EUROPEAN DIARY: Last Friday evening, as most EU officials went home for the weekend, the lights remained burning in Commissioner David Byrne's office. Mr Byrne had invited the Commission's chief spokesman, Mr Jonathan Faull, and the Secretary General, Mr David O'Sullivan, to discuss how best to raise awareness in Ireland about how the EU works.
The participants insist that the 60-minute meeting was not part of a Commission strategy to persuade Irish voters to endorse the Nice Treaty. The Commission will not become involved in the referendum campaign in any way, they stress.
Polling evidence suggests, however, that many people who voted against the Nice Treaty did so partly because they felt uninformed about Europe. And the decision-making structure in Brussels is so complicated and unfamiliar that few people outside the European institutions understand clearly how they function.
While the Commission will watch a second Nice referendum from the sidelines, officials acknowledge they have an interest in seeing the treaty ratified. And diplomats from other member-states are asking with ever greater urgency just what the Government is planning to do to persuade the Irish public to vote yes.
They are particularly eager to know if the Government will be pressing at the Seville summit in June for a declaration clarifying aspects of the treaty that are of concern to voters.
Irish officials are unable to provide a clear answer because the Government has not yet decided what it wants. But most agree that a second referendum is unlikely to succeed unless some of the voters' concerns are seen to have been addressed.
Nothing will happen until the Forum on Europe reports, probably around Easter. But officials at Iveagh House are already considering a package of measures that would improve Oireachtas scrutiny of EU legislation and reassure voters that Europe's security and defence policy does not compromise Irish military neutrality.
Some Government officials believe that the most effective way of reassuring voters on neutrality would be to introduce a constitutional amendment guaranteeing that Irish soldiers would not be sent on any mission without a United Nations Security Council mandate. Such a step would simply confirm the present policy but some diplomats fear that it would place an unwelcome restriction on future governments and could prevent Ireland from taking part in important, humanitarian missions.
Others argue that, since the Nice Treaty has no impact at all on neutrality, defence should not be an issue in the referendum campaign. And they acknowledge that politicians have been slow to present the positive case for security co-operation and for Ireland having some influence over the EU's emerging defence identity.
If the Government does seek a declaration at Seville, a statement is likely to confirm that nothing in the Nice Treaty threatens Ireland's traditional, military neutrality. Diplomats will not start negotiations on a declaration with other member-states until after a general election because the composition of the next government could influence the nature of Ireland's demands.
Other member-states, who want Nice ratified as soon as possible, will be sympathetic to Ireland's request, as long as there is no suggestion that any part of the treaty should be renegotiated. Because the timetable is so tight, the Government's demands are likely to be modest and ministers will hope that domestic measures and a change of mood following the introduction of euro notes and coins will help to boost the pro-European vote.
Meanwhile, as Mr Valery Giscard d'Estaing prepares to chair the first meeting of the Convention on Europe's future next month, there are signs that Europe's next treaty will be much more ambitious than Nice.
"Nice was just the aperitif - this is the main course," is how one senior EU diplomat put it.
British officials yesterday dismissed a report that London wants to create with Berlin and Paris a "super council" for the EU similar to the UN Security Council. A report in the Financial Times said that some British officials wanted to abolish the EU 's rotating presidency and to allow a small group led by the three big powers to take executive decisions outside the full Council of Ministers.
Despite yesterday's denial, officials from smaller member-states fear that the bigger countries will attempt to use the next Inter-Governmental Council to enhance their influence over an enlarged EU. If the big states succeed, misgivings over Nice may soon seem like small beer indeed.
