Madam, - Where are the brave defenders of the whole European achievement? It is not 20 years since half of Europe was behind the Iron Curtain. It is barely 60 years since the genocides of the second World War claimed millions of lives within hundreds of miles of us. Now we jump on a Ryanair flight to all these countries.
The European achievement has been about broadening Europe as well as deepening it. The two are inseparable. If we are to be part of Europe we must accept Europeans have a part in our lives. If we want our sun holidays in Spain (Franco 30 years ago), our weekends in Prague (Soviet tanks 40 years ago) and our Polish plumber (Solidarity 20 years ago) we have to believe we are European.
And as to the future, maybe we will have our Bosnians and Serbians, at war 10 years ago, in 2015; maybe we will have our secular Turkish Muslims in 2020.
People from Ireland have received a lot from Europe. We have not given enough back. We indulge in miserable navel-gazing about what "bloody Europe" has done for us - with, of all people, farmers complaining most. We have yet to grow up and participate in achieving important ideals - peace, human rights, democracy and a decent living.
The European experiment that is called the EU has not diminished us as a people or country. It is given a small country on the edge of Europe a chance to free itself from its past and give ourselves a future we would not have dreamed of 20 years ago. It's time for us to give hope to the many, many people who wish they were here - in the club Ireland joined all those years ago. - Yours, etc,
DANNY HASKINS, Oatlands, Wicklow.
Madam, - Various politicians and commentators tell us that passing the Lisbon Treaty will contribute to democracy. This word is being used liberally, but in two entirely different contexts. Are we to be governed by the will of the people of Ireland, or by the will of the people of the European Union? In which of these two groups does sovereignty reside? Who is the demos in this "democracy"?
Gradually, treaty by treaty, referendum by referendum, we are being manoeuvred from an Irish democracy into an EU democracy. National policy decisions are being superseded by EU policy decisions. The overall direction is mutating citizenship of Ireland into citizenship of Europe. Lisbon is another step along this road.
I used to be an enthusiast for the Common Market, but economic integration does not require political integration. Enough is enough. Satisfied with the hard-won achievement of a successful Irish democracy, I will be voting No to Lisbon. - Yours, etc,
PETER GORMAN, North Avenue, Mount Merrion, Co Dublin.
Madam, - For those who are still wavering about whether or not to support that infernally complex document known as the Lisbon Treaty, might I offer some clinical guidance.
Ditherers might consider applying the long-held medical principal of informed consent. If those who propose you vote Yes have clearly pointed out the adverse possibilities as well as the possible benefits, you have some chance of giving informed consent.
But our political masters have clearly failed in this regard, opting instead for a poster campaign that tells us nothing except that they are adept at wasting our money to promote their own mugshots. I for one shall be declining this particular operation. - Yours, etc,
Dr MAURICE GUERET, Fortfield Road, Dublin 6w.
Madam, - As someone who lectures in European Union law I feel obliged to respond to the many inaccuracies in the article by Richard Greene of Cóir (Opinion, May 26th).
Mr Greene suggests that the Lisbon Treaty will have the effect of allowing for the primacy of European Union law over national law. However, this has been the situation since the decision of the European Court of Justice in Van Gend en Loos in 1963.
Furthermore, the Third Amendment to the Constitution as inserted by the people in 1972 clearly allows for the primacy of European Union law in areas of EU competence.
The wording of the proposed amendment in this respect is nothing more than a restatement of the Third Amendment with reference to the European Union.
Mr Greene further suggests that the European Court of Justice may interpret Article 113 in such a way as to determine that Ireland's tax laws give us an unfair advantage as we will have signed away the primacy of our competition laws. Firstly, Article 113 refers to indirect taxation. Corporation tax is a direct tax and no opinion of Mr Greene will change this fact. Secondly, competition law is already an area of competence of the European Union where trade between member-states may be affected, and it has been of immense benefit to Irish consumers for many years.
Finally, Mr Greene suggests that the European Court of Justice might rule on an implicit right to legal abortion in Ireland. Nothing in the Lisbon Treaty affects in any way the current constitutional position relating to the provision of abortion in Ireland.
