Sir, - I published an article on October 15th, entitled "Renewed attack of the Ultra-Conservative Right on European Women", in the Gender Policy Review, in which I outlined the amendments that the conservative group of the European Parliament have made to a number of very important budget lines, including funding for anti-violence, anti-discrimination and anti-sex tourism initiatives. Having submitted this article to The Irish Times, I was astonished to see my article being misused as the basis for an extraordinarily confused and inaccurate piece by Breda O'Brien (Opinion, October 21st).
At no point did Ms O'Brien speak with me, yet she indicates at several points in her article that she had direct contact with me and that we had discussed the contents of my article. This is simply not true. She did make contact with my office, and in the interest of accuracy and transparency she was provided with detailed information on the amendments in question. Despite this courtesy Ms O'Brien yet again misrepresented the facts of the situation. The passing reference to Ms Rosemary Scallon in my article simply reiterates the fact that she did lead an unsuccessful campaign last year to lobby for funding for a group called the Mothers of the World, and that this year her name is again on an amendment whose aim is to again open up the budget line which funds the European Women's Lobby.
I and many of my colleagues believe that the arguments currently being put forward about greater representation for women's groups at European Level are merely a smokescreen. We know that the effect of dividing this budget line will be to considerably weaken the only effective and organised pan-European NGO representing the interests of women in the European Union. In the interest of ensuring a more balanced and honest representation of views, I very much hope you will publish this letter. - Yours, etc.,
Maj Britt Theorin, Chairperson, Committee on Women's Rights and Equal Opportunities in the European Parliament, Strasbourg.
Breda O'Brien writes: Ms Theorin did offer her article for publication in The Irish Times, but as it had already appeared in Gender Policy Review, we felt it was legitimate to comment on the issues raised in it. I e-mailed Ms Theorin at her office with the text of her article and some questions, so she can hardly be surprised that it formed the basis of my column. At no point did I suggest that I had spoken personally to Ms Theorin, but instead quoted at length from the original article and the written response which I received from her office.
The passages quoted show that Ms Theorin made more than passing reference to Dana; instead, she attempted to link Dana with amendments to which Dana had no connection. This I believed, and still believe, to be unfair.