Letter to Irish newspaper re: Referendum - Brilliant

[Kanadesaga]

>Dear Sir / Madam,
>
>At the beginning of the 19th. century Lord Byron described the Union of
>a small state with a larger state as " ... the Union of a boa
>constrictor with it's prey". As we in Ireland consider the Lisbon
>Treaty / Constitution we would do well to remember Lord Byron's
>prophetic words. He was referring of course, to the Union of Gt.
>Britain & Ireland which came into effect on 01-Jan-1801. That Union
>culminated in the Irish Famine. Irish people may not realise however,
>that each year while her people starved, Ireland was actually exporting
>£45 Million pounds sterling worth of food. The starvation inflicted on
>Ireland was not in fact due to a lack of food, but rather due to the
>unbridled Free Market policies being pursued by the foreigners who
>wielded power over Ireland at that time.
>
>Launching Fine Gael's "Yes" campaign recently, Enda Kenney focused on
>the Jewish Holocaust. It would have been more to the point had he and
>Fine Gael focused instead on our own Irish Holocaust. The Famine is a
>stark warning as to what could happen, if Ireland were again to fall
>under the rule of foreigners who subscribe to the same unbridled Free
>Market ideaology that resulted in the starvation of millions during the
>1840's.
>
>Fine Gael's reference to the Jewish Holocaust may have been a botched
>attempt to imply that the EU is the only way to guarantee peace in
>Europe. Minister Michael Martin and Sean O'Neachtain MEP appear to
>share this view.
>O'Neachtian called the EU "the biggest Peace
>Process in the world" ! The exponents of the
>so called European peace process conveniently ignore the fact that the
>EU's expansionary zeal in encouraging portions of the then Yugoslavia
>to rush to unilateral declarations of independence, was partly
>responsible for starting the Balkan conflict. Neither do they appear
>to see any irony in their professions of peace, whilst at the same time
>facilitating George W. Bush's war in Iraq which has resulted in the
>deaths of an estimated 650,000 Iraqis.
>
>Why does the "biggest peace process in the world" need it's own army
>and compel it's members including Ireland, to increase military
>spending ? If the EU really is the biggest peace process in the world,
>why are they amassing more weapons instead of engaging in weapons
>decommissioning ? Why are Irish soldiers helping the French army to
>prop up a French installed dictator in Chad, under the guise of a
>humanitarian mission ? Do the Government and opposition really believe
>that our European neighbours will react to an Irish "NO" vote by
>declaring war on each other and perhaps even on us ? Or, are they
>simply trying to deceive and blackmail us into voting "Yes" ?
>
>Europe's ordinary people are no more predisposed to violence that
>anyone else. Historicially though, they have been deceived by their
>leaders into participation in military alliances while at the same time
>permitting their democratic controls and freedoms to be weakened, in
>the interest of "Security". Sounds familiar, doesn't it ?
>
>Evidently, European leaders are again preparing for war. As with this
>constitution they won't refer to it by it's proper name, they'll call
>it something else instead. "Peace Enforcement", Rapid Reaction Force"
>and "Humanitarian Intervention" are the currently preferred misnomers,
>but do not be deceived. The French and Dutch voters weren't, but they
>have had to
>learn this lesson the hard way. This time
>round a different race and religion is being scapegoated, but
>everything else is running true to form.
>
>Being unable to promote the Treaty /
>Constitution itself, the "Yes" campaign has been reduced to these types
>of tactics. Their alternatives are, personal attacks on those of us
>with the temerity to advocate a "NO" vote, and to persist with the
>illusion that historically Ireland has been a big net beneficiary of EU
>largesse.
>
>Through the exploitation of our fishery waters, Ireland has in fact
>been the second largest
>indirect contributer to the EU. For the last
>35 years we have been deceived on this point by the EU's elite in
>collaboration with our own self serving policitians. In spite of
>Ireland having contributed 44% of the total EU fishery waters, the
>Irish Government were, as ever unable to influence EU Policy and when
>quotas were established Ireland was awarded a paltry 4% of the catch.
>
>Their attempt to re-sell us the EU, which we are already members of and
>will continue to be members of even after a "NO" vote, requires that we
>examine the EU's record with regard to Ireland. It is almost 35 years
>since Ireland joined the EEC, only the last 10 of these years have been
>good. There rest were downright dismal. Ten good years out of 35
>doesn't indicate an unqualified success. Bertie Ahern recently
>admonished farmers for their negative stance on Lisbon. His assertion
>that farmers had done better out of the EU than any other group means
>that an examination of our farming community should show the EU in it's
>best possible light.
>
>Undoubtedly, our farmers have done better than our fishermen, but in
>1973 there were 300,000 Irish farmers, today the figure is just
>100,000. EU agriculture policy has resulted in a mass exodus from
>family farms and the subsequent destruction of our rural
