In a surprisingly low-key week, the most low-key event of all was the launch of the Nice referendum campaign. Never mind that the Government's referendum schedule was very nearly a casualty of a Seanad handbagging a week ago, or that the most eloquent and forceful advocate of the Treaty, Brian Cowen, is temporarily hors de combat - there was something a shade ominous about the downbeat tone of the campaign's launch.
Drapier knows that every Euro referendum to date has been won and won decisively and that when the leaders of the three main parties, not to mention the captains of industry, trade union leaders and farming organisations all join forces, most people respond in a positive way. And so it will be this time, though Drapier detects an underlying unease, indeed nervousness, among those charged with delivering a Yes vote.
There is good reason to be nervous. The Yes campaign, in spite of being about some of the most momentous and far-reaching developments in modern European history, lacks passion and commitment. Is it that the idealistic Europeans of the Garret FitzGerald vintage have all grown old or shuffled off the stage to be replaced by smooth talking Eurocrat specialists who speak largely to themselves in a language few understand?
Maybe it's a measure of national maturity that we now take these major European developments in our stride, but familiarity can breed complacency, and that is exactly what is happening.
There is very little effort made to spell out the issues, to persuade people that what is good for Europe is good for Ireland and to talk in a straight way about our responsibilities as well as our rights. Instead we get Euro-babble.
The No side does not lack passion. Never mind that many of the arguments are off the wall, that scare stories and conspiracy theories are the order of the day, the language used is making an impact. For some of the No groups, especially the Greens and Sinn Fein, the campaign offers a useful dry run for the general election.
However, that said, the No campaign on its own will not do much more than raise a gallop. The real danger to the Yes vote is that the voters who are in a sour mood - and there are many such disgruntled groups around - will use the referendum to register their protest, to teach the Government and all political parties a lesson.
Drapier has no doubt the Nice Treaty will be affirmed. But unless the Government gets its act together, gets its message into clear and understandable language and shows a bit of passion then we will have a low poll and a high No vote.
MEANWHILE, the past is ever with us, or at least the Arms Trial part of it. There is no doubt Prime Time stirred up a hornet's nest with its first programme, but as the controversy unfolds Drapier suspects the hornet's biggest sting may be reserved for the programme itself.
From the outset, Drapier had reservations about basing an entire revision of a major historical episode on a single document. It may work that way in spy thrillers, but most sane historians would want to see all available documents before rushing to judgment.
The strange thing is how many people did rush to judgment on the basis of a programme that was as much polemic as documentary. The accepted view of Des O'Malley was turned on its head, amid much gloating and sniggering. For some observers, O'Malley was guilty as charged and Capt James Kelly was the blameless hero, the Dreyfus of Irish politics.
It was as if the normal rules of evidence were suspended and no painstaking examination of the facts should be allowed get in the way of a good story. Old scores were being settled. New conspiracy theories emerged, and for some Dessie all but ranked alongside Piggott the Forger of Parnellite days.
The second Prime Time programme in particular left a great deal to be desired. Drapier has argued from the outset that we need to have all documentation made available so that people can make up their own minds on the basis of verified information, though no amount of information, new or old, will change some minds, which will forever remain closed.
Drapier found O'Malley's own statement this week persuasive. Already the nit-picking has started, but to Drapier at least he faced up to the main issues in a fairly convincing way, and Drapier looks forward to the Prime Time response.
There now remains the reports from the Attorney General and the Department of Justice. From what Drapier hears, Michael McDowell has adopted a hands-on approach and is determined to ensure the AG's office will produce a report independent of the Government Departments.
The Justice report will be the interesting one. John O'Donoghue can be in no doubt that his Department - maybe for good reasons - is not noted for its openness or self-scrutiny.
The publication of these two reports may satisfy the needs of the immediate controversy. Or may not, and then the question of a wider inquiry will be on the cards once more. Indeed, as things are unravelling, a wider inquiry may be inevitable.
The O'Malley television series suffered from the lack of a hard critical edge. Few of those opposed to O'Malley chose to put their point of view, with the result that it is his version which holds the stage. He has got his retaliation in first, and it is this version that is likely to prevail, at least in the short run.
The whole episode is a diversion from the problems of real politics - the daily unravelling of the PPF in face of strikes, wage demands, job losses, hospital waiting lists and a general sourness of mood. Mary O'Rourke has been uncharacteristically quiet all week in face of the rail chaos, but then what choice does she have? CIE on its own is enough to destroy any minister, and Mary is wise enough to know that when there is nothing she can usefully do, it is best to shut up.
Finally, back to where we started. Brian Cowen was very lucky last Friday. A second or two earlier or later and the accident would have been very much worse. Drapier's advice is to take it easy. Don't rush your recovery, let the world look after itself. It generally does.
