From the very start, the Taoiseach's position in respect of bank debt has been astonishing. The Taoiseach never sought a write-down despite his pre-election commitments. The Government has paid unguaranteed, unsecured bondholders in full despite stating that not one red cent would be passing hands. Next week another €1 billion will go to unguaranteed bondholders in Allied Irish Banks. The Taoiseach's approach has been all smoke and mirrors, like the so-called promissory note deal of last March. Now, at the end of 18 months of bluff, bluster and hyperbole, it seems we are back at square one.

When the agreement was reached at the European Council summit meeting in June, the Taoiseach described it as a seismic shift. His colleague, the Tánaiste, said it was a game changer. The Taoiseach told the Dáil and the people that this deal, through the mechanism of the ESM, would lift the burden of bank debt from the Irish taxpayer. He also told us that the deal was retrospective. At that time, Sinn Féin said that was not what the Council communiqué stated. In fact, despite what the Taoiseach has said this morning, were he to go back and read the communiqué he would see it is full of equivocation and conditionality. The Taoiseach oversold the position last June. Then we had last night's statement from the finance Ministers. These are not just any finance Ministers; they are the finance Ministers of the AAA-rated countries Germany, Holland and Finland.

A question, please.

What they had to say was nothing short of a disaster for Ireland and I imagine that privately, the Taoiseach was probably angry with them. If he was not, he should be. The Taoiseach tells us that the pace of initiative and negotiation from the Department of Finance has been hectic since June. Will the Taoiseach confirm that the same Department of Finance welcomed the statement of these three finance Ministers last night? Why did it do that? What is the Government's strategy from now on to deliver the deal about which the Taoiseach has talked a good deal but which has failed to materialise?

I do not accept the premise of Deputy McDonald's question. In fact, the Sinn Féin Party does not want a deal, because it thrives on misery and failure. That is what Sinn Féin wants.

The Taoiseach should get back to reality and back to this planet.

That is what it has always espoused. The vast majority of cases put forward by Sinn Féin do not stand up to any scrutiny. I do not accept the premise of Deputy McDonald's question.

We are going to continue the process we have been engaged in since the decision of 29 June - that is, to bring about implementation of the decision of the Heads of Government. Let me reaffirm to Deputy McDonald, as I did to Deputy Martin, that discussion and negotiation by officials from the Department of Finance and directly between the Minister for Finance and his counterparts, face to face, are ongoing. We have made substantial progress with regard to the promissory note, which is a very technical and complex issue to resolve because the deal done requires the country to pay more than €3 billion per year for ten years.

The strategy now is to continue to work to implement the decision of the European Council. If Deputy McDonald cannot see that this is clear, I will repeat the words of the summit statement: "We affirm that it is imperative to break the vicious circle between banks and sovereigns." Let me assure Deputy McDonald that this was and is a seismic shift compared to what applied in Europe before. This was never done before. It was contemplated but never enacted.

It was not only talked about on 29 June in Brussels; it was decided. It was decided, not by commentators or Ministers, but by the Heads of Government. I would remind Deputy McDonald that all Ministers for Finance are equal when they sit around that table.

On the issue of misery, the Taoiseach has cornered the market. He has his joint Ministers for misery, Deputies Noonan and Howlin, seated beside him.

Deputy McDonald would be in some misery if people were still calling on us for the referendum.

No doubt the extent of their misery making will sadly become apparent in December with their budget announcement.

It does not seem to have occurred to the Taoiseach that the processes he describes, that he has embarked on and that he lauds so fully are not working. The realpolitik of how this will play out is that, unfortunately, in the case of Ireland, because they failed to assert themselves, each of the Ministers is not equal. The fact of the matter, as the Taoiseach knows full well, is that when there is a joint statement from those three Finance Ministers it is a significant development.

Can I have Deputy McDonald's question?

This statement that the Taoiseach referred to was equivocal as regards Ireland. It only committed to re-examine our situation and, as my party pointed out to the Taoiseach at the time, very dangerously, it stated, "with a view ... [to] improving the sustainability...". There was no recognition of the unsustainability of the position that we are in.

Deputy McDonald is over time. Does she have a question?

In addition, it cites our "well-performing adjustment programme", that is, all the cuts that people are suffering. The Taoiseach has failed to make the case at a European level. That is the truth.

I would be interested in Deputy McDonald's question.

Deputy McDonald did not even put the case.

The Taoiseach should answer the question that I put to him. How is it, in the name of all sanity, that the Department of Finance headed by Deputy Noonan last night welcomed the statement from these three Ministers that told us, if not to drop dead, certainly to get lost?

Deputy McDonald missed the point of how serious this is in respect of the decision about the eurozone and Ireland. That decision was made by the Heads of Government and was clear and unequivocal, both in regard to the eurozone-----

Historically.

-----and the breaking of the link between sovereign debt and bank debt, and specifically in regard to Ireland. She did not quote the decision clearly.

I did.

It states, "with the view of further improving the sustainability of the well-performing adjustment programme".

I quoted that exactly.

If Deputy McDonald does not understand what "improving the sustainability" means-----

It states, "with a view".

-----it means making it easier for Ireland to meet its debt requirements which were left behind from the wreckage of what happened previously.

And the Taoiseach picked up on.

The last line of that section of the decision was, "Similar cases will be treated equally." That is fairly clear.

It is not a question of the road that Sinn Féin wants to take, which is to have its brand of failure all over the place. This is a case of serious negotiation-----

That is failing.

-----at an intensive level about the promissory note------

Serious failure, that should be.

Deputy McDonald cannot say that. It is conjecture.

Sorry.

-----about the debt sustainability that we have to deal with and about the bigger question of the eurozone and the protection of the euro because Europe itself cannot thrive until this is dealt with. The decision of the Heads of Government was clear in that fundamental to that was to break the link between sovereign and bank debt.

The Commission, in accordance with this decision, published its proposals for banking union on a phased basis, for bank supervision, etc. Of course, there will be difference of opinion about that paper. The paper reflects clearly the decision of the European Council.

I would remind Deputy McDonald that in much of the comment that I have heard about this in the past number of hours the fundamental issue of the agreement has been missed. This was a decision of the European Council, of the Heads of Government. That decision stands. That decision will be implemented.