Over the past several months, particularly over the past several weeks, we have been led to believe that a deal to restructure the promissory notes was all but done. We on this side of the House support the need for a restructuring of our bank debt. As the Taoiseach said in Paris before Christmas: "Ireland was the first and only country which had a European position imposed upon it, in the sense that there was not the opportunity if the Government wished to do it their way by burning bondholders." In essence, the Taoiseach said Ireland showed solidarity to prevent the risk of contagion at the time which now needs to be reciprocated.

In addition, many media commentators felt a deal was clearly on the cards over the last while. To be fair to all of those concerned, the leaks and the usually well-informed sources certainly led people to come to such a conclusion. However, if it was not for Reuters we would probably have the same view today. The Government did not indicate all along, and certainly not last week, that there was any setback or any significant challenge particularly in the context of the European Central Bank, ECB, meetings. It was Reuters that revealed on Friday evening that the ECB did not accept an Irish Government proposal, claiming it was contrary to EU treaty law. Will the Taoiseach comment on this? Will he specifically outline to the House the Government's proposal to the ECB on the promissory notes?

At this stage we need transparency. The Government has been negotiating for the past 18 months. There seems to be a lack of willingness to communicate the facts about the progress made, or otherwise, in the basic request the country has made to the ECB. How many ECB meetings are left where this issue will be considered? Will the Taoiseach indicate the impact any such deal will have on next year's budget? The Tánaiste escalated the rhetoric several days ago when he told Latin American leaders meeting their European counterparts that any failure to arrive at a deal would be catastrophic. Will the Taoiseach explain what the Tánaiste meant by "catastrophic"?

I have been very clear and consistent about this since the negotiations and discussions with the European Central Bank began. The Government and the Governor of the Central Bank, who attends the meetings as a member from Ireland, have made it perfectly clear that this is not an easy situation to unravel. Clearly, the untangling of the deal done, which will cost €3.1 billion per year until 2023 and lesser amounts beyond and which amounts to almost €48 billion under the current arrangement, is not simple. If this were a simple issue to untangle, it would have been done long ago; if it were not as complicated as it is, then it would have been dealt with long ago. I have said consistently that what the Government wants is the best outcome that can be got for the taxpayer.

During complex and technical negotiations on a range of issues many matters are discussed. I want, and I am confident that we will have, a conclusion and a deal on this before the next payment date, which is due at the end of March. Deputy Martin said there were no significant challenges but there are and they are very significant, technical and complex.

I did not say that.

Deputy Martin said it in his comment just now. I wrote it down. He referred to significant challenges. Clearly, there are significant challenges.

I am asking "What are they?"

In any event, I put it to Deputy Martin that the general focus of these discussions has been about the range of options with regard to the promissory notes, the sources of funding, the duration of the notes, the interest rates applicable and all of that area. I have been clear in saying that we want to restructure and re-engineer this situation effectively to move from a high interest rate overdraft to a long-term, low-interest mortgage. It is within these parameters that we want to get the best possible deal for our taxpayers. The discussions have not concluded and I expect that we will have a conclusion by the next payment date, which is at the end of March.

I have no function and neither does the Government in calling European Central Bank meetings. It is a matter for the chairman and chief executive when they wish to call them. The Governor of the Central Bank attends those meetings.

What would the impact be? Clearly, it would make the debt sustainability more easy to deal with from an Irish perspective. It would strengthen the international view of Ireland making progress towards an exit from our programme. It is in these areas where we wish to get the best deal for the taxpayer here.

I am no wiser about the questions I asked. It is time for a little more transparency in terms of what is being asked. People are interested. They have been hearing for some time that a deal is certainly on the cards and will be concluded but no one has any idea what kind of deal is being discussed. Ultimately, when a deal arrives, will it be the real deal the Taoiseach was looking for or will it be some watered down deal that emerges from the discussions with the European Central Bank? In essence, can the Taoiseach confirm that the European Central Bank is up for separating bank debt from sovereign debt? Is it committed to the game-changer decision, so described by the Tánaiste following the June summit last year? I would appreciate if the Taoiseach could elaborate.

Some one and a half years ago or perhaps less I put it to the House and I wrote to the Taoiseach suggesting that we join up. I suggested that we would be willing to support the Government and that all sides of the House, as the Oireachtas, could communicate a unified message to Europe in terms of the need for such restructuring. On that occasion the Taoiseach declined and suggested that perhaps the strands of opinion in the House were such that they would not command a uniformed response or position. I put it to the Taoiseach that I offered that in a constructive spirit in terms of the Oireachtas making a clear statement supporting the need for restructuring. I asked about the impact and the Taoiseach gave some indication in terms of the sustainability of our debt and programme. Does the Taoiseach envisage an impact of the deal in practical terms and in terms of the actual figures to be brought forward by the Minister for Finance in next year's budget? Some people have suggested that the deal on the table last week could have realised €1 billion in savings and that such would be the impact on the budgetary figures next year. Will the Taoiseach confirm that or will he give his ballpark figure for what a deal could mean in practical terms for the people and their household day-to-day activities in terms of budgeting, savings, cutbacks and so forth?

The discussions taking place at the ECB are about the source of the funding, the duration of the notes, the interest rates applicable, the implications for a wider bank debt deal and the implications and options arising from it in respect of the financial system. In respect of the deal done by the previous Administration on the promissory notes, the unified message which we have been sending clearly to Europe and in respect of which there has been powerful support from the Commission, the Council, the European Parliament and the IMF is that: first, it is unfair; second, it needs to be restructured and re-engineered; third, it would ease our debt burden in respect of the requirement to fork out €3.1 billion each March for ten years; fourth, it would strengthen market intent and reflect better on Ireland as a place that is open for business and a most suitable location for further investment; and fifth, it would help to ease our exit from the programme. We have been upfront about that and these five points are messages that anyone in the Oireachtas who would wish to support the measures could convey.

The detail of this is very complex and technical. Deputy Martin has referred on several occasions here following meetings of the European Council that it could be restructured quite easily. I assure Deputy Martin that if that were the case it would have been done long ago.

The Taoiseach keeps saying that but I never said it.

With regard to the decision of 29 June to break the link between sovereign debt and bank debt, following that on the single supervisory mechanism, the ECOFIN group started its discussions on this matter. When the matter of an extension of the mortgage situation for Portugal and Ireland in the same way as that applied to Greece was raised, the principle was accepted and it went to the working group for further consideration. If that is to happen, it would be separate from the recapitalisation discussions. I imagine it would be worth more than the figure mentioned by Deputy Martin but I would rather not put a figure on it. The important thing is the acceptance of the principle and the discussions that will follow. Clearly, if it is agreed and it can be followed through, it will be of substantial benefit to the country.

What did he mean by "catastrophic"?