One key deficiency of the European project is the language in which it is conceived.
While the Treaty of Rome is readable, the same can hardly be said of what followed it, as the Danish government learned to its cost when it sent every voter a copy of Maastricht. Not surprisingly, the voters said No.
But starting again from scratch to draft a new treaty in the language of the street is easier suggested than done. The lawyers have always warned that such a reworking would unravel the acquis communautaire, the 80,000-page corpus of laws and administrative practices that have evolved over the years and form the starting point of accession for new members.
Undaunted, Mr Romano Prodi last summer commissioned the European University Institute in Florence to come up with a draft simplified treaty. Under the guidance of Prof Yves Meny, a committee of academic lawyers has produced a 100-clause text of remarkable clarity (available at europa.eu.int/comm/igc2000) which, they claim, would be neutral on the acquis.
That crucial claim has yet to be assessed by the lawyers of the member-states but within the European Commission there are already rumblings of dissent from the ultra-sensitive competition directorate.
The Commission is upbeat, however, with the French Commissioner, Mr Michel Barnier, arguing that simplification is an essential step towards creating a badly needed constitution for the European Union, and Mr David O'Sullivan saying that objections may well be valid but reflect timidity. Any erosion of the acquis would only be at the margins, he says.
The Florence team's work has also created the possibility of a far more radical innovation. The consolidation of the treaties allows what are regarded as fundamental aspects of the Union's basic law to be easily distinguished from less crucial elements, such as specific policy positions.
And that allows the possibility of different procedures for changing essential and non-essential aspects of the treaty. Mr Prodi argues that the latter should be amendable without the cumbersome process of an InterGovernmental Conference, which could then be retained for changing only core provisions.
The move would simplify what appears now to have become a non-stop process of treaty reform, but would also undermine the role of national parliaments who play a central part in the current ratification process.
A very tentative debate was begun by foreign ministers at the recent informal meeting in Evian. The Commission hopes that, at the very least, the Nice summit will signal a willingness to embark on further discussions.