BRENDAN BUTLER ,
Sir, - Dick Roche rightly asserts that "freedom of movement within the EU is a fundamental principle of the Union" (July 12th).
However, only four EU states (including Ireland) out of the 15 are seemingly willing to extend this fundamental principle to the applicant countries on accession to the EU. I use the word "seemingly" because Mr Roche's letter goes on to declare that Ireland will "retain the ability to take steps should problems arise in this time-frame" of seven years after accession. Thus Ireland's approach to the application of this fundamental principle of free movement of peoples is no different to that of the other 11 EU states.
It seems incomprehensible to me that such a fundamental principle as freedom of movement is being withheld from the applicant countries upon accession to the EU for a possible seven years, or is being so hedged about with limitations as in the Irish case ("should problems arise") that in effect it is being denied.
A fundamental principle is either fundamental or it is not. It cannot be made relative and subject to the whims of political leaderships within the EU. Otherwise the people of the applicant countries upon accession will become very much second-class citizens and will remain so for up to seven years, provided they don't create problems.
And what happens if during these seven fateful years some of the citizens of these second-class countries illegally enter one of the first-class countries? Will they be deported back to the outer fringes until they are needed?
It seems, to use the Minister's own words, that "access to the larger pool of labour and skills which enlargement will bring will be to Ireland's advantage". Enlargement is thus seen as a pool from which the current 15 EU states can fish or discard as they wish. I thought that the change of description from European Economic Community to European Union signified a change from defining people as belonging to "a pool of labour and skills" to defining them in terms of human dignity as possessing inalienable and fundamental freedoms.
Evidently I was wrong. - Yours, etc.,
BRENDAN BUTLER ,
Pennock Hill,
Swords,
Co Dublin.
... ... * ... * ... * ... ...
Sir, - I find H.J. Beckett's comments comments on immigrants seeking employment in this country very selfish (July 12th). Mr Beckett asks how we are going to cope with more immigrants arriving on our shores. Perhaps he is not aware that at one stage this country had a population of more than 8 million people - nearly twice the current number. Also, is he aware that until relatively recently there were queues of people hoping to emigrate outside the American embassy? Is he aware of the thousands of Irish people who emigrated to England, Australia, Canada and countless other countries as well?
And now, when we have a thriving economy, and people are coming to our shores "seeking employment and seeking a future", are we going to turn them away and deny them that future? - Yours, etc.,
JUSTIN KING,
Rathfarnham,
Dublin 14.