Sir, Your front-page headline (June 2) announces “Fight to save constitution after Dutch vote ‘Nee’ ”.

Who is fighting to save what for whom?

With respect,
JOHN PAPWORTH
(Editor),
Fourth World Review,
The Close,
24 High Street, Purton SN5 4AE.
June 2.

From Mr John Fingleton

Sir, Now that two major nations have rejected the proposed EU constitution, those who represent the EU in public seem to be trying to emphasise the fact that, of the 12 nations that have so far taken a decision, ten have been in favour (report, June 3).

However, of those 12, only three have had the benefit of referendums (of which only Spain has agreed to ratify), whilst the decision of the other ten has been taken not by popular plebiscite but by their respective parliaments.

Surely the very strength of the French and Dutch rejections by their people rather than by their political representatives must throw into huge doubt any decision taken by any government in relation to this critically important issue that does not reflect the specific opinion of its people through a referendum?

Yours faithfully,
JOHN FINGLETON,
19 York House,
39 Upper Montagu Street, W1H 1FR.
June 3.

From Ms Melanie Leggett

Sir, Declaration 30 of the EU treaty does indeed make contingency plans for review by the European Council following rejection by the people (Sir Stuart Bell’s letter, June 1). Is this not evidence of the insidious nature of the proposed document? What legal force can such a provision have in an unratified treaty?

Any attempt to bulldoze through ratification of this unpopular constitution in the face of legitimate national referendum results would be politically and economically catastrophic.

Yours faithfully,
MELANIE LEGGETT,
14 The Paddock,
Longworth, Oxfordshire OX13 5BX.
June 3.

From Mr Christopher Jones

Sir, You say (leading article, June 2) that Dutch voters “resent any enlargement that appears to dilute Europe’s Christian heritage”.

How ill-judged, therefore, of the drafters of the EU constitution deliberately to refuse all requests — including one from the late Pope — to have a reference to that Christian heritage included in their document.

Yours sincerely,
CHRISTOPHER JONES,
26 Cranford Close,
Wimbledon, SW20 0DP.
June 2.

From Mr John Prime

Sir, According to Tony Blair and other members of his Cabinet, the French rejection of the EU constitution necessitates a “period of reflection”.

Shouldn’t the French rejection of the Iraq invasion have prompted similar reflection? Or do we only listen to the French when it suits?

Yours faithfully,
JOHN PRIME,
83 Wolseley Street,
Reading RG1 6AZ.
June 3.

Explore Letters

• Feedback