>communities. The impact of this exodus on the
>commercial and social life of our rural towns and villages has been so
>detrimental that not even 10 years of the Celtic Tiger could revive
>most of them. Under the EU's reign, cattle were turned loose into
>woods due to the lack of a market for them, or fodder to feed them.
>Meat factory gates were slammed shut in farmers faces and there were
>times when you would be rewarded with a suck calf, in return for buying
>a farmer a pint. Sheep's wool is worth less today than it was 25 years
>ago. And what of the now extinct Sugar Beet farmers ?
>
>On top of this litany of policy failures and false promises the EU has
>piled bureaucracy, regulations and directives. The EU prevents farmers
>from spreading slurry on the basis of the correct weather conditions,
>it must be done to a bureaucrat's timetable. Farm produce cannot be
>sold at the farm gate. Farmers cannot provide themselves and their
>communities with water, without metering and supply charges, plus VAT.
>Farmers have been prevented from supplying turf to their local
>communities and now are to be prevented from using their turf banks
>altogether. They are even told when they can and can't cut the hedges
>on their own land and can no longer kill their own pig.
>
>Commissioner Mandelson is currently engaged in another sell out of
>Irish Agriculture at the WTO talks. Minister Pat Carey recently
>conceeded on TV that he (Mandelson) was operating outside of his
>mandate. Why then has Mandelson not been reigned in ? Does our
>Government already lack the power or influence at EU level to do so ?
>Would Mandelson be allowed to persist if he was acting against
>Germany's national interest ? One thing is certain, if Lisbon is
>passed with the consequent loss of our veto on foreign trade deals, we
>will have forever lost the power to control Mandelson or others of his
>ilk.
>
>And what of the rest us ? Have FF & FG forgotten about the queues for
>Donnolly & Morrison visas ? Prior to the 10 years of the Celtic Tiger,
>emigration was the order of the day. What solutions did the EU provide
>? The answer is none. As the ECB replaced the Irish Central Bank,
>Ireland was powerless to moderate the excesses of our over heating
>housing market.
>Today, it is our young married couples and first time house buyers who
>are paying dearly for this fiasco.
>
>Ireland differs from the other 26 EU member states in one critical
>respect. Irish Sovereignty resides Exclusively with the Irish People.
>Thanks to this fact, our Irish Constitution and the Supreme Court's
>decision in the Crotty case, we alone in the EU are having a
>referendum. In 2005 the Irish Government explored every avenue in an
>attempt to find some legal chicanery that would permit them to subvert
>our right to have our say. They failed ! The fact that they failed
>gives testimony to the superiority of the Irish democratic system over
>those of our European neighbours. The ordinary people of Europe can
>only envy our written Irish Constitution and wish that they too had the
>right to a referendum on the Treaty / Constitution this time round.
>Everywhere this Treaty / Constitution has been put to a popular vote,
>the people have defeated it.
>
>For the first time ever, this Treaty / Constitution if ratified, will
>give European law primacy over Irish law and make the European Court of
>Justice (ECJ) superior to our Irish Supreme Court and Irish
>Constitution. The ECJ has already demonstrated in it's rulings that it
>has a strong bias in favour of multinational big business and unbridled
>free market ideology.
>Under the terms of this Treaty /
>Constitution, our Irish Constitution will never again have the power
>to protect us from corrupt or tyrannical laws and policies. The
>Government will also have found what they failed to find in 2005, a way
>to circumvent the Irish Constitution ! This blatant attempt to seize
>power from the Irish People, in itself justifies a "No" vote.
>
>"We the People" of Ireland have been entrusted with the protection of
>Ireland's Sovereignty, Democracy and Freedom by our forefathers, not
>just for ourselves, but for all the future
>children of the nation. Our forefathers won
>this right through 800 years of struggle. Just because this gift has
>been given to us free of charge, does not mean it is worthless; on the
>contrary, it is priceless ! Are we to be the generation that lays
>waste to our forefather's monumental achievement after less than 100
>years ?
>
>It is the ultimate irony, that our Irish Constution is today standing
>as a bulwark not just in our defence but in defence of others, some of
>whom once would have oppressed us. That is the genius of our written
>Irish Constitution. The flaws of Parliamentary democracies, where
>Sovereignty resides not with "The People", but in Parliment have been
>exposed in the starkest possible way. Our Irish Constitution is
>Superior in every respect and we should keep it.
>
>Our Irish Constitution needs our support and
>protection now. Never before in it's short
>history, has it been in such peril. This IS
>it's "hour of need" ! Uniquely, the Irish
>Constitition itself, guarantees us the right and the power to defend
>it. We must retain that right and that power. Your Constitution Needs
>YOU, vote "No" on June 12th!
>
> Yours etc.,
> Tom Ward,
> Claregalway.
>

