Madam, – If we are to have an EU superstate, and it appears as if we are, why not copy the US system of a house of representatives, elected in proportion to the population, and a senate with two senators from each state? We should reject Lisbon for the moment, until a more comprehensive parliamentary system is proposed as part of a revised treaty. – Yours, etc,
Madam, – In saying that if the Lisbon Treaty is passed, “a sovereign independent Irish nation will cease to exist”, (September 22nd) Robert Ballagh repeats a number of errors and inaccuracies regarding both the current nature of EU law and the changes proposed by Lisbon.
On the issue of citizenship, Mr Ballagh fails to mention that we currently possess European Union citizenship along with Irish citizenship, and have shared this joint citizenship since we voted for the Maastricht Treaty in 1992. This European Union citizenship allows us to travel to and work or receive education in, other member-states, and be treated the same as citizens of that member-state. It is far more significant than just “having a purple cover on our passport” as Mr Ballagh says. The Lisbon Treaty will not radically alter the current situation as it states clearly that “Citizenship of the Union will be additional to and not replace national citizenship” (Article 20 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union).
Mr Ballagh also states that the Irish Constitution will be “subordinate to the new union treaty regulations”. What he and the No side fail to acknowledge is that EU law has taken supremacy over all Irish law, and indeed, all the laws of the other members states, since we joined the EU in 1973. It is because of this supremacy of EU law that, when the EU passed directives such as requiring equal pay for women, health and safety requirements for workers or strong environmental regulations, Irish governments were forced to implement these progressive measures, often with great reluctance. If EU law were not superior to national laws, national governments would have ignored EU legislation and the entire EU project would have failed decades ago. The Lisbon Treaty merely restates the current situation on this point.
Finally, the new Article 50 Treaty on European Union will for the first time set out a procedure whereby a member-state can withdraw from the EU of its own decision. This clearly puts to rest any comparisons Mr Ballagh tries to make between the European Union and the United States. The last time a state tried to leave the United States, it resulted in a four-year civil war and the deaths of 620,000 people. Lisbon enshrines the sovereign right of any member state to freely leave the European Union.– Yours, etc,
Madam, – As a member of the Church of Ireland Working Group on Europe I am outraged, if not surprised, by the comment of the Rev Ian Ellis, editor of the Church of Ireland Gazette, (Home News, September 23rd). He is certainly entitled to his view on the statement by the Protestant churches on the Lisbon Treaty (in which I had a part). However, as an editor of a significant organ of Church of Ireland opinion, he had a professional duty to inquire into the basis of the report in the Irish Medical News, which he said claims that almost a quarter of the Irish population could be “involuntarily detained under a provision of the Lisbon Treaty allowing alcoholics and drug addicts to be confined, which contravenes the Medical Health Act 2001”.
In fact, the provision allowing for the detentions of alcoholics and drug addicts is contained in Article 5(1)(e) of the European Convention on Human Rights, to which the State acceded in 1953. It says that no one shall be deprived of his individual liberty, except in certain circumstances, including “the lawful detention of . . . alcoholics and drug addicts”. This simply means that the State may do so in conformity with the Convention, but is not obliged to do so. In Ireland, such locking up is not in accordance with the law, and the Lisbon Treaty does not change that. He is also confusing the European Convention on Human Rights with the Charter of Fundamental Rights. The Convention only applies when it is in agreement with EU law. There is, in fact, no EU law allowing for the detention of alcoholics and drug addicts.
I deeply regret that the editor of the Gazette should engage in such baseless Eurosceptic propaganda. – Yours, etc,
Madam, – Some time back I wrote stating my concern that Tom Arnold CEO Concern had used his position to influence people in the coming referendum on Lisbon (September 9th). I have since had a letter from Mr Arnold setting out his position and pointing out that the subject he spoke to made it mandatory to mention Lisbon and that the press singled this comment out in isolation from what was a most insightful talk. While I disagree with him on his opinions I fully respect his right to have them and now accept that he believes the treaty would be beneficial for Concern. I apologise for the intemperance of my language in my previous letter and would wish Mr Arnold and Concern well in the future. – Yours, etc,
Madam, – I am an Englishman and, as such, cannot express my opinion on the Lisbon Treaty in spite of a binding commitment given by Tony Blair in the Labour manifesto. Your countrymen are extremely fortunate to have a proper democracy and can do so, so I appeal to all Irishmen and women to save us from the Lisbon Treaty. Only the Irish can save us from EU corruption, socialism and lack of democracy. You will be saving yourselves too. – Yours, etc,
Madam, Cormac O’Ceallaigh (September 22nd) asks “what’s the end game of this EU project?”. He seems to infer we should draw a line where we are excluding other European nations, especially Turkey. I entirely agree with him that the founding principles of the EEC were brilliant, but I do not recall any of the founders setting a limit on the nations who could benefit from those principles. He ends his letter with “The prospect of some ‘eternal city’ living together as one is a fallacy”.
Anyone familiar with human history would not dispute that. However, I have no doubt the EU is the nearest we will ever get to that blessed state. – Yours, etc,