There was no clear victory for either side in this week's Forum on Europe meeting in Stranorlar, where most of the audience seemed already convinced, writes Carol Coulter
The man who had dropped into the Forum on Europe meeting by accident because he was staying in the hotel came from an area hundreds of miles south of Donegal. He wanted to take the opportunity to be convinced that he should vote in the Nice referendum, and how to vote.
"I'm swayed by both sides," he told the 200-odd people who had come along to hear the Minister for Justice, Mr McDowell, and veteran anti-EU campaigner, Dr Anthony Coughlan, slug it out on the theme of "Enhanced Co-operation" an element in the Nice Treaty.
"I would not like us to lose a commissioner," the man continued. "It's like the fact that we'd all like to have a Minister representing our constituency. We'd lose our say at the inner table.
"I would like to see Europe expand, but I'm worried about farming.
"I'd like to vote, I want to vote, but I don't have all the facts. I'm more confused now after the meeting." Most other speakers from the floor were not confused because they had come to the meeting with their minds made up, and they reiterated points made by one or other of the platform speakers or rehearsed arguments already well-aired in the newspapers.
Judging from the speakers, it appeared that the numbers of the truly unconvinced was quite small, and each of the platform speakers was enthusiastically applauded by supporters after each intervention.
It is unlikely that many people had their minds changed by the debate.
Mr McDowell - who has been critical of European institutions in the past - stressed that the overall experience of the EU had been very good for Ireland.
He said the three weaknesses in Ireland's relationship with the EU, highlighted by the defeat of the Nice referendum, were now being corrected.
These were the perceived arrogance and distance of the European leadership; the fact that directives were negotiated in secret by civil servants, and the Irish people only learnt of them when they had become law; and the need for us to develop our own view of the future of Europe rather than reacting to that of others.
The fears people had for our neutrality had also been addressed. He said there would now be a debate in the Dáil on all significant issues arising from our membership of the EU.
Neutrality would be in our Constitution. Measures were being introduced to deal with the democratic deficit. The Forum on Europe was discussing the future of Europe, and for the first time, Ireland had said it was not in favour of a federalist model for Europe, or a superstate. "I believe, on mature consideration, the best deal on offer for Ireland is this deal," he said.
Mr Coughlan stressed two recurring themes of the No campaign - that the Government was seeking to overturn a decision democratically taken by the Irish people - and that the Franco-German leadership of the EU was seeking through this treaty to dominate the new, expanded EU, reducing the smaller states to a secondary role.
He quoted former EU president Mr Jacques Delors to substantiate his case on the ambitions of these two states, and warned of a future European constitution and consequent loss of Irish sovereignty.
Challenged by Mr McDowell for having opposed every single referendum on the EU, he acknowledged that he did, but explained that he feared from the beginning that the EU was going to turn into a super-state, and that this included the project of a European army.
"I've been right in that every single treaty we signed handed over more power to Brussels," he said. "A grand EU constitution is coming down the tracks. It is moving in the direction of a super-power."
This issue - surely a fundamental one, especially as an EU constitution would seriously impact on our own - received very little discussion at the meeting in Stranorlar.
Given the pressing reality of the forthcoming referendum, it is probably inevitable that at the moment the discussion is focused on the nuts and bolts of the Nice Treaty.
The Forum on Europe has a remit to continue its work after the referendum, and feed into the Convention on the Future of Europe.
There issues like a future constitution for the EU will be discussed, and perhaps the terms of the debate will be less identifiable with party allegiance.