asked the Taoiseach why he accepted some of the remarks in relation to Northern Ireland made by the British Prime Minister in an address to the United States Congress; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

I said that I thought that the Prime Minister was very positive in her reaction to the report of the New Ireland Forum and to the discussions in progress at the moment. I am satisfied that this remark was justified.

Would the Taoiseach not be prepared to accept that if he is satisfied with the approach of the British Prime Minister in the House of Congress of the United States he is one of the few people here, or in the United States, who is? Would the Taoiseach not think that in making references to "Garret Fitzgerald and I", "joint efforts" and "consulting together", the British Prime Minister sought to give the impression that the British and Irish Governments were at one in their approach to the Northern Ireland problem? Will the Taoiseach not agree that that could not be the case particularly in view of the rejection by the British Prime Minister of the New Ireland Forum Report and, indeed, the concentration of British policy at the moment on the security aspects to the exclusion of political progress?

The Prime Minister's reference to myself related to two matters, our joint condemnation of terrorism or our being united in condemning terrorism which I know is the Deputy's own position, and the legislation we introduced in respect of the seizure of IRA funds which also had the support of the Leader of the Opposition. I am not quite sure what the Deputy is complaining about. His name could also have been linked with mine in the circumstances but was not for some reason.

I suggest that the Taoiseach is being deliberately obscure about this matter. Is the Taoiseach not aware of the fact that there is widespread consternation and disbelief here, and in the United States, that the British Prime Minister should attempt to convey to the United States Congress that there is in fact no difference between himself and herself about Northern Ireland, that the whole tenor and thrust of her remarks to Congress was that there is no problem and no real difficulty and that the only question outstanding and remaining to be settled is the question of security and terrorism? Does the Taoiseach not feel it necessary to indicate that in this part of Ireland we have a different approach to the problem of the tragedy of Northern Ireland, that we do not regard the situation as satisfactory and that it is entirely misleading of the British Prime Minister to attempt to convey the opposite to our friends in the United States?

The Deputy may not, perhaps, have bothered to read what was said by the Prime Minister.

Do not be insulting; I have a copy of it in front of me.

What she said was that we, referring to myself and herself, recognise the differing traditions and identities of the two parts of the community in Northern Ireland, the Nationalist and the Unionist, and we seek a political way forward acceptable to them both which respects them both. At a later stage she said that we would continue to consult together in the quest for stability and peace in Northern Ireland. Those are statements to which I certainly do not take exception. They reflect accurately the position of our two Governments. The fact that the British Government, as made clear by the British Prime Minister, now recognise so clearly that the problem in Northern Ireland does comprise one of differing traditions and identities which have to be reconciled and respected, both of them, is important progress. To have it on the record is something valuable which I would have thought the Deputy opposite would have welcomed.

I wish the Taoiseach would refrain from these petty and insulting references to my not having read the speech. I took the trouble to read it. I would not go to the trouble of raising this matter here had I not read it. I have a copy of it in front of me and I refer him particularly to the part where the British Prime Minister said that there is no disagreement on this principle between the UK Government and the Government of the Republic of Ireland. Various other references of that kind by the British Prime Minister to the Houses of Congress gave the impression — I hope the wrong impression — that in our basic attitude and approach to the problem of Northern Ireland there is no fundamental disagreement between the Irish Government and the British Government particularly in view of the fact that the British Prime Minister has recently extended the constitutional veto to cover any form of political progress which again is inherent in her remarks to Congress. Does he not still agree with me that the New Irish Forum Report was a valid analysis of the situation and that, having rejected the New Ireland Forum Report in its entirety, the British Prime Minister had no right to go to the US Congress and suggest that all is well in Northern Ireland and all is well between the British and Irish Governments with regard to Northern Ireland and that the only problem really outstanding is to defeat terrorism, even though we all agree that that is a major part of the problem but only part of the problem?

The British Prime Minister has not rejected the New Ireland Forum Report in its entirety. On the contrary, the communique which we signed at Chequers involves specific acceptance of a number of these proposals in paragraph 5.2 of the report, the only actual proposals in the report. Therefore, in that the Deputy is incorrect. The Deputy has quoted a reference from the speech in Congress that there is no disagreement on this principle between the UK Government and the Government of the Republic of Ireland. He omitted to quote the words before it, but I accept that it is not because he has not read it, it is because he chooses to quote selectively. The words immediately preceding that are: “If ever there were to be a majority in favour of change then I believe that our Parliament would respond accordingly, for that is the principle of consent enshrined in your Constitution”— the US Constitution —“and an essential part of ours. There is no disagreement on this principle between the UK Government and the Government of the Republic of Ireland”. That is a statement which I am very glad to see reported of support for Irish unity in the event of consent and no holding back by the British Government because of any interest of their own in those circumstances. I would have though that the Deputy would welcome that too.

I despair of the Taoiseach.

We have despaired of each other mutually for some time past.