confidence in ANYTHING they recommend to us?

There is Never any forward planning!!

No it doesn’t, unless of course they secretly amended a previous treaty……(as more or less confirmed last night on VB.)

Eh, yes it does. Future deals that access EFSF funds require ratification of the treaty.

Our current deal is fine, but if we need a second deal from Europe, we will need to ratify the treaty.

Something brought into play at the behest of our government “negotiators”.?
It’s already been flagged as legally dubious yet it’s shaping up to be the battle cry for the YES side.

balls donal, the germans wont let us go broke until we have paid back what they say we owe, no matter about access to this particular fund or not

Not going well for the No side so far. SF and ULA having to discuss things they don’t like discussing, like the 15bn to be borrowed to pay for PS pay and SW this year, and how they replace that when we say we don’t want to be part of the ESM. Ruth Coppinger was reduced to a dribbling wreck on Vincent Browne last night.

Revolting, the Germans were the ones who insisted on the ratification for access to the ESM clause in the Treaty.

yes donal, for a proposed future fund, we already have access for the required amount to get rid of our existing deficit, i still maintain that no amount of money is worth abandoning accountability

Yes Neil, it’s going rather splendid for the yes camp too, what with already sacrificing health in favour of paying an EU imposed debt they want us to ratify something that will increase these cuts and all the time paying back a foreign debt which does not belong to us, – instigated by the same people who drafted this treaty.
As for the Labour rep last night on VB – no answers just the usual party responses, a fool.

Revolting, we have a deal that manages our deficit until 2014. We will still have a deficit after that.

If the market will lend to us to fund this deficit, it will be at quite a high rate. The rate will be even higher if the market knows that we do not have access to the ESM.

If the market will not lend to us, we default and we have austerity on steroids.

These are basic facts.

Dermot, here’s the exchequer accounts http://finance.gov.ie/documents/exchequerstatements/2011/enddecexcheqstat.pdf
You’ll notice that the taxes the government takes in do not even cover PS pay and SW etc, they’re more than 10bn short. You can explain to us all where the money is coming from to fund that gap, and indeed increase that gap as you want to increase spending.

These are things the Shinners don’t like discussing. You start having to talk about going back to the bond markets, markets which can make you jump by charging whatever interest rate they fancy on a whim, markets which don’t take kindly to countries who show no inclination to balance their budget in the future and pay them back.

@donal i would cut public spending and raise taxes and get rid of the deficit in one go, this is happening anyway but its costing us a great deal more in the long term, do you realise we cut €10 billion from public spending in the last 2 budgets, yet our deficit only reduced €2 billion? and this was not including the introduced taxes and charges, no one wants a hard time but some things just arent worth the money, they are using the croke park agreement as a weapon to protect their own pensions, while fleecing everyone else, its time to put a stop to this

But Donal.Fg assured us that everything was hunky dory, we’re on track, no 2nd bailout needed, we’ve turned the corner, we have growth, the economy is growing, we’re doing brilliant, the EU loves us, the IMF loves us, we’re the poster boys for austerity, we’ll be back with fiscal sovereignty by 2015 yet still manage to throw in the “this treaty will ensure we have access to funding”…….are they lying about the economy or just dressing it up to suit us?

Neil – time to look at the bigger picture.
Why are we still in recession?
Why are we running a deficit?
Why are we paying back a debt that does not belong to us?
Why are we involved with the troika?

Would this country be better off if we didn’t have that noose around our necks?
Most probably yes.
This treaty will not loosen the burden for this state nor loosen the burden on every man woman and child who lives here.
Granted – a yes vote would be more forthcoming if we received something in return but are we?
Not according to Mrs Creighton.

““Creighton added that Ireland will not seek concessions from Europe to ease its debt burden to make the referendum more palatable for voters.”

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/02/28/uk-europe-ireland-referendum-idUKTRE81R1W420120228

Dependence on future funding in not a requisite for ratifying this treaty and has been debunked as lies.

