Nothing he had said about the outcome of the Nice Treaty referendum was in contradiction of Government policy, the Minister for Finance, Mr McCreevy, told the Dail.

He also said there was nothing unusual in having two referendums on the same question. It had happened on the divorce issue.

He was defending his remarks at a press conference last week in Gothenburg after the EU Finance Ministers' meeting, when he described the Irish rejection of the Nice treaty as a healthy development.

"I did not say it was a healthy political development that the people voted `no' to the specific issue of ratifying the Nice Treaty," the Minister said in the Dail. He believed the treaty should have been adopted. "However, we did not succeed in getting our message across."

Nobody could be an "a la carte democrat" in Ireland, he said. "One either accepts the decision of the people or one does not."

Labour's finance spokesman, Mr Derek McDowell said the Minister was being "disingenuous" to say he "celebrates the decision of the people without expecting them to infer that he also shares that opinion".

He accused Mr McCreevy of "petty populism" by deliberately creating confusion both among his colleagues in Europe and at home.

The Minister said he did not bow to populism and said Mr McDowell, other deputies and commentators believed "it is sheep we send to Leinster House to mouth platitudes and to accept the popular flow. We all went along with the popular flow to June 7th and the people then decided to reject our advice.

"The sign of a healthy democracy was when people decided to exercise their vote," Mr McCreevy said. "The most alarming aspect of the Nice referendum was the low percentage of the turnout.

"It has caused us some difficulties and will do so in the future," he said. But the vote was a "wake-up call" for European governments that "what they are possibly pursuing in a number of areas is not in line with the wishes of their people".

Fine Gael's finance spokesman, Mr Jim Mitchell asked the Minister if he would consider it "remarkably healthy" if the electorate turned down the treaty a second time, and if he believed the Government should seek some form of protocol to the treaty before it was put again.

Mr McCreevy compared the results to those of the divorce referendum and said: "It was roundly defeated on the first occasion. Following changes, some of which were for the better, and laws were brought into effect, the question was put again to the people after a number of years. It was still on the same side and it was passed by a small percentage."

Mr McDowell said Mr McCreevy "cannot blithely walk away from the remarks as if they were casual, on the spot comments". He was ` `sending a missile, whether it was aimed at the Taoiseach or the EU Commission or both".

The Minister said that when he was asked questions he endeavoured to outline what he believed to be the situation as he saw it "and that is what I did on this occasion, as I have done for the past 20 odd years".

It was good to know, the Minister said that "in regard to the long-term interest of the country that the people, despite everybody leaning in one direction, can take an opposing view".

Mr Mitchell asked the Minister to confirm the Taoiseach told him his remarks were adding to disarray in the Government on Europe.

"I do not accept that anything I said in Gothenburg was in contravention of Government policy," Mr McCreevy replied. "The Taoiseach said nothing to me over the past week or fortnight that he has not said on many previous occasions. Any references in the media to anything else are totally incorrect."