Madam, - Until recently I have been undecided regarding the forthcoming referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. However, after listening very carefully to recent arguments, I have decided to vote Yes. In my opinion, the No campaigners seem confused and uncertain. Furthermore, they are playing a dangerous game with Ireland's economic future.
Declan Ganley of Libertas argues that the Lisbon Treaty will result in greater protectionism. Meanwhile, his colleague on the No campaign, Dr Kieran Allen, says it will result in more privatisation. Who am I to believe?
I believe the Lisbon Treaty is about reform. It concerns modernising institutions designed for six member-states in 1957, which today caters for 27 member-states. This reform will include the introduction of real democratic safeguards.
Further innovations include the Charter of Fundamental Rights and measures to prevent organised crime and combat climate change.
A No vote would weaken Ireland politically and economically. At a time of challenging global economic conditions, I urge people to think very carefully before casting their vote. I will vote Yes, as the treaty will play a small part in Ireland's ability to survive the current economic downturn, while introducing positive policies for the benefit of all. - Yours, etc,
THOMAS BELTON,
Melvin Road,
Terenure,
Dublin 6W.
Madam, - Those of us who oppose the Lisbon Treaty are often accused of being, in effect, "little Irelanders" and lacking the global perspective.
Yet Minister for Foreign Affairs Dermot Ahern's article in your edition of March 11th, despite a token nod at issues such as climate change, is exclusively focused on the "funding that has flowed into Ireland from the EU budget", which he claims "was vital in improving our infrastructure". Given the parlous state of our public transport and health systems, the ordinary citizen - as opposed to the corporate honcho so beloved of this Government - might well ask: "Whose infrastructure"?
The mantra that the treaty "is about making the European Union work more effectively" fits perfectly with the prevalent newspeak whereby "governance" replaces "government", and the nature of the politico-economic system being administered - rigidly neo-liberal, bellicose and hostile to immigration - is elided.
Mr Ahern claims that, despite the EU's common foreign policy - which, by and large, it shares with the USA - "Ireland. . .do[ es] not belong to any military alliance". This is a deception: Ireland was drafted into Nato's Orwellian "Partnership for Peace" in 1999 without a referendum.
Irish troops - possibly wearing their new Israeli helmets and aided by their new Israeli surveillance drones - are at present serving in Chad under French command. The fact that France is a staunch ally of the blood-soaked Chadian military dictator Idriss Deby has caused Germany and Britain to withhold troops from this particular adventure; but clearly such scruples don't trouble Mr Ahern or his colleague, Defence Minister Willie O'Dea.
Mr Ahern denies that Irish sovereignty has been "eroded by EU involvement". Yet Ireland, once a loyal ally of the Palestinians, is now participating in the US-EU boycott of Gaza, clearly fearing that some of that hard-earned US investment might be withdrawn were we to take an independent stance. Since the Gazans, under the 4th Geneva Convention, are a "protected people", this suspension of our sovereignty in fact involves us in a war crime.
So much for "the common good" which Mr Ahern pretends the EU is intent on defending! - Yours, etc,
RAYMOND DEANE,
Dún Laoghaire,
Co Dublin.