Is the Taoiseach in a position to give the House before he goes to London an indication of what ideas for the coming together of North and South he will put forward, on what basis such a development would be envisaged by him and what kind of structure as a whole he would consider desirable? Is the House not entitled to have some information on this before the Taoiseach goes to the meeting, because while other parties like my own have set out policies on the subject we have not yet heard anything on this subject from the Taoiseach. I think the Irish people are entitled to know what proposals or ideas are being put forward in relation to North-South relations by the Government which has been very silent on this issue.

The Chair is not in agreement with having everything possible raised on the question as it it. Deputies can easily see that by opening up the type of supplementary question that is being asked everything that might be on the agenda could be the subject matter of questions. I shall call Question No. 2.

I think my supplementary arises directly from the question.

The question asks if the Taoiseach has finalised arrangements for the meeting and the answer was yes.

Finalisation of arrangements for the meeting presumably would involve the Taoiseach having some ideas as to what kind of proposals he would put forward.

If the Chair were to permit supplementaries of that nature we could have hundreds of them.

It is only one that I am asking.

The Chair has permitted quite a number already.

What I am asking is: what ideas does the Taoiseach propose to put forward?

I think it would be most unusual for me to give any indication at this stage.

Is there any stage at which the Taoiseach intends to say what kind of a united Ireland he envisages? We have been waiting quite a number of years.

Further arising out of the Taoiseach's non-reply, there is very considerable disquiet that the Taoiseach's views on Northern Ireland are not known. We had Dr. Armstrong no later than last week saying that it would be extremely beneficial if the Taoiseach would let the country know his views regarding Northern Ireland.

I am about to undertake a meeting with the Prime Minister of Great Britain which is of fundamental importance to the future of relations, I would think, between this country and Great Britain and I would imagine at this stage I might be entitled to expect some support from the Opposition parties rather than this——

If the Taoiseach tells us where he is going.

We can hardly support the Taoiseach when we do not know what he is doing.

——absurd attempt to ask me at this stage, on the eve of the meeting, to say precisely what I am going to say or suggest to the British Prime Minister.

Would the Taoiseach not agree that I personally have been asking him since he was elected Taoiseach and that other people outside this House have also been making it quite clear that they do not know what the Taoiseach's policy on Northern Ireland is? The Taoiseach is critical of us not giving him support. How can we support something we do not know?

The Deputy made it quite clear the day I was elected Taoiseach that not alone was he not going to support me but that he was not going to afford me the normal courtesies extended to a Taoiseach. That has been his attitude consistently since. I do not think he is serving the national interest well by pursuing this matter in this way at this stage.

"Do not hit me with the baby in my arms."

The Taoiseach's absurd efforts to try to indicate to the general public that my questions or comments in this House are anything but political will just not wash.

The position the Taoiseach is trying to put forward is one which I think is unsustainable, I would suggest to him. I certainly hope that these discussions with the British Prime Minister are successful. I have done anything I have been able to do by way of encouraging on the British side a positive approach, and I am sure the same is true of my colleague, the leader of the Labour Party. But we are in a difficulty when the Taoiseach has not indicated in this House anything about his view of the shape that the other Ireland might take. As to whether we can support him on this, we would wish very much to support him—I would certainly—in a constructive way if we knew what it was that he was putting forward and that it was something that could command support. It is his silence which is making any form of bi-partisanship extremely difficult.

I think this is getting into the realms of unreality. I and my colleagues in the Government are entrusted with the conduct of these affairs. Deputies on the other hand may wish that they were in charge of these affairs. The fact is that they are not. These matters are entrusted to us, for better or for worse, and we propose to handle them as we think best in the overall interests of the nation and the people of both North and South. It would be totally unusual, even unheard of, for me at this stage to indicate what precise line I propose to follow in my discussions with the British Prime Minister. On the other side I think it would be equally absurd if the British Prime Minister were to disclose that on her part. I am afraid that Deputies on both sides of the House will have to await the outcome of the discussions. I have already given a broad outline of my approach and my philosophy in these matters in my Ard Fheis speech. After that, I think it is a matter that has to be left to the Taoiseach and the Government of the day to handle as they think best in the national interest.

We are not asking the Taoiseach precisely what line he is going to take on every issue at this meeting. We are pointing out that we are in the difficulty that as he has never indicated what his ideas are for the bringing together of North and South, we are not in a position to offer support. We do not know that. We have indicated our view; he has not indicated his. It will be a very curious position if the first person to hear what the Taoiseach's ideas are is the British Prime Minister before the Members of this House or the Irish people.

That is a non sequiter.