I would like to ask the Taoiseach two questions. The first is about Myamar-Burma. During its Presidency of the European Union Ireland recognised the military regime in Burma, even though Aung San Suu Kyi, leader of the National League for Democracy, is still under house arrest. The Taoiseach will be aware that the NLD won overwhelming support from the people of Burma in 1991, but that election was never recognised by the military regime. In September the European Council reaffirmed its support for the NLD and for the release of its leader. It urged that the NLD should be allowed to participate in a national convention that should be really democratic. No progress has been made on these issues.

Given the appalling level of human rights abuses in Myamar-Burma and the lack of respect by the military regime for any sort of democracy, does the Taoiseach still stand over the decision taken by his Government? I note a former special adviser to the Taoiseach, Mr. Peter McDonagh, wrote a strong article in The Irish Times of 5 October to the effect that the European Union must stand against what he termed a very nasty regime. Is the Taoiseach satisfied that his Government was able to stand against a very nasty regime, or why did he do what he did?

In respect of the National Forum on Europe, the period in the run-in to the referendum to be held on the European constitution will be quite contentious. I do not want to see a situation as applied prior to the first Nice treaty debate where the public were not given sufficient information by Government and the agencies of Government to be fully informed as to the decision they would have to make. Can we get clarification, before we come to this year's budget, that sufficient moneys will be made available to the National Forum on Europe to allow it hold meetings throughout the country and involve itself in local radio and public debates — in participative democracy, so to speak — so that in the run-in to the referendum on the European constitution the public will be fully informed about the issues and will be able to make their decision in the light of that information? Will the Taoiseach ensure that forum is given sufficient resources and the facilities to do the job we all hope it can do and lend to the support given by politicians who support the constitutional treaty?

The simple answer is "yes". I have already stated that resources will be provided to allow the forum to do a good job in bringing people together so that issues can be debated. It needs the resources to do that. We did that in 2002. Extensive resources were put in as per the figures I have given. The dissemination of information is crucially important to allow people understand what is in the constitution because, overwhelmingly, these issues are positive. Already, the ETUC and the TUC have come out strongly in favour of the constitution, as have many other groups in Europe as well as many community groups who help social solidarity. These are all helpful but as I said in reply to Deputy Rabbitte, it is important that we get out as much information as possible. We will start that next week with the simple document, and the more detailed, in as user friendly a way as possible. They will be followed later with the document that will go to all households. We will do everything we can in that regard.

I agree with Deputy Kenny that we cannot take things for granted. We have been debating the constitution here. I gave up the Government nominee's position so that we would have more Opposition Members in the convention. That has helped. Deputy John Bruton also played a key part in the process, which attracted much interest here in the convention aspect. Later I had the honour during the Irish Presidency to conclude these matters. All these things help but we now have to explain them to the public. The answer to the Deputy's question is "yes".

On Myamar, as the Deputy is aware, to try to bring things together we had agreed that we would make progress based on certain conditions. It was always envisaged that the progress would be tentative, not only on the release of Aung San Suu Kyi but that we would see her party engaged in the forum taking place in their country and that they would make progress.

To be frank with Deputy Kenny, everything that could go wrong with Myamar from the point of view of making progress has gone wrong. They have made no progress. They have broken all their promises. Yesterday, they changed their Prime Minister and, I am subject to correction, but from what I picked up in Vietnam, that will only make things worse. I hope I am not unfair to the new Prime Minister but that was my information. There are 52 million people in Burma. Not a semblance of progress has been made. Because Yan Peter Balkenende, the President of the current EU Presidency, was not in attendance due to illness, I dealt with that issue in Vietnam. We strongly condemned Burma. They had a representative at the meeting. Needless to say they did not like what I was saying on behalf of the European Union. I was speaking on behalf of the European Union for that session.

My sense is that they are not listening. The military is in control. They have not completed any of the measures set out in the criteria in Tullamore, and it continues to be a major difficulty. Listening to the responses of their representative it appears they do not accept any of the criticisms of the rest of the democratic world. There is some concern about Aung San Suu Kyi because she has not had as much contact as she would normally have with international authorities, although I understand from the British Government that she is safe. I am aware there is concern, however.

On Deputy Kenny's last point, we have not gone ahead with our diplomatic process on the basis that they did not honour their arrangement, so that is on hold.