Revolting, your getting rid of the deficit in one go solution equals austerity on steroids. An economist who didn’t live here would probably say this is the best solution but it would be hell on earth for the citizens of Ireland for a good few years.

Dermot, see my opening post. You could also ask all those on the left who have been saying that a second bailout is definite, where they plan to get it.

Also, please explain how you would fund the deficit after 2014. That’s what this is about.

The left, as you call them are merely suggesting that FG’s assertion that the economy is back on track and no 2nd bailout is needed as wishful thinking, I hope they’re wrong.
Where it will come from? – it’ll come from the present day source, this idea that we’ll be shut out from the troika for saying no is preposterous, does anyone think the EU will sit idly by as one of it’s members who they have enshrined as the good guys of austerity starts to flounder again, do you think they will cut us loose and watch the whole project unravel?
As i said – the whole notion of ratification needed to access funds was an improper request put in by FG to dissuade any potential no vote.
That’s my opinion and unless someone from the troika and ECB comes out publicly and tells us straight out that a no vote will mean we will be thrown to the wolves i won’t change that opinion.
If of course they do come out and confirm such then serious questions have to be put to the whole structure of the EU and why using threats to sway a nations vote is considered apt.

Dermot, it was the Germans who insisted on the ‘ratification for access to the ESM’ clause. The Germans.

The fact that you are making up stuff like the below indicates exactly where you are coming from – lala land.

“the whole notion of ratification needed to access funds was an improper request put in by FG to dissuade any potential no vote”

@donal i take your point about austerity on steroids, it would indeed be extremely tough, but as i said in the last post, i see this as happening anyway, why will it be easier in 3 years when another €10 billion has been cut from public spending?, this is just a slow death, we are being bled dry, i completely believe the outcome will be the same, we can do it now or in 3-4 years time, the troika expects deficit to reduce to a % of a continually shrinking economy (besides from exports), it seems at the cost of €5billion to reduce the deficit by €1billion we will definitely be in major pain by the time that target is met, just do it now, less debt in the long run

You must be president of lala land to think we’d be cast aside because we don’t do what the Germans tell us to do – see even in that sentence I exposed this treaty for what it is – a German directive telling us not to break the rules that they and France continually broke.
I understand that you have to tow the party line Donal, but petty name calling and churlish attitude rarely a good debate makes.
Why are you so eager to have us committed to austerity Donal?

“If a country emerges from a programme – any country – the situation is that if they require any further funding, it would still be made available provided they met the conditions.”
Mr Enda Kenny. 5/2/2012.

http://www.thejournal.ie/taoiseach-bailout-funds-are-not-dependent-on-fiscal-compact-346718-Feb2012/

Dermot, you do know that you just contradicted yourself? I expect not…

Dermot, if your argument is against balanced budgets then is it your hope that Ireland is always dependent on borrowing from others? That it can never stand on its own two feet?

If your argument is against budget rules going into the constitution then do you disagree with SFs demand that this went to a referendum which could put such rules into the constitution?

Oh Donal, I do love your witty responses, engage me more, humour me.

Why would I be against balanced budgets Neil?
No country in this day and age will ever be self sufficient, it’s a dream of many but the reality is countries will always have to borrow, borrowing more than you can expect to pay back is something basic financial prudence should prevent you from doing, don’t we have politicians elected to oversee such stuff….oh yeah, we’re been punished becasue we can’t breed a decent class of politician with basic economic knowledge.
And why is no-one mentioning the real fact that through this treaty we may never enter the markets again as a sovereign country, we will become more subservient to the ECB who will dictate and control our borrowing and spending….or does that matter?

Dermot, you’re claiming that “the whole notion of ratification needed to access funds was an improper request put in by FG to dissuade any potential no vote” and quoting Enda Kenny saying the opposite.

