The mobile phones are switched off, the newspapers cancelled and the EU's 20 commissioners are settling down to a welcome, month-long break from the cares of office. But no matter how many novels Mr Romano Prodi and his colleagues read, or how many long walks they take in unfamiliar places, they will find it hard to forget entirely about Europe's troubles.
As the European institutions are put to sleep for the month of August, Europe's leaders are still unsure about what to do about their biggest shock this year - Ireland's rejection of the Nice Treaty. Officially, they are calling for "a period of reflection", during which they hope the Irish people will come to regret the referendum result and resolve to reverse it next year.
The Forum on Europe will convene in one form or another and nobody in Brussels wants to pre-empt its conclusions - at least, not in public.
Informally, however, the broad outlines are emerging of a package of measures which could persuade the electorate to vote in favour of the treaty in a second referendum.
Immediately after May's referendum, the Taoiseach and the Minister for Foreign Affairs assured their EU counterparts Ireland would not seek to renegotiate the text of the treaty. So most of the measures aimed at securing a Yes vote next time will take the form of domestic legislation.
They are likely to include the creation a stronger system of parliamentary scrutiny of EU laws, possibly modelled on systems currently in operation in Denmark, Sweden and Finland. This would mean members of the Oireachtas would study Commission proposals before the Government adopts a negotiating position in the Council of Ministers, the body which usually decides whether or not they become law.
The Government is not planning to withdraw from the EU Rapid Reaction Force. But it is considering legislation that would guarantee that Irish soldiers would take part only in operations which have been approved by the UN. Such a move could be reinforced by a declaration by EU heads of government emphasising that any decision to take part in a Rapid Reaction Force operation remains entirely a matter for each member-state.
Such domestic measures could blunt the arguments of some opponents of the treaty but informed opinion in Dublin and Brussels agrees the Government will need to do more to be confident of winning a second referendum. In this context, an intriguing idea about how to satisfy Ireland without renegotiating the treaty has been circulating at the highest level in Brussels in recent weeks.
Among the most controversial issues at Nice was the future size of the Commission, with smaller states such as Ireland arguing that each member-state should retain the right to nominate a Commissioner. In the end, the leaders agreed the Commission should be reformed in two stages.
From 2005, larger member-states will lose their right to nominate a second Commissioner, placing all member-states on an equal footing. The treaty compensates the larger countries by increasing their voting strength in the Council of Ministers.
Each member-state would nominate one Commissioner until the number of EU states reached 27. After that, the number of Commissioners would be fewer than the number of member-states. A system of rotation would come into force, based on strict equality between member-states.
Crucially, a number of questions were left open, to be resolved after the 27th member-state is admitted. They include the question of the maximum size of the Commission and the precise nature of the rotation system.
Some countries would like to reduce the size of the Commission, others would limit it to 26 members.
According to the latest idea, the decision could be brought forward, perhaps to next June's EU summit in Seville. The leaders could then decide that, after the 27th member-state joins, the number of Commissioners would always be one fewer than the number of member-states.
Some larger countries would resist such a move, arguing that such a large Commission would be unwieldy and would inevitably divide into senior and junior portfolios. But many smaller countries would support it and, given the negotiating leverage an Irish Government would enjoy on the eve of a second referendum, our EU partners would be receptive to Irish arguments.
There remains the problem that, under such an arrangement, one member-state would be left without a Commissioner during each five-year term. The problem may not, however, be insurmountable - even within the terms of the treaty.
Unlike some national cabinets, the Commission does not have an attorney general. If such a post were to be created, without Commissioner status but with a seat at Commission meetings, every member-state could have a seat at the table.
Thus, the Nice Treaty would remain intact but the Government could return to the electorate next year armed with an important concession.
