Madam, – The Government proposes to start its campaign in late-August, but the No campaign is up and running already (Richard Greene, Opinion, 14th July). By the time the Government gets its boots on, there will be no room left on the pitch! – Yours, etc,
Madam, – I object to the fact that Richard Greene was given free rein (Opinion, July 14th) to air his views on the Lisbon Treaty. Clearly everyone is entitled to their opinion. However, the danger arises when a person’s views masquerade as fact. Mr. Greene made a number of false claims in his article which need to be corrected. Firstly, he said that Lisbon could pave the way to abortion. He wrote that the guarantees, such as the pledge that Ireland will retain control over the right to life, “have no real legal effect” and are “merely political promises.” This is simply untrue.
The guarantees become legally binding the day the treaty enters into force. They will then be included in a protocol to be attached to the EU treaties at the time of the next accession treaty. Secondly, he claimed that “in these straitened times we can’t afford the Lisbon Treaty.”
The fact is we can’t afford not to vote Yes. This treaty will enhance our competitiveness by ensuring Ireland is at the heart of a more coherent, more streamlined and ultimately stronger union. Mr Greene is entitled to express himself but has no right to make irresponsible claims.– Yours, etc,
Madam, – In response to Richard Greene’s article the legal status of the guarantees is immaterial because, in the words of Newton Emerson (17th June), they merely confirm what is already “blindingly obvious”, ie that Ireland decides its own abortion laws. Mr Greene is obviously determined to keep his eyes closed. – Yours, etc,
Madam, – Sinn Féin’s Eoin O’Broin (July 11th) has, I see, started the usual scaremongering about scaremongering with regard to the Lisbon Treaty.
But what is most frustrating about Sinn Féin opposition to the Lisbon Treaty and EU is the sheer two-facedness of it. Sinn Féin demands that the Irish Government must negotiate a perfect treaty that gains everything and cedes nothing.
Yet when Sinn féin negotiate, as they did in the Belfast Agreement, they effectively ceded a united Ireland and accepted a unionist veto in return for a cross border food safety board, amongst other things.
Why is it that Sinn Féin can give and take in negotiation but nobody else is permitted to?
Scaremongering? Just watch as Sinn Féin try to scare voters by trying to link cuts in public spending with the treaty, whilst conveniently forgetting to mention that Sinn Féin ministers are cutting spending in the North. I’ll bet that Sinn Féin ministers lobbying the European Commission in Brussels for extra funding don’t sound anything like Eoin O’Broin.
But then, should we be surprised by the two faces of Sinn Fein? On some issues, it seems, Sinn Féin have no problem with partitionism when it suits them politically. – Yours, etc,
Madam, – The No campaigners warn us of the perils of voting for the Lisbon Treaty. Not surprisingly, they have little to say about the consequences a second No vote would have.
The first thing to happen would be that the right to one commissioner per member-state would lapse since that is what the Nice Treaty requires. So all of the Government’s work on restoring the commissioner would be lost.
Secondly, all the signs are that the other 26 member-states are intent on pressing ahead with the Lisbon Treaty so as to improve the way the EU does its work, the decision of the German constitutional court being the latest evidence of this.
So the likelihood is that a legal way would be found to move ahead with implementation of its provisions in one form or another, while allowing Ireland to go along with parts of it. What kind of message would that send to our partners, in particular the investors we hope to attract?
We would have a kind of semi-detached position in the EU, losing the influence and goodwill we have built up over 36 years of EU membership. We would be signalling that we are prepared to put at risk the benefits we get from the EU including membership of the euro and the European Central Bank, full access to EU markets, funding for agriculture and infrastructure, and the freedom to live and work anywhere in the EU – which unfortunately many of our young people will have to avail of in the coming years.
It’s time to cop ourselves on, recognise where our true interests lie and vote Yes. – Yours, etc,
Madam, – Claire O’Donoghue’s (July 11th) selective quoting of Article 352 of the Lisbon Treaty is typical of the conspiratorial bent of opponents of the treaty.
Stating that Article 352 is “another self-amending aspect” of the treaty that allows “Brussels” to give “itself” new powers is not a construction that any reasonable person would arrive at on reading the full text of the Article.
Article 352 allows the EU to adopt necessary measures in pursuit of objectives laid out in the treaty, if such a proposal is made by the commission, if agreement is obtained by the parliament, if the EU council of ministers unanimously agrees to such measures and only if such measures are not provided for under the treaty.
Specifically, the article prohibits the harmonisation of laws in member-states and requires that the measures be notified to national parliaments, to whom members of the EU Council Of Ministers are accountable.
The clear purpose of the article is to allow the EU council to act in circumstances that have not been foreseen in the drafting of the treaty but where unanimity exists amongst all EU institutions that action is required.
It is obvious that member-states should not be limited by oversight in attaining the objectives they have set themselves. – Yours,tc.