Sir, Bill Cash et al (letter, Jan 21) are guilty of a series of distortions and untruths about the Lisbon treaty. First, contrary to their claims, the Charter of Fundamental Rights will not increase (or diminish) the rights of workers to strike — the charter itself states that this is up to national legislation, a point that is reaffirmed by a legally binding protocol stating that the charter does not create any new rights in British law.

With regard to their allegation that the UK will lose control of its criminal justice system, the reality is that the UK retains the right to opt in or out of such decisions as it chooses.

Finally, the merger of the two existing EU external relations posts will not give the new high representative any new powers. EU foreign policy will remain intergovernmental and the high representative will be able to speak for the EU on policy only where every country, including Britain, agrees.

Bill Cash et al describe the Lisbon treaty as a “fundamental threat to the livelihoods, business and government of the British people”. This reminds us of similar claims made by John Redwood that ratifying the Amsterdam Treaty would “abolish” Britain. Such claims are as absurd now as they were then.

Gary Titley, Mep
Leader of the European Parliamentary Labour Party

Richard Corbett, Mep
Labour Spokesman on the Lisbon treaty in the European Parliament

Michael Cashman, Mep
Labour Spokesman on Justice and Home Affairs in the European Parliament

Richard Howitt, Mep
Labour Spokesman on Foreign Affairs in the European Parliament

Sir, The letter from Bill Cash et all would be far more convincing if it were signed by, say, 20 or more chief executives of the leading companies in this country. Similarly, Lord Rees-Mogg’s views (Comment, Jan 21) would carry more weight if he were acquainted with the economics of business and our dependence on trade with the European nations. The real people qualified to judge its long-term benefits or otherwise are those who trade with the EU members.

T. J. Pert
Tonbridge, Kent

Sir, Winston Churchill and Edward Heath worked with other visionaries in Europe to bring about a community — a common market — in which wars in Europe would be unthinkable. This treaty, destroying nationhood and imposing federalism, will have the opposite effect. One has only to consider what has happened to federal Yugoslavia and to the Soviet Union. Even small countries such as Britain, Belgium and Sri Lanka find themselves riven by nationalism. How much more so would a federation such as the EU be riven apart by cultural and national aspirations if threatened by a supranational, Brussels-based, federal authority?

Nigel MacNicol
Oakham, Rutland

Sir, William Rees-Mogg accuses the Government of being undemocratic in refusing us a referendum, and as usual he seems to believe that all the voters want one. Not so. I have yet to find a significant number of people, other than the usual suspects, who want a referendum, and many people, like me, are quite happy that the Government has referred the constitution to Parliament, which is the real home of democracy in this country. At least we stand a fair chance that the people we have elected will understand the issues involved and vote accordingly, whereas referendums are, ironically, a doubtful substitute for democracy designed by those despised Europeans.

The Rev Canon Tony Neal
Camborne, Cornwall

Explore Letters

• Feedback