With the start of the somewhat truncated National Forum on Europe the problem of what to do with the Nice Treaty has been kicked to touch. The Government is now focused upon its own re-election and it has other constitutional fish to fry in the shape of the upcoming referendum to outlaw the threat of suicide as grounds for abortion.
Nice will not go away. The Treaty was designed essentially to provide for the enlargement of the European Union and that particular event is speeding towards us. Latest estimates suggest 10 applicant states are likely to conclude their negotiations with the member-states at about the same time - with Poland the last in that line but necessarily first in the actual queue for membership.
Do we really wish to be the country that vetoes or substantially delays EU enlargement?
Conventional wisdom - thus far not shared with the electorate by the Government - is that a Nice Mark II has to be presented to the electorate in time for enlargement to occur on schedule. The Government hopes that upon reflection, with a more wholehearted Yes campaign (with plenty of ICTU, IBEC and IFA money), such a second referendum would get through and save Ireland's reputation in Europe.
Two dark thoughts stress caution, however. First, having been asked once and offered their reply, an even larger share of the electorate (more than the 34 per cent who voted last time) may not appreciate being asked the same question a second time and may choose to serve any incoming government with a salutary reminder of who's boss.
Second, if the present Fianna Fβil/PD coalition were not to return to government, the likes of Charlie McCreevy, Mary Harney, Michael McDowell and S∅le de Valera campaigning in full voice for the Nice Treaty is, to say the least, unlikely.
Let us then consider some unconventional wisdom. As opponents of Nice reminded us, the existing Amsterdam Treaty would facilitate an enlargement of up to five new members. Assuming the Brussels- watchers have it right, that leaves us five places short for bright-eyed but anxious newcomers. Rather than engage in some unseemly lottery as to which of the 10 get in at the first round, why not spend some time looking at the suggestion of the Commission President, Mr Romano Prodi?
Shortly after the Irish No, he suggested that the basic framework to allow enlargement to occur (revised council voting weights, reduced size of Commission, etc) could be built through the individual accession treaties. In other words, the guts of the Nice Treaty related solely to enlargement could be written into the treaties of each state joining the Union.
Ireland - like all other member-states - would have to ratify these treaties and through that ratification would approve the basic institutional changes demanded by enlargement. The bonus for the Government, of course, is that such accession treaties (such as those for Austria, Finland and Sweden in the mid-1990s) are ratified by the Oireachtas alone without a constitutional referendum.
This unconventional wisdom does leave a few loose ends. First - wouldn't the Government be overturning the will of the Irish people? No. The Irish people voted against Nice, we are told, not enlargement. If a challenge were to be taken in the courts and those courts determined that - against existing precedent - a referendum was required, such a referendum campaign would take place on the specific ground of enlargement. The Government might even welcome such a contest. Do we say Yes to enlargement or No?
No extraneous issues like abortion or militarisation and no scaremongering "what iffery" about the EU's future development. A much more straightforward enterprise. Indeed, if we are to believe the protests of many of the No to Nice campaigners, we should expect to see Gerry Adams and Trevor Sargent handing out pro-referendum leaflets at the DART stations.
Second, the larger constitutional issues addressed by the Nice Treaty, like that of flexibility (which the Government didn't like anyway) might then easily become part of the agenda for the next round of treaty negotiations due to begin in March 2002 and to conclude sometime in 2004. By that time the National Forum on Europe will have reported and provided us all with a clear, consensual vision of Ireland in Europe.
The Government might also like to reflect on the fact that this strategy would eliminate the need for costly (in political and diplomatic terms) protocols and appendices that might be the price demanded by various ragtag and bobtail political groups for their support in a second Nice Treaty campaign.
Nice solution?
Dr Ben Tonra is deputy director of the Dublin European Institute at University College, Dublin