THOMAS LEGGE,
Sir, - By what sophistry can one support EU enlargement and yet insist that the Treaty of Nice must be "scrapped and an alternative treaty drawn up" (Brendan Meskell, March 27th)?
For Mr Meskell, the EU is too determined to enforce "neo-liberal policies. . .e.g., the energy liberalisation policies agreed at Barcelona". True, the Barcelona summit made a few small steps towards greater energy liberalisation, but Mr Meskell will presumably be pleased that big monopolies, rather than consumer choice, will continue to determine where most of us consumers buy our electricity.
The point is that day-to-day EU policies, neo-liberal or otherwise, are a poor reason to vote No to Nice. The Treaty of Nice is a "housekeeping" treaty to allow the EU institutions to accept up to 12 new member-states.
The big issues - the future direction of Europe, the fundamental reform of the institutions, the possibility of a European constitution - are not addressed in the Nice Treaty because they lie outside its very limited mandate. That kind of grand debate is currently taking place in the ongoing European Convention, which will lead to a more comprehensive new treaty in 2004. But it has nothing to do with Nice.
We cannot renegotiate the Nice Treaty because that would take several years, and the countries of central and eastern Europe do not want to be kept waiting. Anyway, the outcome of such a renegotiation could hardly be much different from the current treaty - the issues are just too narrow.
The reason that I support re-running the referendum is that the Government and Opposition parties failed last year in their duty to communicate the true and limited meaning of Nice - a boring, technical treaty that is nevertheless indispensable for enlargement of the European Union. - Yours, etc.,
THOMAS LEGGE,
Brussels,
Belgium.