The British government is insisting it has no interest in a deal with republicans which might bypass or exclude the Ulster Unionist leader, Mr David Trimble, writes Frank Millar, London Editor
The Secretary of State, Mr Paul Murphy, is expected to make this clear during a speech in Dublin later today which is likely to emphasise the principle of consent as central to any political agreement on the future of Northern Ireland.
Amid signs of fraying political nerves on all sides, the DUP last night challenged Mr Trimble to confirm he would not be party to any change in the Stormont Assembly's cross-community voting rules which would permit a minority unionist grouping to sustain the Executive.
At the same time, speculation about the scale and implications of any possible deal on IRA and British "acts of completion" was fuelled when the former deputy first minister and SDLP MP, Mr Seamus Mallon, suggested that "members of the republican movement" had recently met the Chief Constable of the PSNI, Mr Hugh Orde.
During Prime Minister's Questions, Mr Mallon asked Mr Tony Blair if he could confirm that such a meeting had taken place and "what understandings about military matters had been reached".
Mr Blair said he did not "specifically know of meetings between the PSNI and republicans".
Sinn Féin later said: "No member of Sinn Féin has been involved in any discussions with the PSNI in any of these matters."
However, Mr Mallon confirmed he had deliberately referred to "members of the republican movement", a definition he intended to embrace both Sinn Féin and the IRA.
And a statement issued by the Chief Constable stopped short of a denial, saying: "I have not had any formal contacts with the republican movement but, as I have always said, I am prepared to meet anyone who is willing to make a positive contribution to policing."
Amid British anxiety about a building atmosphere of claim and counterclaim about the negotiations designed to secure the future of the Belfast Agreement, Mr Murphy is expected to use his Dublin speech to refocus the debate on the need for confidence-building measures on all sides.
Tensions have increased following reports that the Sinn Féin leadership wants Mr Blair "to move forward with or without Mr Trimble" and is itself preparing to deal with a "changing" unionist leadership following the Assembly elections on May 1st.
In New York last week the Sinn Féin MP, Mr Martin McGuinness, signalled a willingness to work with the DUP, while Sinn Féin's national chairman, Mr Mitchel McLaughlin, went further, urging Mr Blair to warn unionists that if they continued to obstruct the Belfast Agreement they would be confronted with "an even more unpalatable . . . Plan B".
Disclaiming any interest in a British-republican deal which failed to win Mr Trimble's support, Whitehall sources say such a deal could not work, even if Mr Blair was willing to go down that path.
As one insider put it last night:
"It takes two sides to make an agreement, and it's impossible to see how we could implement an inclusive Belfast Agreement while excluding one community."
The original British response to Mr McLaughlin's comments in the Derry Journal was to describe them as probable "camouflage" ahead of expected IRA movement toward the complete cessation of its paramilitary activities.
However, Mr Murphy's expected emphasis on the need for mutual consent by both communities in Northern Ireland is a clear signal of British government concern about the possible impact on the present negotiations of any hint of an exclusive British-republican agenda.
During Northern Ireland Questions in the Commons yesterday Mr Murphy suggested that the present negotiation would only lead to the restoration of devolution if it secured the "real, total and permanent cessation of paramilitary activity" .
The Security Minister, Ms Jane Kennedy, also assured MPs that the British government and the International Commission would continue to press for "complete decommissioning" of illegally-held weapons