EU CLAMPDOWN ON IMMIGRATION

Sir, - Congratulations to RTE for its nine o'clock news presentation on Thursday, June 13th. It was hard to tell if the timing was deliberate, but it managed to highlight the pernicious contradiction in the current world order.

The last news item before the commercial break featured our new Minister for Justice, Michael McDowell, at his first outing with his EU colleagues, protesting about the current state of immigration into Europe and engaging in discussions with his colleagues about wide-ranging and draconian plans to reduce the numbers of "illegal migrants" in the European Union.

The first piece after the commercial break was a lengthy report on the desperate attempts of African nations to lobby the FAO meeting in a vain attempt to increase development aid to Africa because of famine and poverty on that continent. We were informed that "millions will die of starvation" if current trends continue.

Tony Blair used to like calling for "joined-up government". What about some joined up thinking? - Yours, etc.,

READ MORE

ANN MORONEY, Stanaway Road, Dublin 12.

... ... * ... * ... * ... ...

Sir, - As you report, UN figures show the number of people seeking asylum falling, yet Michael McDowell has suggested that if the immigration and asylum issue "wasn't handled well it might well affect Nice". He went on to support a proposal from the German interior minister for an element of forced repatriation and for some applicant countries such as Romania and Turkey to be excluded from the EU if they failed to co-operate with such a policy. No doubt he and the Government will now deny that they are pandering to racism or that they will say or do anything to get Nice through.

So, from a treaty that we were told was about including other nations of Europe and not about making the EU a fortress, we have now come to something that is definitely about fortress Europe. Where does the Labour Party stand on this new reasoning of the Nice Treaty? Because nice it ain't. - Yours, etc.,

JOE MURPHY, The Square, Skerries, Co Dublin.

... ... * ... * ... * ... ...

Sir, - Even I, for about 20 minutes, was seduced by the seemingly tough line on illegal immigration advanced by Michael McDowell as reported on the front page of your edition of June 14th. Sanity soon reasserted itself, but if it hadn't, Denis Staunton's report of June 17th would have done the trick. As he says, "Despite last week's rhetoric in Luxembourg, there is little sign that the 15 member-states are prepared to take radical steps towards tackling illegal immigration on a European scale. However, there is likely to be much more tough talk (my emphasis) about immigration for a long time to come."

The proof that tough talk instead of radical steps is all we are getting comes earlier in the article when we are told that Michael McDowell stressed that any new policy must "respect the Geneva Convention".

The Minister, as a lawyer, should know that to withdraw from the Convention without notice is to disrespect it, but to withdraw from it on 12 months' notice is to respect it fully under Article 44.

Until that radical but absolutely necessary step is taken and we make our own untrammelled arrangements, nothing of any consequence will happen. To use one of the Minister's own most famous phrases, he can be radical or redundant. - Yours, etc.,

AINE NÍ CHONAILL, PRO, Immigration Control Platform, Dublin 2.