Sir, - The Amsterdam Treaty has been described as a further step towards an integrated Europe. Perhaps a more accurate description would be a further step away from the democratic self-government for which Ireland fought so hard and so long. But of course we forsook any preference to govern ourselves when we accepted Maastricht in 1992.
When Ireland initially bought into Europe in 1973, did we really envisage that the joining of the European Economic Community would finally lead to a single currency, the loss of huge chunks of our sovereignty and the total integration into continental Europe? At what stage, if at all, did we realise that in addition to our trade agreements, we were also opting to move in with a bigger brother whose directives would decide farming practices, the width of our roads, the shape of our dumps, the packaging around our food, cloning rights, which crops should be genetically engineered, and even the manner in which to dispense World Cup tickets. Steeped as we were in little subs and divvies and basking in the role of poor but deserving relation, we turned a blind eye.
Dick Roche TD, speaking in Arklow on behalf of the European Movement, stated that in his opinion anyone who sought to criticise Amsterdam must be unintelligent, mischievous and perverse. What cheek! Amsterdam is the people's treaty, he told us, yet with the strengthening of powers available to the European Commission and Council of Ministers (neither elected directly by the people), the ability of the Irish people to take control over their own destinies will be further weakened. The European Parliament, expanding to accommodate many new countries, has set a limit for itself of 700 members. We might be lucky to end up with a representation of 1 1/2 per cent.
The Amsterdam Treaty has some noble words on unemployment. It states that a "high level of employment is to be a principal aim of the EU." But if the chips are down and jobs run short does anyone in their right mind think that this huge bureaucracy is going to have at heart the best interests of our tiny nation, set as it is two seas away, and hitherto never historically regarded as "European"? Will we simply be told to enact the flexible labour clause and up sticks from Valentia to settle in Valencia, or take the children from school in Thurles and plant them in Thessalonika where rumour has it a new feta cheese factory is opening? Isn't it also rather naive to suppose that further centralised control from Brussels can alleviate our problems of crime, drugs and refugees.
In its enhanced role set out in Amsterdam, the EU, where it is involved in foreign and security policies, will, for purposes of decision making, now be known as "the Union" rather than "the Union and its members". So what of neutrality? The treaty agrees not to prejudice the specific character of the security and defence policy of certain members, but goes on to directly contradict itself by concluding in the same sentence that the member states who are part of Nato must have their obligations respected, and both must be compatible with the common security and defence policy established within that framework.
Of course the boom has us blinkered. But what happens when the European Central Bank (on which we may have no representation) forces our interest rates down against our better judgement and the boom becomes less glamorous? Isn't a ship in trouble best directed by its own skipper who knows the local waters rather than from a supertanker hundreds of miles away? The recent years of prosperity are not just a result of structural and cohesion funds but a result of good steerage and careful management from our own bridge.
The treaty contains further tightening up of powers to take action to combat discrimination based on race, religion, disability, age and sexual orientation. But in Ireland do we want to wake up to find we cannot put a crib in the park at Christmas, or leave yourselves open to accepting single-sex marriages and adoption? Criticism of practices alien to our Christian heritage could henceforth be termed discriminatory and incur the wrath of our masters.
Many people think we can opt out if things go wrong, but sadly that is one option we will never have. The noose will simply tighten around our necks, harsh sanctions will be imposed backed up by the European Central Bank, and, like the Israelites living amongst Pharaoh and the Egyptians, we will end up making our bricks without straw. - Yours, etc., Susan Philips
(Member of Wicklow County Council), Ballinacoola, Glenealy, Co Wicklow.