asked the Taoiseach if the British Prime Minister, Mrs. Thatcher, made it clear during his discussions with her that the British view was that, if a milk levy was introduced, Britain would strongly oppose exemptions from the levy for Ireland.

2.

asked the Taoiseach if he is satisfied that the recommendations on the super-levy put forward by the Greek Minister for State at the Foreign Office, Mr. Grigoris Varfis, reflect accurately his press conference on his Greek visit.

With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I propose to take Question Nos. 1 and 2 together.

The subjects on which the Prime Minister and I exchanged views during our recent meeting are outlined in my statement to the House on 8 November. As I said then, the paper put forward by the Greek Presidency recognises the existence of a special Irish problem. However, the Presidency's proposal to deal with this problem is not in its present form acceptable to the Government. We shall, therefore, be seeking a derogation from the four-year super-levy proposal.

Arising out of that section of the answer which deals with Question No. 1, does the Taoiseach recall having said, after the Summit meeting with Mrs. Thatcher, that he had explained very clearly our position on the super-levy but is it not the reality that he cut no ice with her on this subject as is evident from the special hostility shown later in the week by the British Government to our agricultural interests?

For obvious reasons I do not propose to go into the negotiations in any detail but there are a number of further meetings to take place before the Athens Summit at which the matter will be decided.

Would the Taoiseach not have done a far better job of work in London if he had left Mrs. Thatcher in no doubt that Ireland would oppose the super-levy, using the veto if necessary, instead of merely, as he has said, explaining fully our position to her?

I explained to the British Prime Minister, as I explained to other Governments, that the application of the super-levy to Ireland is unacceptable to us.

Again, in relation to Question No. 1, would the Taoiseach agree that it is very difficult to create good relations with our nearest neighbour when, apart altogether from the Northern Ireland question, they attack our vital national interest? Would he agree also that one would not find such hostility in respect of a vital national interest between, for example, the Nordic and the Benelux countries?

This seems to be argument.

It is a very good question. Are you not allowing the Taoiseach to answer?

Argument is not in order at Question Time.

In relation to Question No. 2, in view of the fact that the present Greek proposals on the super-levy are totally unacceptable to Ireland, would the Taoiseach agree that he overestimated the extent to which he won Greek support for Ireland's position on this matter? Would he agree also that his statement that Mr. Papandreou had said that his Government understood fully the problems faced by Ireland in terms of the present proposal and understood our just demands was somewhat misleading?

First, the Deputy must distinguish between the position of the Greek Government as one of ten Governments and the position of the Presidency in putting forward a compromise proposal at a particular stage in the negotiations, taking account of the potential reaction of the people to those proposals. From his own experience, the Deputy will recognise that they are distinct.

On his return home did the Taoiseach not exaggerate greatly the importance of the meeting he had with the Greek Prime Minister and the Greek Minister for State at the Foreign Office in relation to the super-levy?

I was most careful not to overstate anything. It would be undesirable to do so in discussions of this kind. The Presidency proposal contains two ingredients which are of great importance from our point of view. One is the proposal that the super-levy be for a limited period, that it be subject to review even before the end of that period, as distinct from the situation before then when it was spoken of as being of indefinite duration. Obviously, the limited period proposal is helpful to us in the context of seeking a derogation because a derogation is easier to conceive of for a limited than for an indefinite period. The other element in the proposal which is of great value to us, is the recognition that there is a special Irish problem in this matter, not a problem affecting a number of countries but a special Irish problem. The solution suggested as a compromise at this stage is not acceptable to us. Perhaps one would not expect that at this stage in the negotiations one would have reached the point where proposals to meet our situation would have been put forward.

Would the Taoiseach agree that we cannot expect any support from the British Government in protecting our vital national interest so far as the introduction of the super-levy is concerned?

I will not prejudge what the attitude of any Government will be in Athens on this issue.

Would the Taoiseach not agree that since his meeting with Mrs. Thatcher all public statements from representatives of the British Government indicate that we cannot expect any support from them?

I think he did more harm than good.

What arrangements has the Taoiseach made to meet the remaining Heads of State of member countries before the Athens Summit?

I will make such arrangements to meet Heads of State as may seem appropriate at any particular time.

Is the Taoiseach aware that he gave a commitment that he would meet all Heads of State of member countries before the Athens meeting to make sure that he had an opportunity of putting our point of view to them with regard to the implications of the introduction of the super-levy for this country? Would the Taoiseach continue to guarantee to us here that he is prepared to meet all other Heads of State before the Athens meeting?

I never gave any such guarantee to meet all Heads of Government, not State. I said I would take such steps as seemed appropriate to meet Heads of Government. I have done so and am doing so. At no stage did I say that I would meet all of them or seek to meet all of them.

A final supplementary on these questions.

Would the Taoiseach agree that his own efforts, as Head of State, have been——

——of Government.

——totally inadequate as far as the protection of the vital intertests of this country are concerned with regard to the introduction of the super-levy?

I am not the Head of State and do not intend to be; I am the Head of Government. Perhaps the Minister could try to get that right.

I am not the Minister either.

Deputy, all right.

Let us leave it at that.

Fair enough. We will call that quits.

——and the Deputy does not intend to be either.

We are inclined to promote one another.

Order.

I do not accept the Deputy's statement. I have taken and will continue to take all steps that might be helpful in these negotiations which are of vital interest to this country.