Following what Deputy McDonald said, I applaud the Tánaiste's passion for equality and non-discrimination, which is obviously very real. However it is a bit hard to take when tomorrow the Government will vote through a piece of legislation that discriminates on no grounds other than age. Perhaps that is something to reflect upon.

I wish to ask the Tánaiste about the European Stability Mechanism. EU leaders are meeting today and tomorrow in Brussels. It is clear that one of the issues to be discussed is the retrospective recapitalisation of banks using the European Stability Mechanism. This is critical for Ireland. As everyone in this House knows, we have poured about €64 billion into the failed banking system in Ireland. The latest information from the budgetary documents suggests that next year we will pay about €2.7 billion in interest on the money we all poured into the banks. Let us put that in perspective. The entire gain to the Exchequer of all the measures from the Social Welfare and Pensions Bill - including cuts to those under 26 - will be about €100 million. Let us think about this for a second. The Social Welfare and Pensions Bill will return to the Exchequer about 1/27th of the money that we will pay in interest - not on the national debt, but just the bit of the national debt that is there because of the banking crisis. The youth who will be discriminated against in tomorrow's legislation will pay that €2.7 billion in their taxes for the rest of their lives, unless Ireland can get a substantial deal on recapitalisation of the Irish banks.

I welcome the fact that the Taoiseach has written to his EU counterparts to keep this imperative at centre stage. Labour and Fine Gael made a lot of noise before the election about senior bondholders sharing the burden.

A question please. We are over time.

However, when they came into office and Angela Merkel said "No", the Government acquiesced and since then tens of billions of euro have been paid out. In fact, we do not even know how much burden sharing was asked for.

Would the Deputy put his question please? He is over time.

My question is in two parts. First, can the Tánaiste tell the House how much recapitalisation has been asked for? How many billions or tens of billions have been asked for? If Angela Merkel continues to say "No" - and she is clearly, publicly saying that right now - is there a plan B?

On a point of order, the clock was ticking when I was speaking but it is off now.

Will you stay quiet please?

Deputy Lawlor should mind his own business for a moment.

The clock is ticking in Deputy Lawlor's constituency.

Watch your own constituency, Timmy.

Will Deputy Donnelly please put his question?

I am trying to, a Cheann Comhairle. There are two parts to the question. First, to what extent is the Government asking for recapitalisation?

Deputies should stay quiet please.

Second, if Angela Merkel and other EU leaders say "No", does the Government have a plan B, or is the intention to continue making the payments?

There are no clocks in operation for Leaders' Question. That is the answer to Deputy Lawlor's question. He should not interrupt somebody in the middle of their question.

As the Deputy is aware, when this Government took office at the beginning of 2011 we inherited an unholy mess, including the bank guarantee and huge problems in the banks. We have had to work to get out of that situation. Over that period, we have managed our affairs in such a way that we will exit the bailout at the end of this year. In addition, we succeeded in negotiating the terms of the deal that was made by the previous government. In the first instance, it was to secure a reduction in the interest rate. I remember people in this House saying that we would not get a 1% reduction and we got over 2%.

What did he ask for? He asked for 1% and got 2%.

Second, we succeeded in negotiating the end of the promissory note payment and the liquidation of Anglo Irish Bank, or the IBRC as it had then become.

Third, we succeeded in persuading our European partners to make a significant policy decision in June 2012 on the separation of bank and sovereign debt. Ireland's situation was specifically referenced in that decision because Ireland had done its recapitalisation before the new European mechanisms were put in place, including the ideas around banking union and the ESM.

Following that, we pressed ahead with implementing the banking union and quite an amount of work was done on that in the course of our EU Presidency. The issue will be discussed at the European Council again tomorrow. In order to make Ireland's position absolutely clear, the Taoiseach has written to President Van Rompuy and the other 27 EU Heads of State and Government. He has made it clear that we want delivery on the June 2012 agreement.

All the previous negotiations, which we successfully concluded to the benefit of the Irish taxpayer, were conducted on the basis that we would not state our negotiating position publicly. It would be unwise and we will not do so in this situation either, other than to say that we are determined to get the best outcome for the Irish taxpayer. We have some form on this because on all the previous occasions when we had major negotiations to conduct, we succeeded in getting a satisfactory outcome for the Irish taxpayer. It was an outcome which went beyond the most pessimistic expectations that were often expressed in this House.

I thank the Tánaiste for his reply. To set the record straight, the interest rate was achieved by Portugal and then applied to Ireland. When the Government sought an interest rate reduction it did not get one.

The Tánaiste made an extraordinary comment which was that the Government had ended the promissory note payment. Unless I am mistaken, we are going to pay €210 million next year on interest on the promissory note and we still owe €28 billion in promissory note bonds. Just so that everybody understands, the promissory note payment has not changed. It has moved from a promissory note to a bond. We still owe the money and will still pay it all. The Tánaiste is correct in saying that the Government achieved a great success in June 2012 with that statement. I applaud him for it. My question goes to the heart of that statement. Being nice and paying everybody else's bills is not a strategy. That is what has happened on the promissory notes.

A question please.

If the Tánaiste wants to use public money to pay my mortgage, I will tell everyone in Europe that he is great as well. The question is important.

Would the Deputy his question please? We are not having statements, this is Leaders' Questions.

How much recapitalisation has the Government asked for? I am not asking what is plan B.

I am asking if the Government has a plan B, other than paying if Angela Merkel says "No".

Deputy Donnelly has been wrong successively in his predictions as to what would happen. The Deputy did not think we would exit the bailout.

Really? When did I say that?

He is now saying that does not matter.

When did he say that?

He did not say that.

Deputies, please.

The Deputy did not think we would get the reduction in the interest rate.

When did I say that?

He did not think we would get a conclusion to the promissory note issue. The Deputy now appears to be wishing that we will fail in relation to the issue of the recapitalisation of the banks. It is time----

The Tánaiste is the only one who cares about it. What sanctimonious waffle.

When it comes to sanctimonious, Deputy Donnelly has no equal in this House.

With the exception of the Tánaiste.

Deputy Donnelly, please allow the Tánaiste to reply to your question.

I will.

Deputy Donnelly asked if the Government has a plan B. We have a plan B, plan C and plan D.

They are all the same: empty.

We are well prepared, as we were on the previous occasions when we were successful, to conclude these negotiations. We will do so. Very often these are matters of timing. We will do so when we are in the best position to secure the best option for the Irish taxpayer. This is what the taxpayer expects us to do. We have set out our position to the European Council meeting. This was set out in a letter from the Taoiseach. The issue of recapitalisation does not arise until the banking union and ESM structures have been put in place, which will be some time next year. Clearly, it would not be wise for us to wait until next year to set out our position and to ensure it is clearly understood. We will continue to do so until we get a satisfactory outcome, as we have done on each of the previous occasions.