Voters in the Irish Republic have rejected the European Union's Lisbon treaty in a vote by 53.4% to 46.6%.
But this video, via Trixy, shows precisely what the general excuses of The Colleagues are likely to be.
Their central plank is that most people haven't read the Treaty, in which case, I think that Farage's response that you shouldn't sign any contract that you don't understand—"don't know? Don't sign"—is a good one.
UPDATE 3: besides, as Question That points out, how is it that those who voted "no" didn't understand the Treaty but those who voted "yes" did?
The second is the idea that Ireland is one small country out of 27. There are, of course, two responses to this: the first is that 100% of those countries given a vote on the EU Constitution/Lisbon Treaty—Ireland, France and the Netherlands—have voted against it (and similarly, 100% of those given a referendum on the Euro voted "no").
The second answer is that provided by Guido, who points out that the number of Irish voting is considerably higher than the number of the political elite deciding for everyone else.
The BBC has continually been running this line in its reporting of Ireland’s historic vote on the Lisbon Treaty:“Just over three million Irish voters are registered—in a European Union of 490 million people.”
The implication is clear. Those beastly Paddies are depriving everyone else in Europe of the benefits of the Lisbon Treaty. They want to convey the image of a minority running rough shod over every one else. The BBC fails to mention that Ireland is not depriving Europeans of their say. It is the only member state which gave its people a say on the matter. It is the other member states who are depriving their people of a say lest they give the wrong answer. In those states, like Britain, it is their legislatures who decide what is best and hang what the people feel.
Guido then looks at the make up of the EU Parliaments and comes to a rather predictable conclusion.
In total there are a mere 9,225 people deciding the European future for 490 million people outside of Ireland.
The real comparison with Ireland is even far more dramatic and much less democratic than the image the BBC has been projecting…
Still, as Nigel Farage points out, the Commission has been busy implementing most of the provisions of the Treaty anyway, assuming that it was going to be passed by all countries, and they will continue to do that regardless of the Irish vote. What other possible excuse can the UK government, for one, have in continuing ratification of the Treaty is, in fact, dead?
No, really: can we leave yet?
UPDATE: Timmy gives us a little update, via a fisking of the talentless Will Hutton, of just what amazing benefits the EU brings us.
Nasty little ignorant people not understanding how the elite are really doing it all for you. No gravy trains, no power grabs at all, no siree.The reality is that Ireland’s ‘no’ voters have trashed an EU that is precious but weak. Most ‘no’ voters, grabbing on to the worst fear rather than reasoned fact, have unknowingly set in train a political dynamic that, unless carefully handled, could lead not just to Ireland but Britain leaving the EU.
Now that would be a good result, wouldn’t it? We might end up like those two basket cases, Norway and Switzerland, only able to trade freely, move freely, work freely and invest freely, without having to carry the burden of umpty squillion pages of regulations.
For example, Gunther Verhuegen has pointed out that EU regulations cost the European economy € 600 billion a year: much of which is in place to organise the Single Market. That single market brings us benefits per year of €120 billion… No, not €120 billion nett of those costs, but €120 billion before we account for those costs.
Obviously and clearly a loser that.Everybody will be the poorer.
So, no, that won’t be true.
Indeed, one who did look at the cost benefit analysis was Patrick Minford and his calculation is that if we left our economy would grow by some 3% as a result. Whatever that is it ain’t poorer.
So, the Single Market—that thing which was meant to be one of the few unalloyed benefits of our membership of the EU—far from making us richer does, in fact, cost us a considerable amount of money every year.
Seriously, can we leave yet?
UPDATE 2: EU Observer appears to confirm the fuel prices story.
Aside from institutional affairs, EU leaders are also set to look for a coordinated response to oil prices, which reach their highest level since the end of the 1970s. The European Commission is set to ask member states to "carefully" consider "targeted measures" aimed at helping low-income households.
Ah, I see. So, rich people should pay more for their fuel use through so-called Green Taxes but "low-income households" should be helped to burn more. Yup, that seems like typical socialist tactics: use any possible environmental cause to justify more control of the population and mix it all up with a bit of class war.
Mmmm, you gotta love it...