The Tánaiste's reply to Deputy Kenny is very loyal and is very good for Fianna Fáil morale. We all know the Tánaiste can lead Fianna Fáil. The question is whether he can lead the country. This country now needs new leadership. The position the Taoiseach is in vis-à-vis the tribunal is one that has moved from benefit of the doubt to incredulity to embarrassment and it is moving on to ridicule. This cannot go on. The country needs to move on from this.

It is all very well to say that the tribunal should be allowed to finish its work and hear out all of the evidence, but how many stories do we have to hear? The Taoiseach did not have a bank account when he was Minister for Finance even though he was an accountant. The Taoiseach was so poor even on a ministerial salary that there had to be whip-arounds in a pub and in Manchester for him. At the same time we now know that there were accounts, some of which were controlled by some of the dig-out men, from which a loan for a house could be granted. The tribunal said the lodgements made to the Taoiseach's account was in dollars but he said he has a banker who can prove it was not dollars but when the tribunal came looking for the evidence, the Taoiseach went to court to stop them getting the calculations on which he based his claim.

The Taoiseach came before the House and stated he is tax compliant. He told the people in a television interview that he had paid all his taxes but he cannot get a tax clearance certificate. We can all stretch our credulity only so far. We could say that maybe some of these stories are true but not all of them. The Taoiseach's position regarding public credibility and political authority is untenable. Clearly he will not go voluntarily but intends to brazen it out. As we saw in the motion of no confidence, the Opposition does not have the numbers to force him to resign. The Green Party will not exercise whatever political position it has to cause that to happen. It falls to the Tánaiste and I am not naive enough to expect the Tánaiste to tell us he will go to the Taoiseach, bring him the bad news and advise him about what he must do. However I expect him to do so and I expect to be able to interpret the answer he gives here as some signal that he will do it.

This cannot go on forever. Politics in this country and the business of government must be enabled to return to the issues of the people. As long as the Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, is before the tribunal giving these kinds of unbelievable explanations, we are in "the dog ate my homework" territory. We need some firm leadership and the only person who can provide that is the Tánaiste.

I disagree with Deputy Gilmore's suggestion that the Taoiseach, in giving his evidence, has compromised his position to lead this country. The issues under consideration by the tribunal relate to a two-year period after his separation from his wife and the settling of his family affairs. As Deputy Gilmore suggested, he did not have a bank account at that time. There was the question of the €22,500, the €16,500 and the €8,000, and he has given explanations about those, which have been corroborated by people who have gone into the tribunal to confirm the nature of those amounts. If the question is that this was obtained, as Mr. Tom Gilmartin suggested, from Mr. Owen O'Callaghan, the Taoiseach is adamant that he did not receive one cent, penny or euro from Mr. O'Callaghan.

He must have been the exception. He seems to be the only person in the country who did not.

We will not discuss fees. That is the Taoiseach's position. While this is a painstaking and drawn-out process, the Taoiseach is adamant that this is the position. No material has been provided to the contrary. Deputy Gilmore has consistently been of the view that the tribunal should get on with its business and we should get on with ours. He reiterated that here today and I agree with him. However, his contention is that we are not capable of getting on with our business on the basis of the present situation whereby the tribunal is not completed. In his view the Taoiseach should leave office, but we do not agree with that.

The Government is doing its work. It had its Cabinet meeting, made its decisions and is getting on with its business. The problem is that a policy-bankrupt Opposition wants to discuss this issue every day as if it is the only matter going on in this country. The Government is functioning in making its decisions and will continue to do so under the Taoiseach's leadership. We will continue to deal with the serious issues the people expect us to deal with regarding the economy, social conditions, the international financial situation and the responsibilities of the line Ministers' Departments. We have a good budgetary situation despite the challenges we face, which we discussed here for an hour previously. That is the real political situation.

The issue manufactured by Deputy Kenny is that he will tell us what the outcome of the evidence is and we will listen to him and his cohorts for the interpretation or meaning of events.

Here is the build-up.

During the two years, about which he obsesses, Deputy Kenny's party at headquarters level, not constituency level, was involved in systemic tax evasion, paying under-the-counter payments to its employees, and had to settle six years later, in 2001, with the Revenue Commissioners.

The Tánaiste is pathetic.

At least that is settled.

Former Deputy Pádraig Flynn, former Taoiseach Mr. Charles Haughey — nothing has changed.

