Madam, - I voted Yes, out of gratitude and appreciation for the benefits the European project has brought to this country. Just as those who took an opposite view of the treaty had to take many things on trust, so did I. The difference is that I accepted the undertakings given safeguarding our corporate tax rates, our neutrality, and our primacy in resisting anything we find unacceptable.
Under all the previous treaties to which we have signed up, nothing was forced on this country that we did not wish, and Lisbon would have been the same. We now find ourselves the focus of those incredulous EU citizens whose taxes brought us out of the third world in which we were firmly rooted.
We often talk about the sophisticated Irish electorate. How can we claim that status now, when we have obviously swallowed all the balderdash and spleen of every ingrate from left and right of the political spectrum, along with every screwball conspiracy theorist?
What we have shown is our complete inability to separate right from wrong, truth from lies, and fact from fiction. We have given an undeserved boost to the unelected and mysteriously funded chief naysayer of the campaign, Libertas, and breathed life into the moribund Sinn Féin Frankenstein.
When, not if, the implications of the No vote begin to affect this country, it will be interesting to see if its proponents disappear back into the shadows from whence they came. - Yours, etc,
ANDY JONES, Mullagh, Co Cavan.
Madam, - The message for Brussels is not that an ungrateful Irish people are looking for more concessions. No; the message that should be hammered home is that the European people deserve much more from their leaders than was on offer in the Lisbon Treaty. We deserve to be governed by institutions that are transparent, less prone to waste and corruption, and accountable to the people of Europe.
The underlying reason for the No vote, I believe - leaving aside all the red herrings - is that too many people suspect the EU is deeply undemocratic in its structure and operations, is remote from the concerns of European electorates, and is administered by a bureaucratic elite who, however well-intentioned, are not accountable to the people.
This is really sad because the European Union has been such an outstanding success in creating peace out of the desolation of war and in transforming the Europe's political, economic and cultural landscape for the good. But in recent years the project has been hijacked by an inner circle and needs to be reclaimed for the people.
This might require, inter alia, the transferring of powers from the Commission, from the Council of Ministers and from the European Council to the elected Members of Parliament, and the election, on a democratic basis, of the President and Foreign Minister — or such senior officials who discharge executive powers.
Are these such outrageous ideas? Is there any possibility that the underlying issue - lack of democracy - will be addressed? Or will we just have recriminations and a further attempt to manipulate us into giving the "right" answer? - Yours, etc,
BRIAN TIMMONS, Edenvale Road, Ranelagh, Dublin 6.
Madam, - I can only feel a deep sense of unease and dismay at Ireland's rejection of the Lisbon Reform Treaty. It does not augur well for the country that, when faced with an issue of subtlety and complexity, it has been swayed by the flotilla of misleading and contradictory billboards erected by the No side. In rejecting the Treaty, the majority of voters have accepted at face value the most outlandish distortions of both the far right and far left, and have allowed these distortions to seriously damage Ireland's relationship with its European partners.
How could a result like this have come to pass? In the aftermath, a panoply of explanations will no doubt be advanced for the failure of the Yes campaign - ineffectual leadership, popular discontent with the political class, electoral apathy, and, of course, the intricacy of the issues involved. Yet what cannot be overlooked is the refusal of many people to seriously weigh the consequences of their vote.
The No side played up to this, and consistently ventilated the airy belief that a No decision register a protest not only against the tarnished integrity of our politicians, but also against the abstract and complicated governing machinery of the EU itself. If Ireland rejected the treaty, a "better deal" would be at hand - yet how this deal could be achieved, or how it would be "better", was left unsaid.
In short, a political and institutional crisis has been engendered by the electorate's refusal to seriously consider the stakes involved. What this means for Ireland, for Europe, and for the future of the Union is yet to be discovered. What it means for the state of our democracy, however, is readily apparent. - Yours, etc,
SEAN COLEMAN, Lindisfarne Lawn, Clondalkin, Dublin 22.
Madam, - The rejection of the Lisbon Treaty is a clear statement by the people of Ireland that they wish to maintain the primacy of Ireland's Constitution and do not want a federal, constitutional United States of Europe. Our political leaders would do well to listen to the voice of the people.
Maybe now the mandarins of the EU political elite will listen to the democratic voice of the people - especially as we represented the hundreds of millions of EU electorate who never got the chance to express a democratic vote.
The treaty has fallen. It should be torn up. The people have rejected it.
This time No means No and there should be no re-run, as in "Nice 2". In particular there should be no statements that "the people" were not fully informed and did not know what they were voting on. What part of No do the political leaders not understand? - Yours, etc,
DANA ROSEMARY SCALLON, Claregalway, Co Galway.
Madam, - As an Italian and European citizen I'm appalled by the Irish referendum result. Ireland has gained very much from its presence in Europe. European structural funds were crucial for the economic development of your now flourishing economy, and the new, important role of Ireland in the world community was also connected to its influence on EU members. Other neutral states, such as Austria or Finland, have already approved the treaty, because it doesn't put neutrality at risk.
I read that many Irish people have voted No because they didn't understand the treaty. That's incredible: how one can say no (or yes) to a thing that doesn't understand ? The better strategy, in such cases, is to abstain. By the way, almost every internet news site (such as BBC) contains a short summary of the main elements of the treaty.
In 2001 Irish citizens voted against the Nice Treaty, against European expansion. Today, thanks to Eastern Europeans, the European economy is working well despite of global recession. On Thursday Irish citizens voted against the Lisbon Treaty, against a stronger Europe able to cope with the challenges from India, China, Russia, Brazil, Japan, South Africa. Ireland has a long, heroic history, and knows very well the perils of being a little country among huge powers. If Europe doesn't become stronger, it runs the risk of being a little island of democracy and peace in a word ruled by gigantic empires. - Yours, etc,
GABRIELE CATANIA, Vicenza, Italy.
Madam, - God bless the Irish! I thank you from the bottom of my heart, and on behalf of the 80-per-cent-plus of my UK constituents who would have voted No, but were denied their promised referendum.
Ireland has struck an historic blow for freedom and democracy, independence and self-determination. At last the cloth-eared Eurocrats in Brussels will have to listen to the people. Thank you, thank you, thank you. - Yours, etc,
ROGER HELMER MEP, (Conservative, East Midlands), UK Hon Chairman, The Freedom Association, Blisworth, Northamptonshire, England.
Madam, - If the State has any subsequent referendums on any European treaty, in addition to the Yes and No answers, there should be an extra option: "I don't quite understand this".Then we might actually have an accurate reflection of how the nation feels. - Yours, etc,
ALEX STAVELEY, Norseman Court, Dublin 7.