Madam, - Mary Lou McDonald MEP (January 24th) and her adviser Eoin Ó Broin (January 23rd) are clearly uncomfortable with my analysis of Sinn Féin's Euroscepticism. Highlighting the similarity of the Sinn Féin and Le Pen cases against the Lisbon Reform Treaty prompts their abuse and misrepresentations, but no clarification. In desperation they reach for the actions of maverick French socialists who helped boost Le Pen in 2005. These socialists claimed to want more European integration; Le Pen wanted less, as does Sinn Féin in Ireland. They did not achieve a stronger social Europe as a result of that debacle, as they argued they would, and the right in France is stronger than ever.
Understanding the basis of Euroscepticism in Ireland is fundamental to understanding what Sinn Féin & Co really mean when they say Lisbon is "bad for democracy". They oppose power-sharing in Europe because it involves pooling sovereignty to make binding decisions at European level. They do so because they are in a nationalist time-warp and refuse to accept that trans-national decision-making enhances rather than diminishes nation-state democracy. Ganley and Murdoch oppose it because they want unregulated markets and are quite happy to whip up old-fashioned nationalist arguments to block greater democratic control of the now globalised market. It is therefore not surprising that all of them should argue that sharing sovereignty is "bad" for their conception of democracy.
It is self-evident that if you confine the exercise of sovereignty within nation-state borders you deny citizens the right to take part in decisions beyond the control of the nation-state acting alone. Take climate change, for example. Ireland obviously has the freedom to make whatever choices it wants on climate change. But it is clear we cannot stop global warming on our own. It is equally clear that mere "co-operation" between states - the Sinn Féin & Co position - will not work; every state would be tempted to seek short-term economic advantage by refusing to implement non-binding undertakings, as we've seen with Kyoto. We therefore need a system whereby states can pool their sovereignty in order to make binding decisions, which ultimately carry penalties for failing to implement obligations freely negotiated and entered into.
Fortunately, we in Ireland are part of such a system - it's called the European Union. At this time of crisis for our planet we are fortunate too that with the Lisbon Reform Treaty we have the chance to vote to extend the EU's remit to enable binding decisions to be made on climate change. For good measure, this treaty also ensures that all such decisions will be subject to greater democratic scrutiny by our TDs, senators, and MEPs, as pointed out in detail by Joe Costello TD (January 24th).
The bottom line is whether we want to be able to make more effective, more democratic and binding decisions on matters such as climate change, raising labour standards, energy conservation and diversification, and ensuring that Europe's social model is not wiped out by footloose global capital. If the answer is yes, then we need to support the Lisbon Reform Treaty to strengthen our hand in these battles. - Yours, etc,
Madam, - I am thoroughly mystified by the letter from Chris Andrews TD February 1st). In what sense will the Lisbon Treaty "improve identity with EU leaders", and what does such "identity" entail? Personally, I have no wish to be "identical with" apparatchiks like Benita Ferrero-Waldner or Javier Solana. Regardless of their job-description, my wish is to be able to kick them out (or just kick them) when they make yet another of their crass statements defending the increased convergence of US and EU neo-imperial interests.
As for Mr Andrews's Parthian rhetorical question, "if the next president of the European Council is Irish, wouldn't we be proud?", the answer is: not necessarily. I personally would feel something akin to pride if I had some slight role in electing such an official, regardless of his or her nationality, and if for once the European Council were to define political guidelines for the Union that did not offend my sense of social and political justice. - Yours, etc,
RAYMOND DEANE, Dun Laoghaire, Co Dublin.