Madam, – David Cochrane (June 26th) suggests that keeping an Irish Commissioner is the main reason that he has seen the light and has abandoned the good ship Libertas.
This is simplistic nonsense as an EU commissioner does not represent his or her country.
The code of conduct for EU commissioners specifically states that commissioners are to discharge their duty in the general interest of the community and in the performance of their duties they must neither seek nor take instructions from any government or any other body.
Each commissioner must also take an oath and the wording of the oath includes the same terminology.
For a leading member of the No campaign to change his mind on the basis of our Government supposedly securing a better deal of which the highlight is maintaining an Irish commissioner shows the ignorance still pertaining when it comes to the Lisbon Treaty.
A cynic might suggest that Cochrane and his fellow Libertas travellers are using a facile excuse to wash their hands of a further campaign and the large expenditure involved.
The Lisbon Treaty has not changed. No amount of protocols, supposed guarantees or commissioner appointments will affect the wording of the Lisbon Treaty.
The Government and its supporters, including the former members of Libertas, who have been born again, are still attempting to hoodwink us.
Anybody who voted No the first time should do so again.
Who knows, perhaps the Government will get it right for the third referendum. – Yours, etc,
Madam, –It was good of Aengus Ó Snodaigh to warn us on Sinn Féins behalf (Opinion, June 25th) that there is, under Lisbon, a possibility that wars we do not support will be fought in our name.
There were no such warnings from Sinn Féin when the IRA was doing just that, so perhaps they have learned something about democracy in recent years. But they are not yet well-placed to lecture us on the need for care in the alliances we form - their links with Farc and Eta are too recent.
We (well, Sinn Féin actually) lose an MEP and we “gain” a commissioner. That strikes me as a double benefit for Irelands influence.
As to the shift in voting-power in the council from the smaller to the larger member-states, it will have only a marginal impact and is unlikely ever to prove fatal to Irelands interests.
In any case, those who exalt popular over representative democracy should not complain when the allocation of power is adjusted to take greater account of population numbers. – Yours, etc,
Madam, – Can it really be the case that Irish and European politicains have learned from the GAA and devised entry for Lisbon via the back door? If so, we truly have returned to the land of saints and scholars bringing our wisdom to all.
However, I will be voting no again to support my fellow European citizens in France and Holland who rejected Lisbon in their democratic processes.
We are either in Europe together or we are not. – Yours etc.
Madam, – During the first Lisbon Treaty debate we were repeatedly assured by the Yes side that the loss of a commissioner would be of no importance, as EU commissioners do not represent individual countries.
The Yes-men and -women, most recently Gavin Barrett (Opinion, June 30th), are now falling over one another to claim that the retention of a national commissioner changes the second Lisbon Treaty into “Lisbon plus”, and is a major achievement of our trusty negotiators.
If the issue of the commissioner was a red herring in the first debate – and I believe it was – then in the current debate it’s a “red herring plus”.
The Treaty is the same one, and our vote should be the same: a resounding No. – Yours, etc,