Sir, – Over 90 years ago, a small impoverished agriculture-based country stood alone against the then might of the British empire. Whole families risked their lives and livelihoods for what they believed was the proper course of action. This same country, now a modern industrial-based developed independent nation with a highly sophisticated electorate, has the chance again to give the lead to other nations by taking on the might of the German financial system.
I find it intriguing that the political leaders of today have not got the spirit of their forefathers and are prepared to take the soft option instead of playing hardball. As a former PD councillor I am hardly an advocate for Sinn Féin policy but I still believe that some of us must “stand by the Republic”! It may very well be that Declan Ganley and Eamon Ó Cuív are correct. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – What we are voting on ultimately comes down to the availability of funds to pay our State’s bills. Over three-quarters of the monies required are devoted to social welfare, pensions and salaries for health services and education. At present, taxes collected only pay 70 per cent and the State has to borrow the remaining 30 per cent, well over €1 billion every month. A Yes vote gives us a secure source of funding at a very reasonable interest rate while we address the 30 per cent gap. A No vote means we have to start again in trying to find a source of loans to fill the gap.
Two things are for certain if we vote No. First, nobody will lend us all the money we require to fill that 30 per cent gap. This will inevitably lead to the need to adopt further harsh, perhaps extreme, budgetary measures. Second, the interest rate on any loans we do manage to negotiate will be higher than our current arrangements, further widening the gap.
The argument that we should use a No vote as a bargaining chip to cut our bank debt is not logical. Since our vote isn’t holding up anything else, the rest of Europe doesn’t care what we do so we don’t have any bargaining chips in this case.
Furthermore, failure to accept what’s on offer is just as likely to harden attitudes against us and make a future re-negotiation significantly more challenging.
The new focus across Europe towards an enhanced set of growth measures is positive. We have enough issues to be dealing with without scoring the ultimate “own goal” just before the Euro Championships commence. We ask people to exercise their right to vote on this matter of great importance to all our futures. Reflecting the views of affiliated Chambers of Commerce around Ireland, we also ask for a resounding Yes. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – I believe it does not matter a whit what way one votes, as, regardless of the outcome, the only certainty is austerity, pain, suffering and emigration for decades.
It worries me greatly that our leader, while taking every photo opportunity available, has shown a complete lack of confidence in his own ability to openly defend the Cabinet position, hiding behind a lame excuse.
At this late stage, I would like to know where the upcoming cuts are going to bite. If it is, as promised during the election, the obese pay and add-ons of top civil servants, politicians, top bankers, quangos, the Senate, the number of TDs (at least 100), councillors, advisers, consultants, reports, upward-only rents and bank debt, then I can vote Yes.
If its more of the same, jobseekers, carers, SNAs, those with intellectual disabilities, school transport, nurses and distressed homeowners, then I can vote No. I wish our leader would tell us. I’d love to vote Yes, but I fear it’ll be No. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – Three cheers for our Taoiseach, Enda Kenny, for refusing to partake in a radio/television debate on the forthcoming referendum. What a pity the following did not follow his example: Simon Coveney, Paschal Donoghue, Brian Hayes, Lucinda Creighton, Eamon Gilmore, Joan Burton,Micheál Martin, Michael McGrath,Gerry Adams, Mary Lou McDonald, Pearse Doherty, Joe Higgins, Richard Boyd Barrett,Shane Ross, Declan Ganley, etc, etc. And there I was thinking the Eurovision Song Contest was dreary, boring and banal! – Yours, etc,
Sir, – It is almost impossible for voters to get easy access to the facts on the fiscal treaty without “the spin”, including, I should add, from so-called independent journalists. As such I have identified a number of factors that I believe neither side of the debate could deny if they weren’t allowed the luxury of “qualification” (ie spin); 1. If the treaty is rejected there is no guarantee that we would have access to the ESM funds in the event that we need a second bailout. 2. While the initial tranche of our financial commitment to the ESM fund will be €1.47billion the fund will have the legal authority to request up to a total of €11 billion from Ireland. 3. At present, just four countries have ratified the treaty.
Neither Germany nor France have yet ratified it. 4. Regardless of the outcome of the referendum there is no legal impediment to having another referendum on the issue at a later date. 5. A rejection or ratification of the treaty will not divert the current Government from its planned fiscal adjustments. 6. The implementation of the ESM does not rely on Ireland’s ratification. 7. We are in this mess because of Lehman Brothers.
What I hope I have demonstrated is that even when our politicians and media fail to dispassionately relay the facts to us, we can and must get to the truth ourselves. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – The future of our country is the issue at stake in the referendum. Ireland is insolvent and we need to borrow from other countries to pay our way and repay existing debt. For these reasons alone, the ratification of the stability treaty is essential. We should do so in our own self-interest, just as Greece and Portugal have done already.
