An ideological rift opened between groups opposing the Nice Treaty last night when left-wing opponents of the treaty accused fellow campaigners of xenophobia and scaremongering.
Dismissing as "inflammatory and hysterical" warnings that ratification of the treaty would prompt a flood of migration from eastern Europe, the Socialist Workers' Party publicly distanced itself from the "No to Nice" group at a meeting in Dublin. .
Spokesman Mr Richard Boyd-Barrett criticised the claims as "dangerous rhetoric" which had ceded the moral high ground to the pro-Nice movement, allowing it to portray itself as enlightened and progressive while casting the No campaign in the role of the reactionary anti-immigrant.
He said: "Elements within the No to Nice organisation have resorted to scaremongering. Their statements are bogus and irrelevant to the debate.
"Their statements have opened the door to a very dangerous line of argument."
In raising the spectre of mass inward migration from new EU member-states, opponents to Nice had tapped into the rich seam of racism now prevalent in Irish society, Mr Boyd-Barrett said.
"This hysteria has led to attacks not only on asylum-seekers but on foreigners generally," he said.
It was vital that the Socialist Workers' Party distanced itself from such scaremongering.
He said claims that failure to ratify the treaty would stymie EU enlargement were a red herring raised by the Yes camp to distract voters from the real purpose of the Nice Treaty, which was to undermine democracy and lay the groundwork for a proactive European defence force.
Yes campaigners have attempted to portray No activists as "small-minded, grubby money-grabbers" who wanted to keep eastern European states out of the EU, Mr Andy Storey, of Action from Ireland (AFrI), told the meeting .
He said: "It is deplorable that anybody should attempt to link immigration to Nice. Immigrants should be welcome here regardless of the outcome of the referendum."
The evidence of the growing rift among anti-Nice campaigners emerged as the Minister for Finance, Mr McCreevy, cautioned that failure to ratify the treaty could jeopardise funding from the EU.
Despite the perception that the Republic was among the EU's wealthiest members, it remained a net beneficiary of structural aid, receiving €1.3 billion last year alone, he said.
A rejection of the treaty would undermine the Government's negotiating strength in Brussels, Mr McCreevy said.
"We have been able to forge alliances and to be listed on that basis. It is imperative that we retain this central position for future EU negotiations on crucial issues, including the post-2006 budget negotiations."