Madam, - Ciarán Toland is to be commended for drawing a clear distinction, in his article of March 19th, between support for the EU and support for the Lisbon Treaty. He then presents cogent arguments for voting Yes in the forthcoming referendum.
If all his assurances could be taken at face value, I am sure a great many voters who are at present undecided - of whom I am one - would be happy to vote Yes.
I fear, however, that not all of Mr Toland's assurances can be taken at face value. He argues that there is no idea of further enlargement driving the treaty. If this is the case, why does the EU still have a Commissioner for Enlargement?
Many voters who are worried that a Yes vote will be taken as giving carte blanche for further major enlargement, but who would otherwise like to vote Yes, would be greatly assured if the Government would make a clear call in advance of the referendum for the position of Commissioner for Enlargement to be made redundant.
- Yours, etc,
RAY BATES, Sandymount, Dublin 4.
Madam,- Ciarán Toland argues that the debate on the Lisbon Treaty risks being framed by the politics of fear by those who oppose this treaty. But, as he himself highlights, this is precisely the kind of politics in which those arguing for a Yes vote, in particular some Ministers, have been engaging.
They have threatened vociferously that we place ourselves at a substantial risk economically should we reject this treaty since we owe "30 years of growing Irish prosperity" to membership of the EU.
Yet it is worth remembering that in the 1980s, a decade after we joined the then EEC, the rate of unemployment was 16 per cent and some 250,000 people emigrated from the Republic. This argument also fails to account for the thriving economy of Switzerland and other non-EU countries. Similarly pro-treaty supporters have threatened that we run the risk of "isolating" ourselves should we reject this treaty. The threat of isolation was also used in both referendums on EU membership in Norway and has since been proved to be utterly without foundation.
Mr Toland also dismisses as "fantasy threats" the real concerns of opponents of the treaty about the ceding of Irish sovereignty. But he fails to provide any evidence demonstrating that these fears are in fact imaginary. The very reason we are having a referendum on this treaty is because it will fundamentally alter our Constitution. Article 29.4.11, which clearly states that EU law supersedes our own law, effectively jettisons our sovereignty.
It may be true that the Lisbon Treaty will facilitate the more efficient operation of the EU, as Mr Toland argues, but in my view this comes at the price of giving the EU a federal-type structure, in which Ireland will have virtually no say or input, due to the same proposed changes in this treaty.
If these fears are really so unfounded, why have pro-treaty politicians not been able to allay them? Why have they instead tried to threaten and intimidate us into submission?
- Yours, etc,
MICHAEL O'DRISCOLL, Blackrock, Cork.