Oh Christ.
Do you need clarification on everything you read Donal, pardon me for not indulging you with a full break down, my fault, no need to stoop any lower.
It was suggested that FG asked for the nonsensical line regarding a dropkick out of future funding if we don’t adopt this treaty, Mr Kenny had to go public to deny it yet now the party line is that yes, we will be refused further funding in we don’t ratify the treaty.
Now if that’s not a flip flop I don’t know what is – maybe you’d like to contradict your Taoiseach, will we be kicked from funding if we don’t ratify?

How in gods name did she get elected? The only thing she’s worried about is losing her job! Hearing her on the radio this morning, trying to frighten the public was embarrassing! Does she think we can’t think for ourselves?

I am sick of these peoples lies and I am sick of the idiots in Ireland who believe her and her political friends. I am very close to leaving this country with my family. How can a country have a future if the people are not even educated and bright enough to see through blatant political lies. I have just seen the Poll here regarding the referendum, I am shocked and embarrassed to be Irish, again!!!

…and thus the scaremongering and the soon to be sabre rattling commences. They still don’t get it..do they? They’ve been lying to us about Europe since Maastricht (forgive the spelling) and we have been buyiing their lies…up to now. We’re a desperate nation who are watching every move and now we have a say in where this might go…stop patronising us and stand up for us. This is an absolutely golden opportunity to get the Anglo promisary notes re negotiated…use it and take the first steps to get us away from living in an economy to living in a society.

@ Irish Mammy, you see Fine Gaels policy is working Recovery by Emigation! Get enough people to leave and that will take the pressure off.

so whats she’s saying if I can translate is ” Look everyone else is putting there hands in the fire ,you’ll look completely stupid if you’re the only one without a burnt hand ” .Does she think were all five year olds?

yes random, surely if she knew this to be true she could get these mythical investors to tell us in no uncertain terms, they will invest with a yes vote, until i see this proof i will regard this as the usual tripe

Any rational person knows that this is not a vote on continuing with the euro currency, it’s not a vote on EU membership and it’s not something which will mean a drain on jobs if we vote no.
The sooner people cop that on the sooner FG can get to offering equally laughable threats to force a yes vote, maybe – a no vote will mean we can’t compete in Euro 2012,

It’ll mean we have to have a balanced budget by 2014 = austerity on steroids.

An informed vote will come from informed debate.
Unless we can be told straight up how this treaty will benefit us as a society rather than an economy then the usual clap trap of euro exits and jobs will not cut any ice with me.

Society Dermot? Don’t be bringing dirty words in to the debate. It’s all about markets don’t ya know. ;)

Ready the ‘no junk mail’ propaganda sticker on my front door!

Do they canvass door to door for referendums like this?
I hope so.

Dermot excellent point. This is all about money, nothing about the people.

So you lot believe the economy and the people have no connection?

i understand that a very large part of the economy is based on how much cash the people can spend, its getting less every day

Dermot Mc
How about how the Treaty finding out how it will benefit us a sovereign state and a society
I am sick of us being called an economy.

spot on V, i can survive on very little, and at this stage i am quite willing to go through more hardship if it means teaching some of these elites what its like to go without

Run on that in the referendum campaign, tell the nurses and guards that they’ll be taking massive pay cuts, and see how it works out.

Problem is Mr Revolting it won’t be the ‘elites’ who suffer. It’ll the the average citizen that gets it in the neck. Be careful what you ask for as you might just get it.

it wont work neil, but you might concede there is an enormous amount of bad feeling towards our political class at the moment, in my experience strong negative feelings are rarely accompanied by measured action, it could be risky adding fuel to those negative feelings, just a thought

It’s coming anyway Neil – that’s the point. How will the austerity plan result in success?

They can see the harm alright but its the ordinary person they want to pay for it not the elite that caused the problem,but i agree with everything else you say.

