POLITICIANS, academics and interest groups at the conference all agreed that enlargement of the EU is politically necessary. But many warned that Ireland could lose funding as a result.
Speakers pictured a European Union stretching from the west of Ireland to the Black Sea, with Cyprus, Malta and up to a dozen central and eastern European states seeking to join. Negotiations are likely to begin late next year.
The Minister of State for European Affairs, Mr Gay Mitchell, insisted that Ireland must continue to receive cohesion funding even after such new states join.
The dream of the founders of what is now the European Union was to see peace and democracy in Europe, said Mr Mitchell. "That dream has become reality and the links which have developed between member states give a guarantee of peace, democracy and prosperity to a degree never seen before in Europe.
The enlargement of the Union was necessary to maintain that peace and security. This enlargement would, however, bring problems, and the European Commission was now preparing an assessment of its impact on the Common Agricultural Policy and the Cohesion Fund, from which Ireland currently benefits significantly.
Mr Mitchell said the CAP and cohesion funding had to be retained, and that Ireland would continue to need compensation for its peripheral location.
"Without countervailing measures, the economic benefits of enlargement are likely to accrue chiefly to the existing central economies of the European Union. This had to be taken into account in the negotiations on its future shape and financing.
Mr Con Lucey of the Irish Farmers' Association warned that enlargement would have significant implications for agriculture in Ireland. The CAP had been reformed substantially in 1992/93 and would face further pressure in the lead up to the next round of World Trade Organisation (WTO) negotiations.
A speaker from Hungary, one of the applicant countries, maintained that the EU was not showing enough determination to ensure the successful reunification of Europe.
Mr Sandor Meisel, of the Hungarian Institute for World Economics, argued that the criteria set by the EU for the applicant countries were "moving targets", changing regularly.
Mr Tony Brown, of the Institute of European Affairs, warned that an enlarged EU would be very close to "new and demanding neighbours ... The extended Union will have borders with Norway, Ukraine, Turkey, Belarus, Moldova and Russia itself.
"And it will have close proximity across water with the Middle East and the Mediterranean countries of North Africa."
The term "European" had not been officially defined, he said. While rejecting racism and "organised xenophobia", which, he said, were present in European society, consideration had to be given to questions such as the place of Islam in Europe.
Mr Brown called for a clear timetable for enlargement, warning that telling applicant countries they must first spend 25 years reforming their economies "will produce only hopelessness and frustration, leading to political disaffection".