AVERIL POWER,
Sir, - The undertones of xenophobia and scaremongering in Anthony Coughlan's article (Opinion, June 24th) are an ugly addition to the debate on the Nice Treaty.
The following are some basic truths about the enlargement of Europe which Mr Coughlan omitted: Firstly, many of the applicant states are much more economically developed than Ireland was when we joined the Union. Indeed, as the Slovenian president confirmed last week in Dublin, his country will be a net contributor to the EU budget from the start - a level of prosperity Ireland took nearly 30 years to achieve.
Secondly, while enlargement will increase the EU population by 28 per cent, that is only marginally greater than the 22 per cent increase brought about by the accession of Spain, Greece and Portugal in the 1980s - which, incidentally, did not lead to a mass exodus from the poorer to the wealthier regions of the EU.
Thirdly, while imports from the applicants to the EU increased by 300 per cent in the decade to 1999, exports from the EU to the applicants grew by 400 per cent.
Enlargement will offer even greater access to eastern European markets for Irish goods. This will ensure opportunities for stability and growth in the Irish economy.
Finally, while eastern European companies can at present undercut Irish prices due to weaker employee protection and product standards, upon joining the Union they will be forced to adopt the EU's progressive social legislation which will remove this unfair advantage - unfair to Irish businesses, and unfair to the workers of eastern Europe.
Last year's rejection of the Nice Treaty has caused concern and fear among the peoples of central and eastern Europe. Rejecting it twice will not only end the prospects for much-needed enlargement, but will irreparably damage Ireland's role in the Union and the prospects for consolidating and expanding our economic progress. There is no better way to ensure that Ireland loses "power, money, influence" than by voting No.
Now that it is certain that we will have a chance to vote again on Nice, let's have an honest debate. - Yours, etc.,
AVERIL POWER, Ballybrack, Co Dublin.
... ... * ... * ... * ... ...
Sir, - Alan Dukes asserts (Opinion, June 24th) June 24th that "the No campaign absurdly believes it knows more about the Treaty of Nice than the governments that negotiated it". Surely that is like saying that any opposition party, Fine Gael for instance, that believes it knows more about the effect of any legislation than the government that enacted it is also being absurd.
If the proposers and enactors of laws could always foresee the effects of what they were doing at any particular time, surely the chances of any constitutional challenge succeeding against any law enacted would be slim. That is certainly not our experience in this country.
Laws, constitutional amendments and treaties do not always work out as intended. Did the Treaty of Versailles stop a second world war, as was intended by its negotiators? Or, more recently, regarding our Constitution, did the anti-abortion amendment of 1983 work? Did not the worst-case scenario suggested by the "scaremongers" come to pass in the X case? Was it not the actual opposite of what was intended by the proponents of the amendment?
It seems now that if you oppose the Nice Treaty you are either "absurd" or a "whinger"! Mr Dukes's arrogance astounds me. - Yours, etc.,
FRANK BARR, Glasnevin Woods, Ballyboggan Road, Dublin 11.
... ... * ... * ... * ... ...
A chara, - Should we support the Nice Treaty because the EU brought us prosperity, so that 12 other countries may join, or because, if we don't, we might be seen as "bad" Europeans? Alternatively, should we determine our vote on the basis of "enlightened self-interest", asking what is best for Ireland and for Europe at this time?
Before the EU seeks further expansion should it not first remedy its own deficiencies? These include an absence of accountable democracy and a failure to protect the sovereignty and cultural identity of member-states. It is evident now that the movement of persons between states must be regulated and quotas set for all immigrants, including foreign workers. Otherwise, the culture and identity of small indigenous populations will be endangered.
Many decisions taken at EU level lack consensus or democratic endorsement. Value systems and ideologies are being imposed which are undermining our sense of social cohesion. Some are founded on fallacious policies such as engineered multiculturalism and political correctness which will create deeply segregated societies, as exist in the US and Britain.
Unrepresentative "rights" quangos, fostered by the EU and UN, are allowed to undermine Christian values and ethics, as shown by recent moves to legalise homosexual marriages and stem cell research. In practice, the EU has become a bastion of neo-communism - aggressively anti-national, anti-family and anti-church.
When the EU encouraged member-states to abolish border controls, it took responsibility for protection from exploitation by illegal immigrants, drug traffickers and other trans-national criminals. But it has singularly neglected this duty, as has our own Government.
Enlargement, before EU reform and effective immigration control, would be a mistake! - Is mise,
LIAM Ó GÉIBHEANNAIGH, Áth an Ghainimh, Co Átha Cliath.
... ... * ... * ... * ... ...
Sir, - It's about time the people of Ireland woke up and realised that we must finally accept that we cannot continue expecting the rest of our EU partners to sit idly by while we squabble and argue about the pros and cons of the Nice Treaty. Ireland has benefited hugely from membership of the European Union. Those of us who were forced to leave these shores in the 1980s can testify to that. Today we have a thriving economy built on many years of massive inward investment, generated in no small part by our membership of the Union. The development in our national infrastructure to date has been funded almost entirely by the EU.
The neutrality issue is a red herring; our neutrality was never in question.
The European Union, for better or worse, is an agreement between peoples with one common aim: that together they can greatly enhance their collective strengths and minimise the effect of their individual weaknesses. In the case of our little nation on the edge of one of the world's largest trading blocs, the benefits of this have been proven beyond any doubt.
Let us show a little confidence in ourselves and let us openly welcome the enlargement of the European Union and all that it brings. Is Ireland a team player within the EU or are we the spoiled child of Europe, who having got almost everything we asked for over the past 30 years, now want to keep it all for ourselves when others want to come and share? - Yours, etc.,
A.P. O'SULLIVAN, Hole In The Wall Road, Dublin 13.
... ... * ... * ... * ... ...
Sir, - I am curious as to why the anti-Europeans are so against the re-running of the Nice Referendum. Surely if the Irish people oppose Nice, they will reject it a second time, probably by an increased majority? Surely it would only enhance the position of the anti-Europeans if they have not just one but two outright rejections of the treaty.
So why are they so afraid of a second referendum? The only conclusion that I can draw is that they realise that the Treaty will be approved.
Obviously they are not confident that they can get the gullible Irish people to swallow the bare-faced scaremongering falsehoods that they got away with the last time. - Yours, etc.,
JASON FITZHARRIS, Oak Park Avenue, Carlow.
... ... * ... * ... * ... ...
Sir, - The Nice Treaty vote is over. The people won, Bertie lost. So, he says, we must keep voting until he wins.
Now who's the real whinger? - Yours, etc.,
WILLIAM CAMPBELL, Harold Ville Avenue, Dublin 8.