Madam, - Regardless of the outcome of the Lisbon Treaty referendum, should we not query the use of the two-option majority vote? When France voted on the EU constitution, the question (as is usual in politics) required a Yes or No answer.
Those who supported Giscard d'Estaing's new draft voted in favour. Those who voted against, however, included not only those who opposed that new draft, but also those who opposed the EU altogether, and/or Jacques Chirac, McDonald's, globalisation, the prospect of Turkish accession - or je ne sais quoi! At the very least, there should have been two questions: "Are you in favour of the new draft constitution?" And: "Do you wish the EU to remain under Maastricht?"
In Germany (where national referendums are banned because of Hitler's polls), the Bundestag uses a "constructive vote of no confidence": this means you can't just say "no"; you must first present a feasible alternative, and then people vote for one option or another.
For years, Northern Ireland suffered from the mindset that believes a majority may set the questions and thus rule, and if they could not rule, then they could veto: "Ulster says No!" The SDLP was of the same bent, of course, when it organised a boycott of the 1972 border poll. Similarly, abroad in recent years, Gibraltarians, Greek Cypriots and Bosnian Serbs have all said "No". And the simple yes-or-no majority vote has also dogged many other debates, not least our own on abortion. - Yours, etc,
PETER EMERSON, Director, The de Borda Institute, Belfast 14.
Madam, - Regardless of the referendum result, may I pay you and your colleagues the compliment of saying "well done" for your coverage of the Lisbon Treaty debate?
The breadth and depth of your paper's journalism was unparalleled and you more than fulfilled your public duty. Special mention should be made of Jamie Smyth's series of articles which were superb. While your own editorial line was clear and definitive, you aired the issues comprehensively, with space devoted to all comers.
To prevent any charge of sycophancy, however, I should note that your decision not to publish an earlier letter of mine was a grave dereliction of duty and one that clearly shifted the course of the entire campaign. - Yours, etc,
BEN TONRA, Jean Monnet Professor of European Foreign and Security Policy, UCD School of Politics and International Relations, Dublin 4.