Some Fianna Fail Ministers have been behaving like ducks in thunder following rejection by the electorate of the Nice Treaty. With up to 60 per cent of voters in some constituencies voting No, and Sinn Fein and the Green Party threatening to make political advances, the reality of the ballot box has traumatised them.
Not since the nomination of Hugh O'Flaherty to the European Investment Bank has the Government been under such pressure. On that occasion, the public rose up in fury over what it regarded as a blatant exercise of jobs for the boys, buried Fianna Fail's prospects in a Tipperary by-election, and had the decision reversed.
This time there is no such uniformity in public opinion. The Nice Treaty was rejected, sure. But what did it mean? What would the public accept for the future? And what could the Government do to direct the debate and recover the situation?
As Bertie Ahern dithered, some of his colleagues went on Eurosceptical solo runs. Figures from the party's nationalist wing dusted down old furniture. Loss of sovereignty and military implications were again moved centre stage. And faceless Brussels bureaucrats began to resemble, in vague outline, the less appealing aspects of perfidious Albion. Blame was being transferred or deflected.
Michael Noonan and Ruairi Quinn read the signs and concluded that Fianna Fail was in trouble. Not only had the Government lost a referendum, but it was deeply divided over what it meant. The whisper went around that the Taoiseach had backed Mary Harney in reining in Brian Cowen and the Department of Foreign Affairs from adopting Europhile policies. It all contributed to the notion of a rudderless Government.
The Fine Gael and Labour Party leaders looked across the channel and hoped the Conservatives' malaise was catching. With a general election less than a year away, an ideological meltdown in Fianna Fail was to be wished for devoutly. So, while advocating far-reaching reforms in the way the EU operated, they committed themselves to its long-term development and enlargement.
The Taoiseach was hurting. In spite of the growing folklore, Mr Ahern finds it difficult to ride two horses. And he ignored his less disciplined colleagues and went for it. First, he reassured his European partners at Gothenburg that enlargement could go ahead in spite of Ireland's rejection of the Nice Treaty. And then he reassured the Irish electorate that its No decision would be respected.
It was too much for Charlie McCreevy. Having been ticked off for budgetary excesses by his EU colleagues, the Minister for Finance played to the gallery at home and described the referendum result as a "remarkably healthy development". Then, striking a rebel pose, he regarded the outcome as an anti-establishment statement of which the Irish people should be proud.
Having offered Eamon O Cuiv a pardon of sorts for having misled the Galway West electorate, and then ignored Sile de Valera when she offered her well-connected cousin support for his anti-bureaucratic sentiments, the Taoiseach tried to cut his losses. He suggested that Mr McCreevy had clarified his position. But the Minister for Finance wouldn't play ball. Withdrawing to his Kildare fastness, his spokeswoman let it be known that his comments stood.
With all the fuss, the only certainty was that the Government had not agreed, and may not even have discussed, a coherent position. Into this uncertainty Michael McDowell dropped his comments on the lack of democratic accountability within Europe and the failure of the Oireachtas to live up to its responsibilities in keeping an eye on Brussels.
The opposition parties regarded it as further evidence of Euroscepticism. But Mr McDowell had expressed such concerns before. And the contribution was positive - proposing reforms - rather than negative. Mr McDowell wanted to shape an enlarged EU rather than undermine it.
In that, his concerns about a centralised, federalist Europe found echoes in the Taoiseach's own position. Announcing the belated establishment of a Forum on Europe, which will discuss democratic legitimacy, transparency and effectiveness within an evolving EU over the coming years, Mr Ahern said that Irish demands would be based on a retention of the nation state as the basic EU building block; that the balance between institutions should stand; and that practical benefits should be delivered to citizens.
It was a nationalist approach, taken in full awareness of the Sinn Fein threat. And the emerging debate will be given a push tomorrow by the Labour Party when it publishes a Bill making ministers more accountable to Dail committees for European business.
The Taoiseach promised terms of reference for the Forum on Europe before the Dail rises in July. And it may begin work in September. As far as the Government is concerned, the public debate couldn't happen soon enough. Not if they are to revisit the Nice Treaty before the end of next year.
Denis Coghlan is Chief Political Correspondent of The Irish Times