The contrast between a Yes and a No vote is stark. A Yes vote will help us on the path to economic recovery and provide us with access to funding should we ever need it again. A No vote would instantly destroy progress to date and block access to any sort of funding for years to come.
The choice, we believe, is simple. It is our passionate belief that a Yes vote will rebuild our international reputation as a credit worthy country, restore confidence among consumers and investors and regain our self-belief in the future. A No vote will do precisely the opposite. That is why we came together to form the “Alliance for Ireland”.
As a civil society campaign, we ask all concerned citizens to join us in securing our collective future by voting Yes to the stability treaty. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – One of the key arguments by the Yes campaign is that unless we ratify the treaty, Ireland will not have access to cheaper money from the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) for future bailouts. However, was it not access to cheap money that got us into our economic mess in the first place? If the Irish Government and financial regulator simply did their jobs and managed the country’s finances and lending practices more responsibly, this would go a long way to restoring our economy and further bailouts should not arise. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – Regarding the euro and the fiscal compact, the real question is: would we be better off in or out of a German-dominated Europe? The dominance of Germany has contributed to the euro crisis and its continued dominance has caused potentially the death of the euro and the EU project.
That Germany gained and has not suffered from flooding the euro zone with cheap money is a question that needs to be addressed in Europe. How likely is this when our Taoiseach won’t face the TV cameras at home and has gone on record as saying that he has a friendship with Germany? Enda Kenny has been wooed by the Germans while in opposition and we are now the partner of a dominant voice that sees only the German way as correct.
Whether the Taoiseach is capable of understanding the enormity of his actions is debatable. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – Some, like Declan Ganley, continue to say that a second referendum is likely if voters reject the stability treaty on Thursday.
It is clear that they do not understand the nature of the stability treaty which is not dependent on an Irish Yes to enter into force. This will happen once 12 of the 17 euro zone states have ratified it. A No vote will simply exclude Ireland from the treaty and from the vital long-term funding to be provided by the European Stability Mechanism (ESM).
Mr Ganley further asserts that a No vote on the present treaty will put this country in a position to demand concessions from our partners. As someone who has spent most of their working life in and around EU negotiations, I can guarantee that it is much more likely to put us in a position in which we will have run out of credit and thrown away the goodwill we have regained in Europe in recent times. – Yours, etc,
Sir, –
At 58 years of age,
I entered a bookies office a few days ago, for the first time in my life. Going up to the desk I made my inquiry: “Can you tell me the odds you are giving on the referendum?”. Reply from the young
guy behind the desk, (turning to his PC): “Yeah, sure, what race is he running in?” – Yours etc,
Sir, – While the debate around whether Ireland will, in the event of a second bailout, have access to the fund of money in the ESM should the country vote No, it must be pointed out that this fund (initially €700 billion) will be raised by the 17 states in the euro zone. That is, of course, by taxpayers of these countries.
For example, Ireland will contribute over €11 billion, while Germany will contribute over €190 billion and France over €142 billion. It does not require an economist, political pundit or even a government minister to tell the people of this country that he (or she) who pays the piper calls the tune. (Greece, by the way should put nearly €20 billion into the kitty!)
Government ministers have used the FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) principle to try to convince the electorate that they should vote Yes for the upcoming treaty.
An overpaid and overbloated public service, overpaid management, and inefficiently managed health service and grossly overpaid government salaries and civil service pensions, might just be some of the reasons why we are being asked to vote Yes.
The majority of people are just surviving, fearful of the future for themselves and their families. They are burdened with bankers’ debts, household charges and more to come. People who still are in a job are going to face rising austerity, and instability until the EU changes course. There are a number of areas in Ireland where money can be saved, efficiencies made and services improved, without any need for a second bailout.
It is time the Government stopped acting like some puppet of Germany, got its own house in order and tackled the problems here. The people may well tell them so on May 31st. – Yours, etc,
Sir, – Participants in the debate about “growth” versus “austerity” would do well to note that the German word corresponding to ‘austerity’ in this context is Sparmassnahmen or Sparpolitik, meaning literally “savings measures” or “savings policy”. In other words, there is no suggestion of the unpleasantness, discomfort, even cruelty, that the term “austerity” implies, and that opponents of the policy mean it to imply.
In German the policy in question is simply a matter of saving money by reducing spending or by not overspending. This is a very honoured virtue in German culture, for which the popular model is the thriftiness of the legendary “Swabian housewife”. – Yours, etc.
Sir, – John Waters (Opinion May 25th) may salve his conscience, and solve his voting dilemma by voting No – with mental reservations. – ours, etc,
Sir, – Regarding the casting of the sole vote on the European treaty on Inishfree island (Home News, May 29th): was the polling box containing the solitary vote ferried back to the mainland? If so, would it be legitimate to describe this particular ballot as “the single transferable vote”? – Yours, etc,
Note: On May 31st we will be observing a moratorium on letters relating to the referendum to amend the Constitution.