NEIL PATRICK McCANN,
Sir, - Those who favour a No vote in the second Nice referendum are somewhat at risk of developing a habit resembling the "No Surrender" of Northern unionism.
Instead of "Ulster says No" we in the South have sometimes taken the slogan "No to Nice" too close to heart. Just as, in the North, many enlightened citizens wondered during the years of the Troubles to what Ulster would say "Yes", I wonder to what we in the South would now say "Yes" in the ongoing debate on Europe.
I say this because there are a series of measures and reforms relating to Europe to which we would almost certainly say a clear "Yes". Could we now move the discussion from what we don't want to what we actually do want in terms of our relationship to the nations of Europe?
Environmental policy is one major EU success and should be enhanced. Democratic accountability should be finally addressed in any major reform of the institutions. The future of energy provision and transport are in urgent need of examination with the depletion of fossil fuels and the build-up of astonishingly expensive and toxic nuclear waste. A major European research and development programme in technology and medicine would also be very productive. The CAP, currently under review, is in need of root treatment and probably complete extraction. In fact, this is not a policy at all but a protectionist scheme with income provision for farmers. This could now be replaced by a new agricultural policy and a separate, and possibly more important, incomes policy.
And yes, I believe that we do need a security policy. Since the changes in the power centres of the globe with the collapse of the Soviet Union, it is far more appropriate that order and security be developed by negotiation and international law rather than by outdated military force or the threat of it (especially by nuclear weapons).
We are in a period of historic change and the decisions we take in these years will determine the kind of world we bequeath to the coming generations. Europe needs to take her place in this world in the context of the new global relationships, based not on the doctrinaire globalisation of the World Trade Organisation, but on sustainability, fair trade and internationally recognised human values. - Yours, etc.,
NEIL PATRICK McCANN, Millenium Tower, Charlotte Quay,
Ringsend Road, Dublin 4.
... ... * ... * ... * ... ...
Sir, - I'm puzzled that Sarah Carey (July 18th) intends voting Yes to Nice, having voted No last time. I'm writing as someone who is appalled by our Taoiseach's seemingly unconditional support for the US "War on Terror", having granted military use of our airspace. This happened since we first rejected the Nice Treaty.
The Treaty copperfastens the Rapid Reaction Force, described as "to a certain extent. . .a European Army" by no less than the former Commission president, Mr Jacques Santer, in an Irish Times report (page 11, July 13th). This force, to which the Government has committed 850 Irish soldiers, is to operate up to 4,000 km outside the EU's borders, covering countries such as Afghanistan and Somalia. This "army" is to work in close co-operation with the US-dominated NATO.
The Nice Treaty sets up an EU Political and Security Committee to control its Common Foreign and Security Policy under the former NATO head, Javier Solana. This convinces me that, as with the "War on Terror", EU (and Irish) foreign policy will be increasingly dominated by NATO and US interests.
This alone is sufficient reason for me to vote No to Nice. - Yours, etc.,
COLM RODDY, Bayside Walk, Dublin 13.
... ... * ... * ... * ... ...
A chara, - I was under the misapprehension that, with just three months to go before the electorate vote on the Nice Treaty, we had finally begun to debate the issues involved.
It seems I was mistaken. John Gormley of the Green Party is intent on regurgitating vacuous statements relating to the President, Mrs McAleese, and distracting the electorate from the real issues (July 18th).
In his interpretations of what the President is reported to have said, Mr Gormley failed to mention that Mrs McAleese was at pains to emphasise that the referendum was entirely a matter for the Irish people and she would never advise them how to vote.
During her discussions with the Greek President, the issue of enlargement was referred to many times. Greek leaders are concerned about Ireland's position, not least because they will take over the EU presidency next January. They have seen Ireland as a model of how to make the most of EU financial transfers. President McAleese was very careful when she responded to questions on the matter.
It is disappointing that people such as Mr Gormley feel it necessary to misinterpret what she said.
I hope we can now begin meaningful discussions and debates on the real and substantial issues involved in this treaty. - Is mise,
Ald PAT CAREY, TD, Dáil Éireann, Baile Átha Cliath 2.