The Lisbon Treaty dilemma

Madam, - Brian Wall (August 6th) asserts that what the EU needs is "a strong and clear European constitution that puts power…

Madam, - Brian Wall (August 6th) asserts that what the EU needs is "a strong and clear European constitution that puts power firmly in the hands of the voter and which is resilient enough to serve the people of Europe long into the future" (August 6th).

I fear Mr Wall is as confused as many others on the issue of how to run the EU. Putting power "firmly in the hands of the voter" in this context would mean that the government of the EU would be directly elected by the ordinary European punter.

While this would certainly render the European government more accountable to the people, it would greatly reduce the power and prestige of the various national governments. In short, what Mr Wall is talking about is effectively a federal European state. His admiration for the 18th-century constitution of the United States of America confirms this.

The EU is patently not ready for such a radical development (the British, alone, would have a seizure at the merest suggestion of such a thing). No. What is needed for the EU at this juncture, in my humble opinion, is a constitution (small "c") which retains most political power firmly in the hands of the national democratic governments.

READ MORE

Decision-making at EU level should be shared by the nation-states in conjunction with various appointed functionaries and specialist councils.

Naturally, compromises would have to be made: the thing must not be so cumbersome that it simply would not work. And such compromises are likely to require years of negotiations before agreement is reached between nation states jealous of their power and concerned for their individual special interests.

But hang on! Wasn't there a lot of stuff in the newspapers recently about something like that? Oh yes - now I remember. It was called the Lisbon Treaty! - Yours, etc,

COLIN BRENNAN,

Nutley Square,

Dublin 4.

Madam, - Andrew Finch writes (August 11th): "The onus is on the European Council to look at why the people rejected the treaty and negotiate relevant agreements that people want."

I think the European Council will reject this impossibly difficult task. In that case, our Government will be faced with a non-reception of our referendum by Europe. The choice then will be either to stick to what the referendum demands, even at the cost of leaving Europe, or to find some reasonable compromise.

Since the Irish people never voted to leave Europe, the first course would be quite undemocratic. - Yours, etc,

JOSEPH S. O'LEARY,

Sophia University,

Tokyo,

Japan.

Madam, - Cllr Niamh Bhreathnach (August) is continuing her disinformation campaign on the Lisbon Treaty. She warns us that "there are consequences for the future of this neutral country outside the EU". One can only deduce that the good councillor actually believes we have left the EU or, perish the thought, she is engaging in scaremongering in the hope of forcing us all to rethink our referendum vote.

She goes on to state the obvious with her observation that "there are consequences for the economy, if we have to leave the euro". Now, I know the Treaty document was complex but it did not state anywhere in its 400 pages that a No vote would lead to exclusion from the euro currency.

She then suggests darkly that there are "consequences for our employment prospects and educational standards if we choose to turn our backs on the EU". We have not turned our backs on anyone except perhaps our own Government.

When I was unsure which way to vote, a chorus of lying implications from established figures, who had repeatedly shown themselves to be untrustworthy, was enough to convince the majority to give them their answer.

If the Yes campaign had told voters the truth, I believe they would have done better. Any treaty is a list of compromises, some good things and some bad, but on balance, the overall agreement is good.

Instead, leading Yes campaigners confined themselves to insulting anyone stupid enough to consider voting No and threatened us all with dire consequences if we did not do as they wanted. It did not work and it won't work if tried again. - Yours, etc,

JOHN MALLON,

Mayfield,

Cork.