I am sure everyone in this House will join the tributes which were paid in the Northern Assembly to the civilian security personnel who managed to avoid an outrage in the Stormont premises. Does the Taoiseach agree that the drama outside Stormont diverted attention from the lack of progress that was made in the Chamber itself? The approach of the two Governments has been characterised by consistent slippage, unfortunately. I say that as someone who has consistently supported the Taoiseach and the British Prime Minister in terms of the St. Andrews Agreement.

We were told prior to the St. Andrews Agreement that if all parties did not unequivocally sign up to the Governments' requirements, plan B would immediately be put into effect for enhanced co-operation between the two Governments. They then went ahead and set up new deadlines during the St. Andrews process. Most of the deadlines have since been missed. The preparation for government committee was to meet on October 18, but did not do so. All parties were to consult, come back and give an unequivocal response to the agreement by 10 November. The responses of the DUP and Sinn Féin were half-hearted at best.

We were also assured that Sinn Féin was ready to sign up to policing and that an announcement would be made about holding an Ard-Fheis, but no such announcement has yet been made. On 18 October, the Taoiseach told the House: "We are also clear that in the event of failure to reach agreement on 24 November, we will proceed on the basis of the new British-Irish partnership arrangements to implement the agreement." That did not happen and, worse, the Secretary of State, Mr. Peter Hain announced — presumably with the Taoiseach's agreement — that he was prepared to water down the conditions further so that the parties were only required to indicate, as distinct from nominate, a First Minister and a Deputy First Minister.

Whatever about statements that have been made elsewhere, is it not the case that the only place we can get the necessary commitments is in the Chamber of the Assembly itself? Is the Taoiseach saying that he accepts that interviews given by Dr. Paisley outside the Chamber meet the requirements now posed by the two Governments? Does he accept the situation in which the Secretary of State apparently directed the speaker to accept whatever the party leaders were going to say? Dr. Paisley, normally a blunt speaker, neither indicated nor nominated, nor was nominated, for the position of First Minister. However, by what appeared to be a prior arrangement, and rescued in a ghoulish way by Mr. Michael Stone, the speaker of the Chamber said that she accepted it as an indication, as required by the Secretary of State.

As the leader of a party that has consistently supported the commendable efforts of the Taoiseach, I would like to hear his views on where we stand now. There has been a record of consistent slippage since before the St. Andrews process started.

I appreciate the support of the Deputy and all the leaders in the House for the Good Friday Agreement. I regret the actions of Michael Stone on Friday. There could have been a real disaster and I commend those involved.

What we agreed at St. Andrews was a significant breakthrough from the old view of the parties that they would not move towards setting up an executive. In April, Prime Minister Blair and I said that we would set 24 November as the date when we wanted to get the full Executive working in Northern Ireland. The parties were to start working with each other from that date. They eventually started working with each other in the summer and while we did not agree on everything in those summer talks, substantial progress was made.

As I reported to the House on the resumption of the Dáil, that progress led us to a position where we thought we could move the parties towards setting up the Executive again. I also made it clear at that stage that this would not happen by 24 November. I also made it clear that we would move to plan B if we had to do so, but that it was not the desired solution.

Last Friday, I said that I was not satisfied with what happened in the Assembly. It was not what Dr. Paisley said, but what he did not say. He has since clarified that. Deputy Rabbitte asked me if I was satisfied that Dr. Paisley has made it clear that he will be the party's nominee when the time comes next March and the answer is "Yes" provided the issue of policing is addressed. I accept that he has addressed that issue and he did so again yesterday in an interview on RTE. His party colleagues also made it clear to the Prime Minister, the Secretary of State and others. That issue is clear.

Sinn Féin must deal with policing and there are still some outstanding issues, especially those related to MI5. Those can hopefully be cleared and we are still working to resolve them. The programme for government committee, which should have started six weeks ago, started last week with a useful meeting and there was another useful meeting yesterday. It is now up and running. As Deputy Rabbitte knows well, dealing with Northern Ireland is always pull and tuck. People never work to the deadlines we want, but progress is always made along the way. We are now in a position where the DUP, Sinn Féin, the UUP and the SDLP will set up a working Executive based on the legislation that was passed last week. If they do not move on as agreed, particularly with issues related to devolution of policing, there is a power in the legislation to strike it down. I hope that will not be necessary.

