Ok, but this is an entirely different and opposing point to Jerome's - who was worried he might succeed in enhancing the Council's effectiveness relative to the Commission or Parliament.

Blair did have a good track record and a great deal of dedication and resilience in negotiating the Irish Peace process, and it's not as if he has a lot of other high profile political career options at his disposal.

On balance I tend to agree that Bertie Ahern would be better at the negotiating/coalition building end of things - and wouldn't carry Blair's negative baggage.  But we are not arguing here who our ideal candidate might be, but rather whether Blair would be as bad for the EU as everyone here seems to fear.  

Expectations are so low that it wouldn't be hard for Blair to surprise on the upside, and I think he might just do that.  But is it a risk we want to take?  Probably not - especially when there are other more suitable candidates around.

It does matter whether EU citizens should actually like their President and be proud to be represented by him.  So on balance I will probably end up falling in line with the prevailing consensus.  

I just felt that it was possible to make a contrary case, and given that we have led such a high profile campaign against him, we should at least be seen to have given reasonable consideration to the opposite view.

Call me old fashioned, but I believe even a criminal deserves to have a defense counsel!

"It's a mystery to me - the game commences, For the usual fee - plus expenses, Confidential information - it's in my diary..."