The restatement of Protocol Number 17 of the Maastricht Treaty makes it quite clear that the EU treaties cannot be invoked in relation to the current Irish constitutional provision on abortion.
The Lisbon Treaty is about many things, but it is not about corporation tax and it is not about abortion. Mr Greene has applied interpretations and suppositions to the Treaty which have no basis in law. - Yours, etc,
DECLAN J. WALSH, Faculty of Law, University College Cork.
Madam - Gay Mitchell MEP (May 27th) challenges Sinn Féin's Alternative Guide to the Lisbon Treaty. He fails to mention that some of the largest trade unions in the country, such as Unite and TEEU, share Sinn Féin's analysis with respect to workers rights and public services and are opposing the treaty. He also claims that the CPSU has formally endorsed the Lisbon Treaty, which is not so.
With respect to the impact of the treaty on the developing world, Mr Mitchell omits to say that many trade justice organisations, such as Christian Aid and Trócaire, are deeply concerned about the EU's trade agenda. That there is a glaring contradiction between the EU's overseas development policy and its trade policy is not in dispute.
The Lisbon Treaty will make this contradiction even worse, actively undermining the good work of many individuals such as Gay Mitchell in the European Parliament's Development Committee. It promotes a global trade agenda that is bad for the world's poorest countries.
Sinn Féin's concerns on issues such as workers' rights, public services, international trade and loss of influence are factual and credible. Anyone who is interested in finding out more should read our alternative guide for themselves on http://www.no2lisbon.ie/en/policies. - Yours, etc,
EOIN Ó BROIN, (Sinn Féin), Dún Laoghaire, Co Dublin.
Madam, - Fact: the Nice Treaty, not Lisbon, reduced the size of the European Commission. The Nice Treaty (which came into force on February 1st, 2003) determined that the composition of the European Commission would be reduced.
It states: "The number of Members of the Commission shall be less than the number of Member States. The Members of the Commission shall be chosen according to a rotation system based on the principle of equality..." (Protocol A (Article 4) of the Nice Treaty).
This ensures a streamlined and less bureaucratic Commission on the basis of strict equality between the member-states in the context of EU enlargement. A No vote to Lisbon will not change this. It is already a fait accompli. Lisbon merely adds detail to a principle that has already been agreed.
Furthermore, the current legal position is that the Commissioner's role is not to represent national interests at EU level. Rather it is the role of MEPs and governments (at the European Council) to do this. A No vote to Lisbon will not change this.
However, voting Yes to Lisbon will extend the powers of our directly elected MEPs and strengthen the role of Dáil and Seanad Éireann in representing Ireland's interests at EU level. - Yours, etc,
AVRIL DOYLE MEP, European Parliament, Brussels.
Madam, - I read and re-read your Editorial of May 27th. I am simply astounded to see The Irish Times buying the pre-emptive spin being propagated by Brian Cowen, Brian Lenihan and Dermot Ahern. To suggest that Fine Gael is not playing its part in promoting a Yes vote for Lisbon is to ignore the vast amount of work that has been and is being done by the main opposition party.
We in Fine Gael have been campaigning for a Yes vote since February. We have held more than 50 public meetings around the country. We have distributed hundreds of thousands of leaflets. We have been campaigning door to door, outside shopping centres and church gates.
We are running a serious national campaign. What have Brian Cowen and Fianna Fáil done, besides launching an unwarranted attack on Fine Gael supporters in recent days? Fine Gael has always been the passionately pro-European party on this island. One of our core values is a firm commitment to the European project.
However, domestic issues and concerns frequently overtake the central issues involved in referendum campaigns. Fine Gael members and supporters do not take kindly to the bully-boy tactics of Taoiseach Brian Cowen.
If the Lisbon Treaty is to pass, Mr Cowen should spend his time explaining the merits of a Yes vote, rather than attacking the Fine Gael support base which will be so pivotal to the ratification of the treaty. - Yours, etc,
LUCINDA CREIGHTON TD, Fine Gael Spokesperson on European Affairs, Leinster House, Dublin 2.