Madam, - Proinsias De Rossa's suggestion ( The Irish Times, June 18th) that Ireland should question whether it should stay in the EU, or form a new relationship with it, similar to Norway's, deserves strong criticism.
I campaigned strongly for a Yes vote, like many others, and am very disappointed at the result. However, it is important that this result is analysed, like the Constitution referendums in France and the Netherlands in 2005. These are negative results from three of the most pro-European member-states in the Union. Castigating Ireland alone for causing a dilemma would be mistaken.
Some 40 per cent of those voting No last week were estimated to have done so because they did not fully grasp the proposals. False claims emerged about the treaty and the refutations were not easy to understand. This result should therefore be seen by the rest of Europe as a victory for propaganda.
That fact should be the main focus of debate within Europe in any post-mortem on the Irish referendum result. Campaigns of disinformation have been responsible for halting the EU Constitution, the Lisbon Treaty, and the progress of the EU as a whole. Asking Ireland to leave the EU is not going to alleviate this problem in future. - Yours, etc,
JOHN KENNEDY, Knocknashee, Goatstown, Dublin 14.
Madam, - Claims are widespread in the media that a great many No voters were misled by outrageous claims of mandatory abortion, conscription, euthanasia and more. I respectfully suggest that some may have voted Yes on the basis of equally unscrupulous claims that Lisbon had nothing to do with increased militarisation or federalisation or that our representation in the EU would remain undiminished.
Voters are misled by both sides. That's part and parcel of all referendums. On balance, the vast majority of voters ignore the more outrageous claims of both sides and in this particular case they voted a very convincing No.
I urge our political leaders to respect this result and recognise from it that Irish electorate are profoundly distrustful of them and of the EU's ambitions. To remedy their situation I suggest they begin by acting upon this actual result for what it is - a rejection of the Lisbon Treaty - rather than trying to explain it or apologise for it. - Yours, etc,
DAN LINEHAN, Sidney Place, Wellington Road, Cork.
Madam, - It has been a recurring theme since the No vote in last week's referendum that Ireland is the only EU member-state that provided its citizens with a "democratic voice" on the Lisbon Treaty. Perhaps I missed something, but did the governments of the EU member-states, which negotiated this treaty together, come to power by winning raffles or by having their names pulled from hats? If the citizens of other EU member-states really believe themselves to be the victims of a democratic deficit with regard to Lisbon (and would also have voted No if given the opportunity, as we are being led to believe), then they can punish the governments they elected by removing them from power during those member-states' next general elections?
Surely that is functioning democracy, rather than the base exercise in populism and self-interest that is a referendum? - Yours, etc,
DANIEL SEXTON, Dublin Road, Blackrock, Co Louth.
Madam, - It's clear that a representative cross-section of the Irish electorate rejected the Lisbon Treaty. The right, the centre and the left rejected it for many and numerous reasons, each dependent on their own interpretation of an unintelligible document.
Brian Cowen and Charlie McCreevy gave the distinct impression that the detail of the agreement shouldn't concern the voter. But partisan, pro-treaty pamphlets and generalised waffle are no substitute for detailed analysis over an adequate period of time. This treaty, if passed, would have profound repercussions on Irish society for generations to come. Complacency was their down-fall! Politicians treated the electorate as idiots, and they have paid the price.
Those who voted Yes obviously cannot accept the result, and much of the published comment is dismissive, if not downright abusive, of a sophisticated electorate. This is a human reaction. When people lose arguments, petty abuse is often the only outlet for their frustrations.
In all the obfuscation, however, one thing has become blindingly obvious to me, and that is the essentially undemocratic nature of Brussels. We are expected to act as unthinking robots and if we give the wrong answer to a question we will have to be reprogrammed. This happened here in Ireland when the Nice treaty was rejected. Likewise in France and Holland where the electorate answered No in 2005 to the same proposition put to us last week. The French and Dutch are now effectively disenfranchised. They cannot be trusted to do as Brussels would like, so the decision has been taken out of their hands. That's my point. That's not democracy, no matter what spin you put on it.
European society has never been a great example of democracy in action, and the efforts of unelected bureaucrats to force through this treaty in a matter of weeks by sloganeering and veiled threats should be treated with the derision that they deserve. - Your, etc,
PETER MARTIN, Castle Avenue, Swords, Co Dublin.
Madam, - Isolated? Why should we feel so? The "No to Lisbon" majority have the warm support in Europe of Italy's Northern League, France's Jean-Marie le Pen and his followers and the UK's Tory Eurosceptics. Great friends for Mary Lou, Declan Ganley, Joe Higgins et al. Enjoy! - Yours, etc,
MARY CARR, Seafield Road, Clontarf, Dublin 3.
Madam, - I voted against Lisbon - not because I am a working-class malcontent or a supporter of Sinn Féin, nor because I didn't understand the treaty. And I welcome all the diversity our new immigrants have brought to our country.
I voted No because I hate being ignored by an arrogant government. Although I was a student in the 1960s in the UK, I was never on a protest march until 2001 in Dublin against the Iraq war. Our "precious neutrality" meant that people could be subjected to extraordinary rendition through Shannon before the blind eye of the Irish government and planes carrying armed military personnel could be refuelled there.