The fiscal treaty does not involve a diminution of sovereignty.

no dermot, but it does involve a diminution of responsibility under ALL laws
3. The ESM, its property, funding and assets, wherever located and by whomsoever held, shall enjoy immunity from every form of judicial process except to the extent that the ESM expressly waives its immunity for the purpose of any proceedings or by the terms of any contract, including the documentation of the funding instruments.- from article 3
there is no way i am voting to give free reign to ANY body, financial, political or otherwise

@Peasant .. the arrangements re. legal inviolability for the ESM mirror those for the IMF. In any event, my comment stands that the treaty has does not involve a diminution of Irish sovereignty beyond that already provided by EU treaties or laws.

indeed it does desmond, your comment was in response to a previous point, would you like to make it a few more times? so why are you comparing the esm and the imf? we are not being asked if we want to vote in a legal carte blanche for the imf, relevance please

Des, just the same way that Lisbon was meant to protect our corporation tax.
French and Germans trying every day to get rid of it….
Who’ll win out there? Merkosy or Kenny.

@Peasant … the IMF is highly relevant as the ESM is being reconstructed as a European version of it, including with respect to legal iimmunity. Hence my comment. Ireland is already a member of the IMF and as such has already ceded such immunity to an analogous international body. That makes the conneciton between the ESM and IMF pretty relevant.

@Gerard .. Lisbon had no effect on Ireland’s corpo tax rate. Recent Franco-German efforts to co-ordinate Corpo Taxes across the EU have focussed on the calculation of the tax base only. No attempt has been made to co-ordinate corpo tax rates nor to require Ireland to alter our own rate.

no desmond it doesn’t as we didnt get a vote on imf membership, we have a decision to make now, if i had a vote on imf membership and it had these clauses in it, i would vote against that too, i will not vote to give any body free reign from any laws, despite the fact we might already be involved with a similar body

@Desmond It involves handing substantial powers to the ESM who, through Article 32 of the treaty, will put themselves, their staff, their records and their assets beyond any sort of legal accountability. And that’s no loss of sovereignty? Pull the other one.

We must vote No .
Ireland will be nothing if this referendum is passed .
We need to protect what is left of our sovreignty
and we must not allow any more interference in
the running of our country.Yes I said COUNTRY
not economy. I am Irish and I am proud.

Agreed. The days of refusing to listen to every economist in the world who has been proven right on the crises while blindly following people who are consistently wrong has to end.

Unfortunately scare tactics do work. It’s how they got the last two refdums reversed.

We’re a nation that scares easily

I don’t think our shower of servile representatives would even entertain the thought of seeking help from the very people who are imposing this debt upon us and i don’t think the troika will offer us any sweeteners, they know we are fully committed to paying of these debts.

For the record Paul.

“Creighton added that Ireland will not seek concessions from Europe to ease its debt burden to make the referendum more palatable for voters.”

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/02/28/uk-europe-ireland-referendum-idUKTRE81R1W420120228

Then she has declared herself to be an incompetent buffoon and I will be fighting for a ‘no’ vote. Not to leave the Euro (although that might be the right reason), but a no vote will trigger an election and we can jettison the incompetents

@Paul i can see no bargaining position from a treaty that doesnt require us to vote yes in order to be ratified. i doubt we would get to vote on something that would put us in a position of strength

@Revolting Peasant – you are right, they don’t need our vote to ratify but I bet they would be willing to make substantive concession for us not to leave the EURO. They don’t need us for the Euro, but we have two factors in our favor.

1) The ego of the high kings of europe would be offended by the idea of losing a member. This gives us leverage.
2) If we did leave, all monies owed to European banks would be immediately converted into Pun Nua’s and they would take a savage haircut

The cost of keeping us in the tent is a lot less. Time for our heretofore shrinking violets to go get a substantive chunk of that 85Bn structural funds.

