We had exactly the same argument: that voting NO would give the govt a mandate to negociate a "better deal for France and for EU"

What really happened is that the NO vote was self sufficient, did not support any effort to renegociate and lead to nowhere. I have not seen any party advocating for a "better" constitution at the time, being serious about it and engage in european wide discussions.

Because the root of the problem is that whatever is considered as "a better deal" in France is completely different as what would be "a better deal" in Ireland.

Take abortion, or fiscal policy: you will never, ever, have a french left wing party (and a good deal of right wing parties either) vote for that. The same goes for neutrality, common defense policy and so on.

While you may get support in Germany for a european seat at the security council, neither France nor Britain will accept to lose their seat so that EU could get one.

On social welfare: I remember from my time there that sweden seemed very strongly opposed to any transfer of social issues to EU level, for fear of jeopardizing the high quality swedish social welfare by mixing with low quality mediterranean mismanaged french system (among others ^_^).

Poland or baltic states will never accept neutrality as a defence policy at EU level, nor the french ambition of a european stand alone army: they will only agree to a NATO driven defence, because US is good and helped them against USSR.

In 2005, I got the opportunity of reading the treaty. I spent a lot of time on it, as well as my colleagues at work (we had it printed and available on the coffee table). We had a lot of discussion about it, and I almost voted NO. I thought otherwise nevertheless because I knew, from my previous experiences abroad, that it was highly unlikely to get anything else from renegociation between so many different countries, where no-one has the same conceptions or purposes of what is the European Union.

Secondly I can't see Fianna Fail agreeing to it.  Giving Sinn Fein such a prominent role recognises them as the real opposition and guarantees them a huge increase in seats  at the next election.  

Thirdly Sinn Fein are right in one sense:  Negotiating a pile of opt-out or clarificatory protocols specific to Ireland is easy as they don't require re-ratification in other countries.

As most of the NO side complaints are not relevant to the Treaty it is easy to draft protocols that address them:  e.g. "Nothing in this Treaty shall be construed as requiring mandatory military service for Irish citizens"  "This Treaty shall not mandate the implanting of microchips in babies"

Thus a "renegotiation" is quite possible and can be presented as addressing many of the key NO concerns and misconceptions.  Why give Sinn Fein the credit for that?

However, for a re-vote to pass, the implications of a NO vote would also need to be spelled out - e.g. that c. 25 Member states will proceed to implement most of Lisbon on the basis of Nice.

There has to be a clear downside to a NO vote to get the pro-EU vote out in even bigger numbers.

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

Great!

Well, an opt-out is easy enough to negotiate, that's true. It's added to the Treaties as a "protocol" of which there are a ton.

When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes

Dublin offered plan to save EU treaty

Ireland will be offered additional guarantees of its sovereignty - possibly in areas such as taxation, military policy and family law - under an emergency plan to save the European Union's Lisbon treaty, government ministers and EU officials said on Monday.

They said the plan, still in its early planning stages, would involve no changes to the treaty's text, because all governments that have approved Lisbon would then have to ratify the altered document - a process regarded as virtually certain to fail, especially in the UK.

(...)

According to one senior EU government official, the solution will involve an offer of "explanatory protocols" that would state explicitly that Lisbon does not affect Ireland's power to set its own tax rates, maintain its traditional neutrality and control abortion policy.

Although legal experts say the treaty preserves Irish rights in these matters, the success of the anti-Lisbon referendum campaigners last week was due in large part to voters' fears that Ireland was ceding control over sensitive policy areas to Brussels.

EU leaders will hold their first substantive discussions on how to rescue the treaty at a summit on Thursday and Friday, and diplomats say the next steps will depend partly on what explanation Brian Cowen, Ireland's premier, gives his colleagues of why his countrymen voted No.

If he indicates support for the idea of additional protocols for Ireland, it may be possible for a detailed proposal to be presented at a subsequent EU summit in October, a senior EU official said.

One open question is whether the Irish government, having accepted the new protocols, would hold a second referendum.

Irish citizens believed that one could go to the EU directly and right some of the wrongs, and there we had almost complete disappointment; we were shuffled right back to the Irish government doing the wrongs.

I remember rural Ireland before the EU. I remember shitting in a barn in the early 70s because my great-uncle's house was too primitive for actual toilets. So don't even begin to try to tell me how awful the EU has been for rural Ireland.