I have no doubt about the merits of the European Constitutional Treaty. It contains much that is worthwhile, and nothing that from an Irish viewpoint is seriously objectionable.
To have brought together in a single document all the provisions contained in a series of earlier treaties - the accumulation of whose amending provisions only a dedicated lawyer could find his way through - was clearly a worthwhile exercise. And, insofar as it contained new provisions, many of these were very worthwhile, especially in the context of a greatly enlarged EU: for example increased transparency, more simplicity in the European legislative process, and a greater role for national parliaments.
But although these new provisions would certainly have improved the working of the Union, the enlarged Union can probably get along without them.
No: the damage done by the rejection of this treaty by the electorates of France and the Netherlands lies elsewhere - it lies first of all in the fact that the thrust of the objections made has not in fact been against any changes in this treaty, but rather against aspects of the original Rome Treaty, with its provisions for free movement of people and services as well as goods within the Union. These provisions have underlain both the Union's overall success and our own huge gains from membership.
Secondly, the opposition, coming from the more extreme right and left, has facilitated a weakening of a European democratic system that is based on representative government. This political system depends for its vitality, and ultimately, perhaps, even for its survival, upon a measure of trust being maintained between electorates and the governments they elect - a trust which in a time of poor political leadership in many European countries is vulnerable to populist rhetoric.
On the first point, it is clear that the votes in France and the Netherlands on the treaty were not in reality about the contents of this document.
They were, rather, a cry of protest against high unemployment and turgid economic growth, and of unhappiness with what were seen by many as externally generated decisions that were seen as threatening the interests of some citizens.
In so far as this negativity was inspired by EU decisions on such issues as free movement of capital and labour or of goods and services, all these decisions were, of course, taken decades ago - in the original Rome Treaty - with full and enthusiastic popular approval in the six founder states.
From an Irish point of view this European public mood risks threatening a prosperity that has derived from the free access that our goods and services have since 1973 enjoyed in Continental markets, in conjunction with our right to operate a low rate of corporate taxation.
Already a Socialist leader of the No campaign in France, former prime minister Laurent Fabius, in a triumphalist reaction to the referendum result, has launched an attack on "the voting system that prevents any harmonisation in the fiscal area" - our right to resist attempts to force us to raise our corporate tax rates.
In recent times the developed countries of the world, including those of western Europe, have not been blessed with dynamic, or even, perhaps, moderately competent political leadership. Partly for this reason, the economies of many continental western European countries are in disarray, with slow growth and high unemployment, and in the case of several of them, a dangerously high level of public debt.
These problems are not confined to France and the Netherlands. German polls suggest that between 87 per cent and 97 per cent of voters there would reject the treaty if given the chance to do so. And in Italy public unhappiness with the economic situation has even led some economically illiterate government politicians to suggest that Italy should abandon the Euro - ignoring what a return to the lira would do to Italian interest rates because of a lack of fiscal discipline.
In such circumstance it is all too easy for a dangerous gulf to open up between electorates and governments - as happened in the 1930s, not only in Germany but in other parts of Continental Europe. Extreme left and extreme right both thrive in such circumstances, and the first sign of danger to a democratic system is when, in populist rhetoric, democratically elected governments start to be stigmatised as "elites" - a term much used in this context in recent weeks, in Ireland as elsewhere in the Union.
It was clearly unfortunate that the issue of ratifying a new European constitutional treaty came to a head at a moment when many European countries were in severe economic difficulties, and that in some of these countries that do not have our constitutional requirement for ratification, referendums were nevertheless proposed by overconfident leaders, clearly out of touch with the evolving mood of their people.
Faced with the emergence of such a deep hole in the relationship between governments and peoples, the best thing to do is to "stop digging". Given the public mood in Europe in the aftermath of these recent events, an attempt to push on with ratification by referendum in countries now committed to that method of ratification would invite trouble - not only in the form of further popular rejections of the treaty, but more seriously in the form of a further weakening of respect for the representative democratic system that would play into the hands of those who wish to overturn the open market and free trade, which have brought our country such extraordinary prosperity in recent times.
Meanwhile, public hostility in some countries to the recent enlargement of the Union, and in particular to eventual free movement of workers and of services, is in danger of alienating our new eastern European partners, and is already proving destabilising in the Balkans, threatening the commitment of some states in this region to the political and economic reforms they had started in preparation for what, until the emergence during the treaty ratification process of western European hostility to further enlargement, they have seen as eventual membership of the Union.
In all these circumstances our Government, which a year ago skilfully secured the agreement of 25 states to this treaty, may be diplomatically wise to avoid being seen to lead a move to pull back from further efforts to sell this treaty to the peoples of Europe. But they should not protest too loudly if that proves to be the stance adopted by the European Council next week.