It is for all of us to now let Europe know that we saved their banks when the whole Euro project was at it most vulnerable and it’s now pay back time – or else….

absolutely Paul, i am certain that under current conditions, were we to be voting on our continued membership of the euro, that we would have great bargaining power, but we are not voting on that, i took 4 main points from reading this proposal
1. this is a vote on whether we want access to a particular fund in case we ever need a bailout in the future
2. it has no influence on our current bailout, we will continue to have access to those funds
3. they want to set up a controlling body that is above ALL laws
4. i will be voting no

@Peasant – you’re more clued in that I am. What do you see happening if the vote is ‘no’?

nothing at all at the start anyway, maybe some disapproval from the ecb and germany, but until we repay the bondholders, the germans arent prepared to further jeopardise our ability to repay them, the very worst thing i foresee is maybe a small rise in interest rates, but i think that also unlikely, just because we vote against access to this particular fund does not mean we cant borrow from the ecb, the yes campaign will try and say this is so, but until i hear a spokesperson from the ecb confirm this, i will consider it the usual bullshit

revolting could you answer the question i posed in earlier comment….from reading your comments as Paul as stated you seem to be very tuned it to this whole thing…..i just want to know that since we are going to be having a referendum on the fiscal treaty…meaning the Irish people get to say if we agree or not with it….WHY is Enda Kenny signing up to same treaty on friday? or have i got that wrong? how can he sign it without the agreement of this Country…..

I think he signed up to it on principle, but i’d say he signed up to it full, this referendum is a side show and he will always do the bidding of his EPP buddies – the ones he will bend over backwards to please.
There’s always the chance that our no vote may be superseded by a -’tough shit Ireland, Kenny already signed it.”

I’m not 100% serious of course but i never have and never will trust FG to put Ireland first regarding Europe.

@Kop, the signing is because they agree with the content, e.g. it had to be changed for the fg/lab to try and avoid a referendum, its just an agreement that its wording is ready for the countries to attempt to ratify

thanks Dermot&Revolting…..
i will be voting…… Ní hea…… NO…NON…NEIN AND another European language that Enda would like me to vote in……

Pat watch the video I posted above. These are the facts from Germans. Not scaremongering Irish.

The fiscal treaty makes no mention of a Financial Transaction Tax, aka Tobin Tax.

It is to placate bond holders and markets. Why should we prop up a corrupt fraudulent system that is been pushed along by austerity measures which are punishing the people that didn’t cause this crisis. Why has this crisis not been investigated fully? Who caused this crisis? Will fiscal compact solve the crisis?

@ Desmond: That’s good. Might vote Yes so.
@1 Human Being: How is it to placate bondholders? That’s completely untrue. In fact, if this fiscal treaty was in place constitutionally before the crisis, Ireland would never have been legally capable of taking on the massive bondholder debt.
In fact, doesn’t the fiscal compact pretty much guarantee that Ireland could never again take on private banking debt for fear of having too large a deficit.

Neil who are the bond holders and why should we not burn them. The idea of the fiscal compact is to reassure markets that Europe is a stable place thus when a country goes to look to selling bonds be it 1, 3, 5 or 10 year or even 30 to 50 year bonds that particular country bonds will yield a return for the buyer of the bonds of less than in ideal German case minus percentage at the moment Ireland will have to pay about 5 to 6 percent. That is the case for government bonds in the case for bank bonds such as Anglo or ibrc these are unsecured bonds that have been bought by speculators and are not sovereign debt but because of banking guarantee or so we are told have to be repayed. The fiscal compact may mean tighter control of the purse strings but that will still not solve the debt issue which is be exacerbated by overissuence of bonds. The problem has been delayed by the fiscal compact this treaty will not solve anything it will basically push other country’s in to a unstable zone of no growth as other larger country’s can redistribute assets belonging to other smaller country’s to re balance the books. As we are seeing the start of with the recent government announcement of selling of state assets.

So does this FUD only come from the government? because there seems to be plenty of people in here on a daily basis doing much worse.

Obviously to retain the one sided approach to matters like these.
To debunk alternatives,

PLEASE READ Full Text.
http://www.european-council.europa.eu/media/582311/05-tesm2.en12.pdf

Article 32: Legal status, privileges and immunities, page 45
This mentions the immunity of all ESM Property and Article 15.7.k mentions the Directors and Chairpersons immunity relating to Article32.2

I agree totally, look at these scaremongering comments:

it would be a “very difficult and undesirable situation” if Ireland becomes the only country not to ratify the fiscal compact treaty.