I interpret last Friday's meeting in positive terms. Dr. Paisley believed that he had clarified the situation and I will not argue whether his silence clarified it. He clarified it shortly afterwards and I am satisfied and so are others that he has done so. It would have been better if he had clarified it in the Assembly. I welcome the fact that the nomination process has been taken. It is deemed to have been taken under the legislation and the Assembly, the British Government and the parties all accept that.

There are a few big hurdles ahead, especially involving policing. If policing is not dealt with before the Assembly and its transitionary form collapses, there would not be much point in having an election. It has to happen before that date in late January. The sooner it happens, the better. Bringing it to a late date will only create more tension and more dissent and difficulties within many parties.

In the meantime, the programme for government committee must deal with a substantive agenda. It should have been dealing with it since October, but hopefully it can deal with it now.

I welcome the Taoiseach's positive disposition, but it must be asked why parties have not adhered to successive deadlines. The Taoiseach stated in the House:

The Assembly is expected to meet to nominate the First and Deputy First Minister on 24 November. This has always been a key date for the Governments and it remains so. All going well, we will have a first Minister and Deputy First Minister for the first time in four years.

There is a view that there was more focus on the date than on content and that the threshold was constantly lowered along the way. The more the threshold was lowered, the less unequivocal were the statements from two of the parties involved. Even the requirement in the legislation calling for the nomination of First and Deputy First Minister was changed by the Secretary of State in the House of Commons to merely their indication. Even that was not subscribed to. Why should the parties keep deadlines? The quotation I gave was the same briefing I got in private and in public to the effect this was the date and there was no going beyond it. They were required to comply or else plan B would be put into effect. None of this was done. We still do not have an announcement on Sinn Féin's preparedness to sign up to policing. Whereas the Taoiseach has just said he accepts in this particular instance that media interviews are a substitute for an unequivocal commitment in the Chamber of the Assembly, which is somewhat unusual — I accept he is dealing with unusual circumstances — he enters the caveat that this was of course provided policing was subscribed to. We still do not have that, and neither has an announcement been tabled for an Ard-Fheis. It is immensely difficult to know where exactly we stand. As the leader of the SDLP said, it is about time Sinn Féin and the DUP synchronised their U-turns. Until that happens we cannot be sure where the St. Andrews process is going.

I would love matters to be perfect, and Deputy Rabbitte's analysis is fair enough in that it is not all perfect. There are a number of major difficulties. The biggest one is that the DUP has taken the view it will not have face to face talks with Sinn Féin in the first place. If such talks did take place, it could resolve a lot very quickly, but it will not happen in the circumstances we desire. The next initiative is to move the Programme for Government Committee, which is useful. It is not perfect, and that is not normally what happens. Members on all sides of the House will appreciate the situation. Imagine a post-election scenario where it was decided there was going to be a coalition of whatever make-up and the two parties at the centre of it decided not to talk to each other. It would be unbelievable, but that is how matters stand.

Only one party will not talk.

I accept that, but that is the position. At least we have moved to the Programme for Government Committee. Dr. Paisley's intention is clear. Perhaps it was not quite clear on the day. I said it was not and in fairness to the good man, he clarified it three hours later. Policing has to be dealt with. Let us be frank: if policing is not resolved, Dr. Paisley and his party will be gone, as probably will many more, and then the resolution in the Act will have to be triggered.

On the other side, this period could be used to enable the Programme for Government Committee to get down to work and it seems determined to do that. Dr. Paisley will be the First Minister. The Deputy First Minister is Mr. Martin McGuinness and they are prepared to work with the agenda of the Programme for Government Committee. They will nominate their other Ministers on 14 March and take up duty before that. Within the arrangements the British Government has designed, much of the work of the parties that will form the Executive, will be recognised as being in transition, with people getting on with their work in the meantime, albeit not holding a full brief, as I would have wished. It is not perfect, but the 24 November deadline successfully triggered the St. Andrews Agreement, worked that into legislation and now, belatedly, the Programme for Government Committee is underway. There are many other hurdles along the way we will just have to overcome. However, the position is clearer than it was all year when we could not get them to meet in any format and did not know whether we would be able to deal with the two issues of policing and power sharing.

It is my estimation that the DUP has answered the question, even if outside rather than inside the Chamber. It is prepared to deal with power sharing. Sinn Féin then has to answer the question, if there can be a resolution of the MI5 issue, which we are working to achieve as best we can, I really believe the sooner that happens the better.