The shite from the "yes" campaign continues. Kinda funny putting forward the opinion of the MD of Microsoft just as we find out they're going to be fined 1.5 bn by the EU.
Sir, Dr Derek Flynn's letter of Feb 26th, urges us to vote "yes" to Lisbon. Like almost all other "yes" letters, it uses scare-mongering instead of debating the contents of the treaty (the only exception so far being Gay Mitchell's recent). In addition to the usual line that rejecting this treaty is rejecting Europe, Dr Flynn tells us that Paul Rellis, the president of the American Chamber of Commerce in Ireland and managing director of Microsoft Ireland, is urging a "yes" vote. Coincidentally, on the same day, news broke that the EU are on the verge of fining Microsoft 1.5 billion euro for non-compliance with their rulings regarding Microsoft's abuse of its monopoly. I'm sure Mr Rellis and his employer have quite strong opinions on how they would like the EU to change but their interests do not coincide with mine or the average citizen. It's possible that the treaty is good for all of us but, if anything, the fact that an abusive monopolist wants this treaty to be ratified makes me even less inclined to vote "yes"! Why can't Dr Flynn and the others explain in simple language what changes this treaty makes and what benefits come from these changes?