The rejection of the Nice Treaty in the last referendum was the biggest shock to the Irish political system since the Sinn Féin victories in 1918, the director of the European Institute at University College Dublin, Prof Brigid Laffan, said yesterday.
She told an Agricultural Science Graduates' conference the No vote was a shock to the Government, to the member-states and the candidate states.
"It demonstrated that extensive benefits from the EU could not guarantee a Yes vote in a referendum.
"It showed that the Government had lost touch with the electorate on this issue and that there was a high level of disinterest in the EU."
She said the outcome of the new vote would set the tone of Ireland's European policy as the EU enlarged to the east and south and would influence perceptions in other member-states and among the candidate countries.
"The stakes could not be higher. The outcome will influence our sense of our place in the European order. It is more about Ireland than it is about Europe."
Arguing for a Yes vote, she said Ireland's experience of EU membership had been benign and had, among other things, transformed our relationship with the UK and had helped in the management of the communal conflict in Northern Ireland.
The great Irish contribution to the EU was to have made a success of membership, and the State and people had shown that a small, poor peripheral state could live with internationalisation and liberalisation.
She warned that the greatest danger in voting No a second time would be to draw attention to size and would demonstrate that we were not satisfied with a level of representation which was far greater than our population would warrant.
"For example, Germany has 20 times our population but only four times our voting power. On neutrality, we would have shown that the guarantees given to us in Seville are not enough for us."
Dr Dois Busenkell, first councillor of agriculture at the German embassy in London, outlined her government's support for the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy.
Dr Busenkell said there was a great deal of divergence in the views of member-states to the reforms and conceded it would be difficult to find a compromise to achieve a majority.
Germany respected the Irish and French position that the proposals were too far-reaching and the fact they only wanted to reflect and decide on CAP reform later.
"We respect this position yet want to promote understanding of our position in favour of fixing key points of CAP reform by the end of 2002, before the conclusion of the negotiations with the 10 candidate countries if possible."
Irish farmers, she said, would not lose out because of the reforms because the cuts in product supports would be paid back to them for rural development and other purposes.