People in glass houses should not throw stones.

I have heard nothing about standards on that matter. The political arena is not the place to judge anybody's guilt or innocence because those words are not the currency of politics.

The Tánaiste would love to have it that way.

That is why we established the tribunals. The problem with the tribunal is that it has gone on for so long. That is because we do not have sub judice rules and because of the inadequacy of the legislative framework under which they operate, the Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) Act 1921, which people in this House have consistently debated and highlighted in the past ten years.

The Taoiseach, as has been suggested, is not entitled to go to the courts to maintain and protect his good name in respect of procedures or issues of law, as he sees it, that arise. Deputy Gilmore was incomplete in his suggestion that the Taoiseach would not be prepared to provide documentation which is part of the privileged relationship he and his clients and representatives have with their advisers. He is entitled to seek a judicial review on that matter as he does not have the information the tribunal people have on their bogus dollar claim and how they came up with their theory. The problem is that a series of conjectures can be put before us and turned into fact by Deputy Kenny on the basis that he sees some political capital emerge for him, whereas it is simply consistent with the philosophy that has informed his party since its foundation.

The Tánaiste can thank the Fianna Fáil leaders.

Did the Tánaiste get a mortgage from the Taoiseach?

The Taoiseach should have told us this before the election. He broke his word.

I agree that the holding of political office has nothing to do with guilt or innocence. The tribunal, in its own good time, will reach its conclusions on whether the Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, received a corrupt payment. The Revenue Commissioners, in its own good time, will reach its conclusions on his tax compliance. Holding political office is not about guilt or innocence but about confidence.

Yes.

Confidence in the Taoiseach cannot continue when he has given the most incredible of explanations to the tribunal. Deputy Kenny, my predecessor and I did not invent this. When these issues arose in the public domain we took the view, for which we were criticised, that the Taoiseach would give his evidence to the tribunal. He said he wanted to go to Dublin Castle and explain all this. He said he had an explanation for it and had supplied all the documents.

When he got to Dublin Castle we discovered a couple of facts. We discovered he was not quite as fulsome in co-operating with the tribunal as he had claimed. It had been writing to him for a year and a half to extract information from him. Over a series of appearances in Dublin Castle he has given the most cock-eyed of explanations for various matters. As I said, you can buy one of these stories but, given the contradictions emerging between one and another, buying them all is unbelievable. It will continue and that is not good for the country. It is bad for politics, the way we do our business and the attention which requires to be given to the issues of the people.

Yesterday on television the Tánaiste said it was not his practice to talk to the Taoiseach about his evidence at the tribunal before he gave it, and I accept that, I would not expect him to have that kind of conversation with him. However, earlier this year the Taoiseach designated Deputy Cowen as his successor. Has Deputy Cowen had any conversation with the Taoiseach about when that succession will take place? Whatever about my believing that the Tánaiste did not talk to the Taoiseach about his evidence at the tribunal, I cannot believe he has not had that conversation with him. I will not have the opportunity to ask a second supplementary question to this so in case the Tánaiste tells us this is none of our business, that the leadership of Fianna Fáil is its business and it will decide in its own time, I remind Deputy Cowen that this House elects the Taoiseach. We now have a set of circumstances where the current occupant of that office has said he will resign at some stage and will pass on the mantle to the Tánaiste. When is that going to happen? While the Taoiseach is brazening out his political difficulties with the tribunal, this country is getting increasingly scandalised by it all and it must end.

Again I do not agree with the Deputy's assertions. He said that the Taoiseach does not enjoy the confidence of this House, but in fact he does.

I did not say that. I said that he does not enjoy the confidence of the public.

He enjoys the confidence of the public as well.

The confidence in people who hold elected office in this republic is determined in this House. This is the democratic assembly, as people next to the Deputy often remind me. Deputy Gilmore is making an assertion and that is his view. He was defeated in making that view known in a recent electoral contest, and he was defeated in this House last October. I suspect he would be defeated again were he to try, as he suggests himself. The Taoiseach has the confidence of this assembly, so the Deputy's assertion that he does not is incorrect.

There are no designated successors in this or any other party. The Taoiseach candidly revealed his personal preference, but he said that it is a matter for everyone in this party to decide the next leader. I will not make any such presumption on the identity of the next leader. While he holds the leadership of this party and enjoys the confidence of the House and this party, he will lead this party.

Hear, hear.