[Kanadesaga]

Irish referendum could scupper EU treaty
By Gordon Rayner Last Updated: 2:12AM BST 31/05/2008

In 1973, when Ireland joined what is now the European Union, it was the poorest country on the continent.

Today, thanks in no small part to £32 billion in EU grants, it is the second richest per capita (after Luxembourg).

So the result of a referendum on June 12 on whether to consolidate EU powers by ratifying the Treaty of Lisbon must surely be a foregone conclusion.

Think again.


Despite every major political party backing the Yes campaign, support for a No vote is growing daily.

The most recent poll put the Yes voters at 41 per cent and the No voters at 33 per cent.

That sounds like a healthy lead until you discover the Yes campaign was polling well over 50 per cent on the eve of another Irish EU referendum – on the Nice Treaty in 2001 – before the electorate delivered a resounding No.

In Brussels, European parliamentarians are twitchy about the future of the EU's 495 million citizens resting in the hands of the one million Irish voters expected to turn out on polling day.

Having spent two years rebuilding the Treaty of Lisbon from the scrap parts of the defeated European Constitution, the Eurocrats can only watch as a learner driver takes the wheel of their juggernaut and drives it towards the edge of a cliff.

This scenario has arisen because, while all 26 of the other member states have decided to wave through the treaty via their parliaments (the UK included), Ireland alone has a legal obligation under its constitution to put the matter to a public vote.

Because the treaty must be passed unanimously by all 27 member states, an Irish No vote would kill it.

Earlier this week, the European Commission president, José Manuel Barroso, suggested a No vote would be catastrophic for the EU.

"We will all pay a price for it, Ireland included," he said, adding that there was "no plan B" if Ireland exercised its veto.

Mr Barroso and his cohorts argue that the treaty represents the next glorious stage in the EU's future, creating a new post of full-time European Council president, streamlining the European Commission and redistributing voting powers.

If you don't find these allegedly crucial changes inspiring, you're not alone.

And therein lies the fundamental problem for Ireland's Yes campaigners. Try as they might, they have been unable to come up with anything approaching a coherent, inspirational argument for a Yes.

