Here's a piece I wrote for, head there to read the comments for the piece.


Both sides of the Lisbon debate will use the spectre of Ireland’s uncertain economic future to alloy the public’s fear of a sustained economic downturn to their cause. This is wrong.

Lisbon has nothing to do with the current Irish economic situation, nor does it directly provide any help for or hindrance from a viable recovery in the short to medium term.

The Treaty is a series of amendments to existing treaties designed to enhance the 60- year old dynamic of European integration. It will simultaneously shore up the details of actually running a supranational organisation with more than twenty constituent countries. It contains amendments and clarifications on almost any issue either side wishes to subject to public debate.

The dust storm of confusion we’ve seen both last time out, and this has its origin partly in the multifaceted nature of the treaty (and the beast it proposes to govern); and the need for both sides to polarise the debate in order to gain support from electorate.

Yet, in effect, it simply forces a bewildered public to shut down rather than evaluate whether to vote ‘yes’ or ‘no’.

Last time round, that confusion resulted in a resounding ‘no’ vote for the referendum. This time round, the treaty is the same, word for word, as before. But there are now legal guarantees in place addressing many of the body-public’s concerns over neutrality, the right to life, taxation, and so forth.

The existence of these legal guarantees however, rather than adding clarity, have added yet more complexity to the question. Now that the public must decide on just how binding these guarantees are; they serve only to add another dimension of confusion and contorted debate for the pundits and the chattering classes to chew on.

Frankly, it would be much simpler for both sides to use the fear generated by an entirely domestic economic meltdown to their advantage, and force that fear on the people in order to gain the upper hand in the debate.

Those who want a ‘yes’ vote will point to the EU’s role in providing our infrastructure, underpinning our agricultural sector, and allowing access to the world’s largest marketplace.

Those who want a ‘no’ vote will spend time arguing that Lisbon is bad for worker’s rights, exposes the Irish worker to potentially proscriptive changes in their minimum wage, and so on and so on.

None of which has anything to do with getting Ireland’s domestic economy out of the doldrums right now. Ireland’s economy has a list of problems as long as your arm: we have an damaged banking sector, a bloated public service, constrained credit markets, increasing levels of unemployment, domestic consumption is dropping precipitously, we are in a deflation, and our government is borrowing to run the state on a weekly basis. Voting ‘yes’ or ‘no’ on Lisbon will change none of these facts, either now or in the near future.

The decision the people must take is what the role of the EU in their lives will be. The Lisbon treaty is a further step on a long road towards political and economic integration. Europe began walking this road in 1946. Ireland began walking the road of every closer union with Europe in 1973. The Lisbon referendum represents a clear choice on whether to continue on that road, or not. Let the people decide. Both sides should refrain from trying to woo voters by invoking the tantalising possibility of a return to prosperous days of the Celtic Tiger.

Lisbon, yes or no, just won’t help.


1 2 3 142
March 24th, 2018

Capital inflows, crisis and recovery in small open economies

Our latest paper, and my first with my Melbourne School of Government affiliation (plus my UL one, of course) is […]

March 7th, 2018

Southern Charm

What's it like working at Australia's number one university, ranked 23rd in the world for social sciences? It's pretty cool, […]

February 7th, 2018

Freedom interview

I did an interview for an app I love using called Freedom. Basically I pay them to block off the […]

December 10th, 2017

Marian Finucane Interview

I did a fairly long interview about the experience of moving to Australia with my family. You can listen here.

November 17th, 2017

Increasing wages for macroeconomic stability

My first piece for the conversation is here. I'm arguing the economy would benefit from wage increases, paid for from […]

November 14th, 2017

Health Workforce Planning Models, Tools and Processes: An Evidence Review

Below is my recorded talk, here are my slides, and the handout for the 4th Global Forum on Human Resources for […]

October 5th, 2017

Aalborg Keynote

My talk from the fourth Nordic Post Keynesian conference is up. The full list of keynotes is here.

October 1st, 2017

AIST Debt and Demography talk

(Apparently Limerick is in the UK now!)

September 7th, 2017

My AIST Keynote: Europe Exposed

In which a camera man faints halfway through--he's OK though, I checked afterwards!

July 22nd, 2017

MacGill Summer School Speech

My speech at the MacGill Summer School is here. Thanks to Joe Muholland for inviting me to speak.

May 25th, 2017

Business Post Articles

All my Sunday Business Post articles (back to 2014/5, when I joined the paper) are available here, behind a paywall, and […]

January 15th, 2017

A month with the MacBook Pro

This is a quick update to the the previous post about getting a new MacBook Pro. So far three things […]

December 23rd, 2016

Some Thoughts on the New MacBook Pro

I’ve been working on Mac laptops since the early 2000s. I typically get a new one every 2-3 years. My […]

December 13th, 2016

Strange days indeed

We’re living through very strange times. Times when it’s a good thing that only 46 per cent of the Austrian […]

November 22nd, 2016

Will robots eat your job? @ryanavent's snapshot of a global economy in flux

Review of 'The Wealth of Humans', By Ryan Avent, Penguin, €19 Will robots eat your job? Will your kids have […]