DAMIEN FLINTER,
Sir, - While I would not question Piaras MacEinri's figures and projections for population movements, and find his arguments convincing, I would question the logical leaps involved in his conclusions. (Letters, August 10th).
He states he voted "No last year because I was unhappy with the complacency of the Government and its cavalier attitude to the referendum process" and that "... the point was made by the people and it is time to move on".
I fail to discern what has convinced him that the Government's "complacency and cavalier attitude" has not degenerated into outright contempt. Did they get the signal and return to the reneged promise of a referendum on military neutrality? Or was he convinced by the serving up of the same reheated text; with the instant sauce of Berlin, Madrid, and that historic guarantor of our democratic rights, Her Majesty's Government, that our neutrality is as sacred to them as Momma's strudel?
And "... the stakes are too high for parochialism".
As this is a metaphorical extension from the parish to the nation does it not follow that it can equally be extended to a continental agenda which does less than justice to our obligations under the UN? This referendum should at least be postponed until the people have had the opportunity to see the text of the pending EU constitution, if we are to so "cavalierly and complacently" burn our current constitutional protections from adventuring.
"As far as I can see, the major part of the 'No' campaign is an isolationist, xenophobic, backward-looking far-right rump."
Such a general ad hominem dismissal is insulting, though redeemed by the realisation Mr MacEinri may not have intended; it means he cannot see so far as to say he is but a short year released from the clutches of this rump himself. I remain unconvinced. - Yours, etc.,
DAMIEN FLINTER,
Clifden,
Co Galway