MICHAEL MCLOUGHLIN,
Sir, - When reading Angus Ó Snodaigh and other Sinn Féin spokespersons on the Nice Treaty I am reminded of the comment about Ian Paisley that if the word no was taken out of the English language he would be speechless. How ironic that Sinn Féin's approach to these matters is so reminiscent of the rejectionist Unionists.
The Government has by changing the proposed wording of the constitutional referendum on Nice, following the work on the Forum on Europe, demonstrated that it is willing to take on board concerns that people have in this area. Yet this is not enough for Sinn Féin.
The very party that calls for compromise and give-and-take in Northern Ireland shows its intransigence in the South. If people who disagreed with Sinn Féin on other issues took this approach the party would not be where it is today.
Can Mr Ó Snodaigh point to the precise clause in the Nice Treaty which impacts on Irish neutrality. The treaties of Maastricht, Amsterdam and Nice all make it clear that developments in the area of security and defence will "respect the constitutional traditions" of the member states. Nice provides for oversight of these matters by a committee thus enhancing accountability.
It also abolishes the Western European Union which No campaigners have previously campaigned for!
By changing our Constitution to allow only participation in common defence following approval by the people we are making our position clear. So clear, in fact, that Anthony Coughlan and other fellow No campaigners say neutrality is not an issue. Only a Yes vote ensures that future governments will have to consult the people further. Mr Ó Snodaigh feels a declaration of 15 sovereign heads of government is not good enough for the Irish people but his party spends plenty of time seeking various declarations from Tony Blair and Bertie Ahern on all sorts of matters.
The second referendum will have the advantage of being held at a time when we know for a fact what the much-derided rapid reaction force will be deployed for. The European Council has decided the civilian policing of Bosnia should be handled by the ERRF, a development welcomed by anybody with an interest in, or knowledge of, this region. Presumably Sinn Féin opposes this deployment too.
But given their record on honest attempts to develop improved impartial policing that would be no surprise. - Yours, etc.,
MICHAEL MCLOUGHLIN, Castleknock, Dublin 15
Sir, - The paucity of the Yes case can be gleaned from the pro-Nice leaflet.
1. An Irish Yes vote will allow enlargement to take place on schedule in January, 2004.
2. Enlargement offers opportunities for Ireland to make new allies in Europe and create new jobs at home.
3. An Irish No vote would delay enlargement.
4. Following another No vote Ireland would lose influence in Europe and our ability to negotiate would be damaged.
As regards 1 and 3 (which is merely a variation of 1) this is what Romano Prodi, President European Commission, had to say in June, 2001:
"Legally, ratification of the Nice Treaty is not necessary for enlargement. It's without any problem up to 20 members (Treaty of Amsterdam) and those beyond 20 members have only to put in the accession agreement some notes of change, some clause. But legally, it's not necessary. This doesn't mean the Irish referendum isn't important. But from this specific point of view, enlargement is possible without Nice."
This is what Valery Giscard d'Estaing, president of the Convention on the Future of Europe, had to say recently in Denmark on the possibility of a second No vote:
"The solution will not be to ignore the vote, but to handle the situation. Probably it requires taking what is needed from the Nice Treaty to carry through the enlargement" (Presumably, enlargement beyond 20 is what he meant).
As regards 2 and 4, what is the point of making new allies who will be just as powerless as ourselves in the face of "the democratic deficit" that is at the heart of the decision-making in Europe. Nice is bringing in further centralisation with the removal of the right of veto on vital national interests in 30 new areas, including structural and cohesion funding and the choosing of commissioners. The power imbalance between the smaller states and larger states is being reinforced.
Ireland is set to lose three of its 13 MEPs in the European Parliament if Nice is ratified, so that we will have only 12 out of 732.
On the Council of Ministers we currently have three votes out of 87. After ratification this would become seven votes out of 345.
With the advent of "qualified majority voting" in a whole range of new areas Ireland will have no influence in decision making. At times we would be without any representation on the Commission at all leaving us with no input into decisions of vital national importance. Whether Irish capital flows to the cheap labour markets of Eastern Europe, or the workers come here, jobs will be lost to Irish people who are not prepared to accept low wages.
"We will have to create an avant-garde... We could have a Union for the enlarged Europe and a Federation for the avant-garde". - Former EU Commission President, Jacques Delors, June, 2000.
"Let's be brave. Let national interest remain in second place and European interests be the priority." - Gerhard Schroeder, German Chancellor, speaking in Poland, December, 2000. - Yours, etc.,
JOHN O'HANLON, Sandford Avenue, Dublin 8