Madam, - Haven't we tolerated enough bullying from obnoxious and condescending public intellectuals? Their theatrical disbelief that Ireland did not use Lisbon to show "gratitude" to Europe displays a profound misunderstanding of basic human nature and Irish history.
The British Empire, like the EU, gave this country a lot in terms of infrastructure and legal framework, but Lisbon's apologists seem to have forgotten how we showed our gratitude to it. Yes, Ireland has received a lot from the EU, and certainly the organisation has played a part - in concert with domestic policies - in our recent economic successes. But we should not forget that Ireland has all too readily given up a lot to the creeping communism of European central governance: control over our interest rates, for example, or sovereignty over our fish stocks.
It is childish and tiresome to say that European countries will not like us any more. Perhaps if nation states were 12-year-olds there would be grounds for such an assertion, but this is hardly the case. Foreign companies will not decide to stop investing here because of our decision on Lisbon; they will decide not to invest here because we have lost competitiveness compared with eastern Europe and India. It is plain to see that, with or without Lisbon, we are going to attract less foreign investment in future. With or without Lisbon our economy is long overdue a correction, however traumatic, to more sustainable levels. Linking the two is underhanded and ridiculous.
The Lisbon Treaty referendum was clearly not a debate over representation but instead an argument over administration, and one relevant only to our political and bureaucratic elites - in essence, another round of politicians, lawyers and civil servants making jobs for themselves.
This was nowhere more apparent then in the united front adopted by Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, and Labour, an unnerving accord which hinted to the electorate that something is gravely amiss.
Additionally I note that, in my own circle at least, the overwhelming majority of those upset over the No decision and lecturing us on our "stupidity" are foreign nationals, an informative trend to be certain.
I am neither a conservative nor a nationalist as those terms are defined by Lisbon's proponents; in fact, I find it abhorrent to be on the same side as Sinn Féin in anything. Instead I consider myself a liberal, but - despite declarations to the contrary - this is in no way incompatible with scepticism about the future of the European Union. I am the first to admit that the European project has admirably accomplished its designated purpose: providing an economic mechanism to prevent France and Germany from going to war against each other.
However, is the expansion of the EU beyond this, as it is proposed, really the best way forward? However vague the motions towards a federal European superstate, they are disquieting. Europe will never be the United States, but its more zealous enthusiasts will never admit this.
Neither will they admit that Ireland is, at best, only tangentially a part of Europe. It is certainly not the centre, as some campaigners maintained. We are attached to the same continental shelf, yes, but beyond that we share very little socially, politically, linguistically, or culturally with Europe. Twenty-first century Ireland is, and will continue to be, an unmistakably part of the Anglo-sphere.
Can we not move on now, and prepare to define ourselves against a new American administration, or continue to strengthen our connections with Britain, rather then endlessly replaying the question decided in the referendum. - Yours, etc,
VAL NOLAN, Monashionnach, Ardagh, Co Limerick.
Madam, - Surely if one lesson only is to be learned from the Lisbon Treaty's rejection it is that complex matters should not be put to a referendum in the first place. If it is suitable for the other 26 EU members' parliaments to pass the treaty, then why not let the Dáil deal with it? This way, interest groups are kept out of the equation.
As someone involved in the farming sector I was disgusted with the IFA's brinkmanship which helped the momentum swing in the No direction when clearly it was in the IFA's interest for the treaty to pass.
Why did Padraig Walshe and the IFA wait until three days before polling to come out and back it? It was a bit late for Mr Walshe to be sending voice-mails to farmers on the morning of the referendum urging them to vote Yes after the IFA's carry-on in the previous three weeks. - Yours, etc,
TERRY O'CONNELL, Clash, Tralee, Co Kerry.
Madam, - The doyen of the EU elite has spoken ("Giscard rules out keeping of Irish commissioner", The Irish Times, June 26th). Ireland will have to vote again on an unchanged Lisbon Treaty with, perhaps, some accompanying solemn declarations designed to refute the wilder claims of the No campaign. The message could not be clearer: "Ireland's voters gave us the wrong answer. Please provide compliant voters."
It is unlikely the implications of this message will be lost on voters in the other EU member-states and they will deal appropriately with this arrogant usurping of their sovereignty when the opportunity arises. - Yours, etc,
PAUL HUNT, Haywards Heath, West Sussex, England.
Madam, - Crisis, what crisis?, argued Vincent Browne after the Lisbon result, proposing that the EU continue as it had done for the past four years. In this week's column (June 25th), he tells us the EU will "grind to a halt" once the new commission comes into office next year, unless existing treaties are changed. So we do have a crisis?
Mr Browne's solution is to propose his own "simple and uncontroversial" treaty amendment. The "EU elite", we are told, won't do this because they wish to confront Ireland with the imaginary crisis as late in the day as possible, thereby causing a real crisis. Ireland, according to Mr Browne, should respond by pretending there is no real or imaginary crisis until confronted with one by the EU and then refuse to budge.
Mr Browne should get a grip. I have always thought of people like him and other well-heeled, articulate commentators as part of an unelected but moderately tolerable Irish elite. Big fish in a little pond. But after the kind of juvenile, illogical rubbish in Mr Browne's most recent column, give me the "EU elite" any day, whoever they may be. - Yours, etc,
JOSEPH RYAN, Keelgrove, Ardnacrusha, Co Clare.
Madam, - I voted against Lisbon on balance. I had lots of reasons to vote for, but even more to vote against. It happens that the two biggest reasons I voted against no longer exist. Were there another referendum in the morning I would vote in favour. I doubt that I am alone. - Yours, etc,
DAVID WALSH, Annesley Park, Dublin 6.
Madam, - Catherine Scott (June 23rd) says one of the reasons why she voted No in the referendum was because of the fear that her grandson might face conscription some day. This issue was one of the biggest fallacies perpetrated by elements of the No campaign. Apart from the fact that it is not part of the treaty, military conscription runs counter to the trend in the rest of the EU.
Conflicts such as the Vietnam War, the Falklands War and the two Gulf Wars have shown that conscript armies are no longer effective. As a result many European counties such as France, The Netherlands, Spain, Italy, the Czech Republic and Poland have either abolished conscription or are in the process of abolishing it. As this trend continues it is likely that some future EU treaty will require member-states to abolish military conscription and retain only professional armed forces. - Yours, etc,
ROBERT HALLIGAN, Castledermot, Co Kildare.
Madam, - In this time of reflection following the referendum, and in light of the latest ESRI report, might we seek provisions to have our economy handled from Brussels? - Yours, etc,
JEROME CURTIN, Harty Place, Dublin 8.
Madam, - Tony Baker (June 26th) wants the dirty linen of the Lisbon Treaty washed out by the EU ministers so you can free up space for letters on other subjects.While I understand his wish, I fear his trust is misplaced. Keep up the good work. - Yours, etc,
KEALAN FINN, Neuville-sur-Saone, France.