They wouldn't, would they?

Almost a week from the decisive "No" vote in the Irish referendum, and leaders of the European project are still debating what to do.

They wouldn't require Ireland to vote again, in the hope of reversing it like the last occasion, would they?

They wouldn't carry on regardless, despite the fact that their rules require unanimity of all member states, would they?

Both are possible.

Expect them to offer inducements to Ireland and/or threats, in the hope that Ireland will come to its senses, have another referendum and this time show "more sense".

Expect the talk of a two-speed Europe to be revived, with Ireland cast out into "outer darkness" and so learn the error of its ways.

A further possibility is to do what they have already been doing extensively, - find ways of adopting various parts of the Constitution/ Treaty, piecemeal. They are never more creative than when they find ways of interpreting existing rules to permit them to extend the Project. Depending on what happens in Ireland over the next few weeks and months, I would not be surprised if this was the method they adopt.

The most worrying thing is comments and the suggestion that referendums are anti-democratic, and that voters should not be permitted to exercise choice on complicated issues. Rather, everything should be left to their elected representatives (who are more gullible, more amenable to bribery, more dishonest?) This reveals the true nature of much of the EU and the growing opposition which is due to the remoteness and aloofness of European Government. It has no popular mandate, despises electors because they could challenge the whole affair, doesn't brook opposition, and gives more and more power to the instigators. Another word could be dictatorship!