Dublin will hold a referendum on the eurozone fiscal treaty, plunging Europe into months of uncertainty and potentially placing a question mark over Ireland’s future membership of the euro.Logic of Signing a Treaty then Voting on It
Enda Kenny, Ireland’s prime minister, said on Tuesday that the government had decided to hold a referendum following advice supplied by the attorney-general that “on balance” the Irish constitution required the treaty to be put to a vote.
He said he would sign the treaty at a European Union summit on Friday and within a matter of weeks the government would organise a referendum commission – an independent body appointed to explain the subject matter of a referendum to the public.
An opinion poll last month found 73 per cent of the public felt a vote should be held on the treaty, which would tighten budget rules for the 17 countries sharing the euro. Some 40 per cent of the 1,000 people questioned in the Sunday Business Post/Red C poll said they would support the treaty, 36 per cent were opposed and 24 per cent were undecided.
The government’s decision to hold a referendum follows a threat by the Sinn Féin party to challenge in the Supreme Court any decision not to give the public a say. Irish officials have privately acknowledged it would be more difficult to win a referendum if the government was seen to have been forced to hold a vote by the Irish courts.
The Irish public have twice rejected EU treaties, only to approve them in second referendums. In 2008 the Lisbon treaty was rejected only to be approved in a second referendum held 18 months later.
In the real world it makes no sense to sign a treaty then vote on it. In the political world it is a way of telling voters their wishes do not matter, that politicians will hold a referendum as many times as it takes to get a treaty signed.
In a massive landslide, Irish voters swept out Ireland's previous prime minister, only to have Enda Kenny come along and do the exact same things as the politician he replaced.
US Budgets and Bailouts
That is exactly what happened in the US 2008 presidential elections as well. Obama carried out the same bailout policies and the same war mongering policies as Bush.
There is plenty of rhetoric for change, just no real change that anyone can see. Both sides want to do something about the budget, neither side does.
Obama wants to close corporate tax loopholes, then just a few days ago proposed a new set of loopholes for manufacturing, just as Santorum and Romney have proposed. The net result would be an increase in the budget deficit.
There are differences between the parties on social issues, but nothing happens there but hot air.
Romney vs. Obama What's the Difference?
Not your grandfather’s Republican Party; President Obama and Mitt Romney are Nearly One and the Same!
Obama Seeks to Prove He is More Like Romney; Obama vs. Romney - What's the Difference?
Voter sentiment in Germany is overwhelmingly against giving more money to Greece. So why did Chancellor Angela Merkel ram through more aid for Greece?
The answer as explained many times is all Merkel cares about is her legacy, and that legacy says no country can leave the eurozone. Merkel does not give a damn about what is good for Greece, or what her own constituents want either.
French President Nicolas Sarkozy will not hold a referendum claiming it's "too complicated". In reality, Sarkozy knows the referendum would be about him (See Referendum on a Person or on a Treaty?).
Everywhere you look, it's a case of "Damn the Voters, Full Bailouts (and Existing Policies) Ahead". Politicians have decided, things are "too complicated to change". Expect a cornucopia of promises from politicians, just don't expect any real change.
Mike "Mish" Shedlock
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List