Concern chief warns against No Lisbon vote

THE FORTHCOMING Lisbon referendum was “of crucial importance,” Tom Arnold, chief executive of Concern, said yesterday.

“Given that all other EU members have accepted the Lisbon Treaty as a basis for more effective governance going forward, a second No to Lisbon by the Irish electorate would, I believe, have serious negative consequences for this country’s future – and I don’t believe that falls into the category of scaremongering,” he said.

Delivering the Bishop Stock Lecture at the Humbert School in Ballina yesterday, he recalled a recent conversation with “a serving senior Irish ambassador” who had told him that rejection by Ireland of the Lisbon Treaty last year meant that “at a stroke, we threw away 40 years of Irish diplomacy”. Another No vote would result in “a marginalisation of influence and a loss of goodwill” towards Ireland within the EU and where the 10 new member states were concerned.

“They viewed last year’s No vote with utter incomprehension, and from a country which had gained so much and which had contributed so much [to the EU],” he said.

Economically, he said “we should pay great attention” to the words of Intel general manager Jim O’Hara, who had said last week that voting Yes to Lisbon was hugely important for future foreign investment in Ireland.

Where development aid was concerned, Tom Arnold said that over the past decade Ireland had acquired “a deserved reputation for quality and effectiveness in poverty reduction”. He hoped the McCarthy report recommendation that Ireland defer until 2015 (from 2012) its commitment to reach the UN aid target of 0.7 per cent of national income to foreign aid would not be acted on. There was a need, he said, to persuade the public and politicians “that our aid programme, as part of a progressive and enlightened foreign policy, is in this country’s enlightened self-interest.”

While the low standing of politics and politicians in Ireland was “an undesirable and dangerous state of affairs”, he noted that one of the least commented upon features of the recent local authority elections was the number of successful young candidates.