Most tellingly of all, the new Irish premier, Brian Cowen, has admitted he hasn't read all of the 287-page treaty, and nor has Ireland's EU Commissioner, Charlie McCreevy, who said no sane person could read it from cover to cover.

Asked to sum up why the Irish should support Lisbon, Micheál Martin, director of the referendum campaign for one of the big three parties, Fianna Fáil, said: "First of all, the purpose of the treaty is to ensure that the EU is reformed so that it is more efficient and effective in meeting modern challenges…"

Cue widespread yawns from voters. And the leaders of the other main parties have been equally soporific, leaving an open goal for any No campaigner with the charisma and ability to play on popular fears.

Such a man is Declan Ganley, a multi-millionaire businessman who formed the campaign group Libertas to fight first the European Constitution and now the Lisbon Treaty.

Along with such powerful voices as the Irish Farmers Association and leaders of the Roman Catholic Church, he has given voters a dizzying array of reasons to vote No.

The farmers, who have received two thirds of Ireland's EU subsidies, argue that their handouts will be drastically cut, devastating rural areas.

Pro-life groups say Ireland will be forced to relax its abortion laws, pacifists say Ireland's cherished neutrality will be in danger because of provisions for a European army, and patriots say Ireland will be giving up the independence it fought so hard for less than 100 years ago.

On top of all that, there are fears that a centralised taxation system will mean the end of Ireland's favourable 12.5 per cent corporation tax (compared with the UK's 28 per cent), which has helped attract so many businesses.

John McGuirk, a leading member of Libertas, told me: "We will lose huge influence if Lisbon is ratified and we will get nothing in return.

"It will open the doors for Europe to interfere in our taxation system, and it will place huge restrictions on what rights we have to set our own laws."

While the treaty may yet get a Yes vote – the online bookmaker Paddy Power is offering odds of 1-4 for, 5-2 against – it all depends on whether the voters turn out on the day.

There is a real danger that apathy will prevent pro-Lisbon support being transformed into votes.

Éanna Nolan, a 38-year-old civil engineer, told me: "I am tending towards voting Yes, if only because the Yes campaign has the backing of all the major parties, whereas the No campaigners are people like Sinn Fein and [the singer] Dana."

Miriam Laird, a 28-year-old accountant, said: "I've always been pro-Europe, so I'm in favour of the treaty."

Yet both of these voters were not sure whether they would even bother to turn out on polling day.

In contrast, the No campaign supporters I spoke to were clear about their reasons for turning down the Lisbon Treaty – and about their intention to cast a vote on June 12.

Pádraig De Faoite, 22, a student teacher, said: "We're giving away our democracy and we have no idea what's going on in Brussels. On top of that, migrant workers will be able to come in from all over Europe and undercut Irish workers, so it will cost jobs."

Ide Nic Mhathuna, 24, an office administrator, cited the plight of Ireland's fishing industry, which has all but disappeared under the EU, as one of her reasons for voting No.

"A friend of mine who is a fisherman appeared in court this week for catching too many fish in the Irish Sea," she said.

"He's going to have a criminal record now, and it's crazy."

If Ireland rejects Lisbon on the basis of what might be termed parochial reasons – say, abortion or farming subsidies – and the vote is close, the country could be given opt-outs that would salvage the treaty.

But if it votes No by a substantial margin, and the reasons for doing so are varied, it will be impossible to resuscitate the fatally wounded treaty.

The EU will be faced with the prospect of starting all over again with a new document several years hence, or trying to bring in changes one by one.

Such an outcome would not, arguably, be a disaster (the EU has managed to keep functioning despite the 2005 Constitution being rejected) but it would leave European leaders with serious questions about the union's future.

The fact that France and Holland rejected the European Constitution in 2005 was a clear warning that support for the project among ordinary people may be waning.

This time, only Ireland has dared risk asking what people think. And if a country that has benefited so clearly from EU membership decides to distance itself from Brussels, it would be proof positive of just how far disillusionment with the EU has spread.