asked the Taoiseach if he will specify the constitutional amendments he envisaged when he referred to them in his address at the White House, Washington on 17 March, 1982.

In the course of my White House speech on March 17 last to which the Deputy's question refers, I was speaking about the obstacles which need to be overcome in seeking to bring the partition of our country to an end and in this context I stated that we would make whatever constitutional arrangements might be thought to be needed.

I have spoken previously on a number of occasions, as I did on April 16 last, at a function commemorating the Bi-Centenary of Grattan's Parliament, of a new constitution for the whole island under which we might see a legislative assembly which spoke for the whole nation.

As I said on that occasion, our aim should be a political structure for the whole island which would banish exclusion, discrimination, bias and even condescension from Ireland forever; a political structure in which all traditions would find their representation as of right.

Which question is the Taoiseach answering?

I am answering Question No. 6.

Seeing the seeming willingness on the part of the Taoiseach now to engage in constitutional reform, would he not think it worthwhile to begin to implement some policies of constitutional reform at this stage, rather than wait for some unspecified events to happen?

No. The Deputy should be well aware of my position in that regard, which I have stated on a number of occasions. It would be a futile exercise to start making changes in our Constitution in order to accommodate different traditions without having the participation of the representatives of those traditions in the process.

That reply by the Taoiseach is at variance with his willingness to discuss with me the question of constitutional review, as stated in the Dáil some weeks ago. I hope that the Taoiseach has not changed his mind on the question of constitutional review.

I will communicate with the Deputy.

I understand the Taoiseach's position to be that he, as most of us, would like to have an input from the people of Northern Ireland into what way we should frame a new Constitution.

That would be essential.

It is essential. In what way does the Taoiseach hope to reach that objective?

As the Deputy knows, I would like to see a major input into that situation from the London Government. I hope that this process can be pursued constructively through the Anglo-Irish process.

A final supplementary question from Deputy Harte.

My question arises from the Taoiseach answering a different question. I have asked the Taoiseach in what way he plans to or believes he can obtain an opinion from all the people of Northern Ireland. He has answered that he seeks an opinion from the London Government. In what way does the Taoiseach hope to obtain an opinion from the Northern people, as outlined in his political thinking, to which I subscribe?

I look forward, ideally, to a situation where we will be all sitting around a table discussing this very matter, discussing new political structures and possibly a new Constitution for the island as a whole.

As the Taoiseach has a commitment to have a referendum in the future on certain constitutional issues, surely he must consider it worthwhile to include other items which are unacceptable to the Northern Ireland community which will need changing in Southern Ireland?

I have already dealt with that matter.

Finally, if success is as lacking in the next 50 years as it was in the last 50, must we wait 50 years for the objectives at which the Taoiseach aims?

No. It means that we rededicate ourselves to working towards that objective and trying to bring about the sort of situation which I have envisaged.

Does the Taoiseach mean that we have not tried to do that in the past? People have tried and have not been successful. If success is as lacking in the future as it was in the past, must we wait 50 or 100 years to have a Constitution in this part of Ireland to which the Taoiseach aspires and with which we all agree?

The Deputy knows that in these matters the thing to do is to devise a constructive, forward-looking policy and work to try to make this succeed. If it does not succeed, then we shall have to consider alternatives.

Is it not just a question of saying what we would like to see in our Constitution?