“I think it would be a very difficult and undesirable situation for Ireland to be the only member not to ratify it,”

it was “very much in Ireland’s interest” to ratify the treaty.

it would send a very negative signal to investors and to people who we need in this country to create jobs.

Second time … the Tánasite has already ruled out the holding of a second referendum on this treaty.

@Desmond And our misrepresentatives never lie?

Never stopped them before.

This treaty is different. If it’s defeated, then the rest of the signatories go ahead without us. No renegotiations, no safeguards, no guarantees. We get one vote on this one. We better use it wisely.

Small point with big consequences…its not a treaty.

The Tánasite has already ruled out the holding of a second referendum on this treaty.

Never believe anything is true until it is officially denied.

Whatever way we vote on the Fiscal Treatry will have no material impact on our membership of the Eurozone.

Actually asked that on another thread. Thanks. So how will it affect use if we vote no? The basis of the yes campaign seems to be about market perception of ireland and investment. Not very much going for it.

Hi Niamh, you’re welcome. As to the impact of a no vote. Firstly, the one thing we do know is that we would not then have access to the new European Stability Mechanism (ESM), i.e. the EU’s barrel of cash, in the event of Ireland needing a further bailout. According to the treaty such access is only available to countries that have ratified the treaty. If Ireland did need further emergency funding, a possibility if the eurozone pitches further into recession, we would likely have to negotiate seperate funding arrangements with our European partners. The likelihood would be that this special funding would be at higher interest rates and more onerous terms than available under the ESM.
Secondly, there is the issue of market sentiment. This is the imponderable and relies greatly on predicting the thinking of the “confidence fairy”. If the markets are spooked by Ireland failing to ratify this treaty it would result in the cost of Irish bonds rising (or not falling back to the rates at which the State can fund itself, which is the current ambition of the Irish government). The markets, however, may ignore an Irish no and focus instead on other variables. That’s really the bit that has people worried.

tw@

t

What about the EU abortion armies we’ll all be getting jobs with?
:P

@David Higgins, do you understand what the word speculate means? here’s an example for you, “If we choose to tell the rest of the world that we’re not prepared to take steps that are necessary to stabilise our currency, [or] to show that we are committed to the future of the euro as our currency, it would send a very negative signal to investors and to people who we need in this country to create jobs.” this is speculation, remember it well grasshopper

I like the choice of picture for mr Creighton, it reminds me of the last time she urged a yes vote.

David, please don’t add to the scaremongering.
The fact that the treaty will proceed without us is irrelevant. We need to decide if this is good or bad for Ireland and vote accordingly.

It’s very relevant. Countries who do not sign up to the treaty are excluded from the European Stability Mechanism. This is the new bailout fund that is to replace the EFSM that Ireland currently receives bailout money from. Should we need a second bailout we would need to find the money outside the ESM and this would mean higher interest rates on our borrowing. And this is not scaremongering. This is FACT!

Like the fact that we won’t need a second bailout?

“ludicrous” – Enda Kenny and Michael Noonan – on suggestions of a second bailout – 9/1/2012.

also.

http://www.thejournal.ie/taoiseach-bailout-funds-are-not-dependent-on-fiscal-compact-346718-Feb2012/

people that use FACT as some magic wand because they think it wins every argument have no argument at all

We probably won’t need a second one and as long as we’re on the first one our funding is secure.

However, IF we need a second bailout, we’re limited in our bailout options if the treaty is defeated because we’ll be outside the ESM.

David H
I really do not think it is in any way relevant
what other countries want or choose.
This treaty has to be decided by us for us.
I will vote NO.

These people are elected to represent us. When they welch on their promises and fail to do what they are elected to do, all bets are off.

Fair remarks Frankie.

Let’s have an adult discussion about this and avoid the personal attacks.
It only makes the NO side look childish.

A Junior Minister is not a Minister. A Minister is not a Junior Minister. End of lesson.