The Government insists we pay up to 40 per cent more for a car in a country with a deplorable public transport system, the money supposedly going to a maladministered health system. The EU, with all our best interests at heart, tuns a blind eye.
Broadband coverage is about 25 per cent. In Korea it is 76 per cent. We are told we have a technologically advanced economy yet I live 18 miles from Leinster House and cannot get broadband. Need I say more?
Charles de Gaulle's idea was to create a trading group of countries that would be kept occupied and distracted from their natural bellicosity. He did not intend that little countries such as Ireland should be subsumed into a great, unwieldy, self-serving quagmire. - Yours, etc,
MURIEL JONES, Kilmurray, Bray, Co Wicklow.
Madam, - Noel Gorman (June 18th) singles out Cóir members for their role in achieving a No vote to the Lisbon Treaty and also praises their commitment to their faith. Their commitment may indeed be laudable, but if my memory serves me right the Eighth Commandment says: "Thou shalt not bear false witness". They might like to examine their consciences on this commandment. - Yours, etc,
SEAN HIGGINS, Rathfarnham, Dublin 16.
Madam, - The EU Constitution/Lisbon Treaty studiously omits any reference to God or Europe's Christian history and heritage from its preamble.
I, for one, had no choice but to vote No. - Yours, etc,
PATRICIA O'BRIEN, Sarto Road, Bayside, Dublin 13.
Madam, - Your edition of June 17th contains several excellent pieces on the fall-out from the Lisbon Treaty referendum. Three merit particular comment.
Anthony Coughlan first identified 40 years ago what one of his comrades described as the "West European Fascist Empire" and what Cóir/Youth Defence call the "Godless Empire". He has advanced various theories, largely of the conspiracy type, on the process of European integration over those years and has opposed every attempt to advance and reform it. He claims to recognise this spectre today in the terms of the Lisbon Treaty which, he asserts, would create a supranational federation.
It does nothing of the sort but, rather, provides for the better governance of "a community that was founded on voluntary, freely chosen adherence to the same values and the same ideals", to quote the former president of Latvia when she spoke to the National Forum on Europe last December. Latvia suffered at the hands of two genuinely "godless" empires in the 20th century and should be able to identify the true nature of the EU, within which it has regained its independence and sovereignty.
However, as Jamie Smyth points out in his article on the mood in Brussels, there is little point in demonstrating the fallacy or, indeed, truth of arguments while the Irish political class continues to treat the EU in a manner which invites - and has obtained - public indifference and even hostility. As he writes, "national politicians continue to blame the EU for domestic problems and many don't even know the basics of how the EU works. No Lisbon Treaty or new institution-building process can solve this problem."
Platitudes about "listening" and "reflecting" need urgently to be replaced by serious efforts to move debate on Europe to the centre of politics, since the real EU agenda, which is in danger of being sidelined by the Lisbon crisis, relates to issues of the utmost importance to this country, ranging from climate change to the CAP reform package.
Finally, it was revealing to read of Mr Declan Ganley's rush to London to line up with the deeply Eurosceptic British right-wingers, whose concern for this country's interests are as well disguised as Libertas's knowledge of the EU institutions. - Yours, etc,
TONY BROWN, Bettyglen, Raheny, Dublin 5.
Madam, - I have to admit I enjoyed Fintan O'Toole's recent article where he suggested that it might prove unsatisfactory to send off Micheál Martin and Brian Cowen to Brussels to articulate the concerns of those who voted against the Lisbon Treaty. He maintained that this was like sending Richard Dawkins to make the case for God, or asking Iris Robinson to explain the virtues of a gay lifestyle. Humorous but, in my opinion, inaccurate.
The reality, I'm afraid, is more like having Quisling negotiate on behalf of the Norwegian people with the occupying Nazi regime.
I say this because the Government appears to be ad idem with the European élites in its response to the decision by the Irish people to reject this troublesome treaty. - Yours, etc,
ROBERT BALLAGH, Dublin 7.
Madam, - I'm one who answered the call of what some journalists described as our "quisling politicians" and voted for the Lisbon Treaty. Now that a majority of the Irish electors who voted have rejected that Treaty, I'm sure the other members of the EU will respect Ireland's refusal to pool any additional sovereignty with them. However, I believe it would be counterproductive for Ireland to stand in the way of the other EU states if they wish to reap the benefits of further political integration.
If the rest of the EU wish to see the Lisbon Treaty enacted with the support of Ireland, perhaps they could make a declaration that none of the numerous nightmare scenarios sighted by the No campaigners will be forced on Ireland were it to ratify the treaty.
If that is not an option, perhaps we should consider the suggestion made by Germany's foreign minister, Frank Walter Steinmeier, that Ireland take a rest for now from the trauma of the ongoing EU process and opt for a relationship with it based on the exciting Nice Treaty.
If later, on mature reflection, Ireland wishes to rejoin the Brussels express, I'm sure we will be most welcome aboard. - Yours, etc,
TONY MORIARTY, Shanid Road, Kenilworth Park, Dublin 6.