asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce whether he is aware of the great hardship on a number of men belonging to the permanent way department, Sligo and Cavan lines, Great Northern Railways, who have been transferred from their homes, some a distance of 50 miles, to take the place of men of shorter service, and whether the Minister is aware that some of these transferred men were threatened and had to return home and thereby lose their jobs; and if he will make representations to the railway company to have inquiries made in these cases, with a view to having these men declared redundant and compensated for the loss of their positions, as some of these men have almost 20 years' service.

I presume the Deputy refers to certain employees of the Great Northern Railway Company of long service who were discharged in the course of retrenchment by the company, consequent on a change in the method of working on the permanent way. Complaints were received by my Department that contrary to the usual practice of railway companies these men had been discharged by this company whilst men of shorter service had been retained. Representations were made to the company and as a result they agreed to replace the men of shorter service by those who had been discharged if the latter were willing to accept the employment. A number of men were not willing to accept the employment but five of these have been given temporary work on which they are at present employed.

As the provisions of the Railways Act, 1924, do not apply to the Great Northern Railway Company the question of redundancy and compensation does not arise.

Might I remind the Minister that it is the Great Southern Railways that is mentioned in the question?

Then I have no knowledge of the men.

Is the Deputy's question wrong? It is the "Great Northern Railways" that is in the question. Should it be the Great Southern? If so, the Deputy can put down another question to make it all right.