asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he has discussed with the British authorities the use of super-grasses in trials in Northern Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

): On 5 December last Dáil Éireann passed a resolution noting the damage which is being done to the legal and judicial system in Northern Ireland by regular reliance on uncorroborated accomplice evidence as a major feature of the prosecution system.

Both I and officials of my Department have raised the issue of the so-called supergrasses with the British authorities. As the Deputy is aware, I made a detailed statement on this issue during the course of the debate in Dáil Éireann.

Has the Minister entered into any negotiations with the British Government in relation to compensation for victims who have been remanded for long periods under this unfair system?

The matter of compenstaion is one for the people themselves on the advice of their solicitors.

Can the Minister tell me if he has any idea why Deputy Allen, if he is so concerned about these matters, did not vote for our Private Members' motion condemning supergrass trials?

Questions are normally taken at this stage and if Deputy Haughey has something to say to Deputy Allen he might say it to him outside.

The Deputy's question is incredible in view of his stand on the Private Members' motion.

An emasculated version.

What response has the Minister had from the British authorities concerning the use of uncorroborated evidence? Has he received any assurance that the practice will be ended?

I have not received such an assurance nor did I seek such an assurance. I was concerned about the length of time for which people who were charged were held before they were brought to trial. That is my main concern in this matter.

In view of the fact that the Government did not support the motion to condemn supergrass activity which was debated on 5 December and in view of the request made during the debate by Deputy Allen that the Minister for Foreign Affairs must be firm with the British and insist that the system of supergrass trials in Northern Ireland be reappraised and that the normal standards of justice apply equally to Northern Ireland and Britain, what progress has the Minister made on that request made by a backbencher of his own party who put such an inspired question to him today? Are these questions on the Order Paper part of the phone link to the Dáil that went astray?

The Deputy and the House can take it that I am always concerned at damage done to any legal system by the use of uncorroborated evidence. As I pointed out in the debate, the North of Ireland is not the only place where such a system is used. My concern is that people charged on supergrass evidence will be brought to trial and the case disposed of as quickly as possible. I have made that quite clear to the British on a number of occasions.

The Government have not yet condemned the supergrass system.

The question I tabled was on record in the House long before the debate or any discussions with the Northern groups took place.

Was it before or after the phone call?

It was long before any debate took place here. If approaches are made to the Minister's office by people in Northern Ireland in relation to difficulties they may have in pursuing compensation, will he meet and help them in every way to pursue the matter through the European Court?

If approaches are made to me from people in the North whose rights are not safeguarded I will do everything I can to help them.

The Minister said that his main concern is with the length of time people are held on remand. I go along with that but does the Minister accept that the calibre of person giving uncorrobarated evidence is cause for extreme concern and that that, allied to the damage being caused, should be of equal concern to the Minister? Does he accept that?

I do. In many cases what the Deputy says is correct. That position has been commented upon by many justices in the North of Ireland.

Does the Minister agree that the question of the length of time, while important in itself, is really peripheral to the main issue here which is the immorality and downright flouting of the rule of law involving the whole supergrass system? If that is to be part of the legal administration and procedures of Northern Ireland it will lead to a complete disrespect for the rule of law and administration of justice which will make it impossible to achieve the peaceful reconciliation that we all desire.

That is the point I made during the debate on 5 December.

The Minister should not pussyfoot on this matter.

I am not.

There should be an outright unambiguous condemnation and rejection of the system by our Minister for Foreign Affairs.

The Deputy should read my contribution to the debate on 5 December.