In the context of the part of the programme for Government which deals with Northern Ireland, I wish to raise with the Taoiseach the remarks made by the Attorney General of Northern Ireland this morning. I have grave concerns with regard to what the latter is suggesting and proposing. This goes to the core of many issues that have been raised in this House on quite a number of occasions, namely, the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, collusion between British state security forces and loyalist paramilitaries, the murder of Jean McConville, the lack of a resolution in respect of the those who were disappeared and whose bodies have never been found and the definition of when the Troubles begin and end for many families who are still seeking justice in respect of those who murdered their loved ones. It seems that a pardon has been almost unilaterally decided upon in respect of the latter. This is a very grave issue. It might suit many people if the views of the Attorney General of Northern Ireland were carried through upon, the past was neatly buried and prosecutions were placed to one side.

The House should debate this issue. The Taoiseach should set Government time aside in order that we might discuss the section in the programme for Government which deals with Northern Ireland and the implementation of the Good Friday Agreement and the St. Andrews Agreement. Such a debate could form the basis of an input into the Haass process. After all, Dr. Haass has engaged in consultation and dialogue with many parties. What is wrong with the Dáil making a contribution to the process in the form of a debate? Such a debate would be very helpful.

I respect the statutory authority of the Attorney General of Northern Ireland. The opinion he has given is personal in nature.

It affects us.

It is a personal opinion offered as a contribution to the Haass process. A range of other personal opinions may well be expressed in the coming weeks. As I informed Deputy Adams during Leaders' Questions, my preference would be to allow Dr. Haass to conclude his hearings and discussions and then make his recommendations before the House engages in whatever form of debate might be deemed appropriate.

I am willing to agree to this and the Whips can make the necessary arrangements. However, rather than everybody having his or her say while Dr. Haass is in Northern Ireland, having been invited there by the Executive to deal with three issues, namely, flags, parades and the sensitive issue of the past, we should not distract or interfere with his process of making recommendations. I am willing to have the House, either through the Joint Committee on the Good Friday Agreement or the Dáil, engage in a debate, including on Dr. Haass's report to the Executive, after he concludes it.

Why wait?

Dr. Haass has been invited specifically by the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to come here to deal with the issue of flags, parades and the past. He should be allowed to complete that process, as he expects to do in the next four to five weeks. The House can have a debate in January on issues outside the Haass recommendations that are of concern to Deputies, but we should include Dr. Haass's report in our deliberations.

The past includes everybody.

We are not having a debate on the issue on the Order of Business.

I do not want a debate now either. I am making the point that the past includes this House. We debated the Dublin and Monaghan bombings-----

The Deputy asked a question and was given an answer.

It is not fair or correct for the Taoiseach to take the line he is taking. The House is entitled to feed into the process.

That may be the case, but the matter cannot be debated on the Order of Business.

I am not debating it. I am seeking time for a debate in advance of Dr. Haass making his recommendations. Many people who have cases before the prosecution service are suspicious and worry that their cases will never be prosecuted.

I ask the Deputy to respect the Chair and, please, resume his seat. There are many other ways of raising this matter.

On the health service plan, which has been delayed-----

If I may, I will, first, deal briefly with the issue raised by Deputy Micheál Martin. Dr. Haass was invited here by the Executive to do a particular job and make recommendations. This House has primacy and, as has been pointed out, the Government is the co-guarantor, with the British Government, of the Good Friday Agreement. The contribution of Dr. Haass may well be very valuable. This matter is being raised this morning because of the personal views expressed by the Attorney General in Northern Ireland. My view is that we should allow Dr. Haass to do his work and make his recommendations, after which we can have a debate, North and South, about how to move forward.