asked the Minister for Local Government and Public Health if he will state the cause of the delay in sanctioning the proposed extension of Dean's Grange burial ground, and if, in view of the report of the county medical officer of health and of the engineer concerning the necessity and the suitability of the proposed extension, he is prepared to sanction the same without further delay.

The proposed extension of Dean's Grange burial ground requires careful investigation and consideration and no unnecessary delay has taken place in dealing with the matter. The original proposal was not agreed to. A subsequent report of the board's, consulting engineer suggests alternative lands for an extension of the burial ground to those originally proposed by the board. A decision will be notified to the board in due course.

Has not the Department sanctioned an investigation into the proposed extension? Has it not authorised an investigation into the matter and the digging of trial holes in 35 acres of land belonging to Mr. Nolan? Has not that land, with the sanction of the Department, been valued and a price agreed to by the Dean's Grange Burial Board and has not a detailed scheme in relation to the new ground been sent to the Department at the Department's request? So far as I am aware, everything possible has been done by the Dean's Grange Burial Board to complete this matter and the Department has been notified that within ten years there will be no burial space in the existing burial ground. In view of all this, I should like the Parliamentary Secretary to indicate if the Department is against an extension of the Dean's Grange burial ground, or is it going to sanction the proposed extension, seeing that the ground has been tried and a price agreed to, and everything, in fact, completed and submitted to the Department? I might say that each step in connection with this matter was approved by the Department.

I refer the Deputy to the latter portion of my reply:

"A subsequent report of the Board's consulting engineer suggests alternative lands for an extension of the burial ground to those originally proposed by the board. A decision will be notified to the board in due course."

I have nothing to add to that unless this, that, according to my information, the existing burial ground should meet requirements for the next 25 years, and there does not appear to be any occasion for in urgency.

I should like to know if Depute Fogarty will give notice of his intention to raise this matter on the adjournment. It is time this matter was brought to a head.

It is Deputy Fogarty's question.

It should have been a joint question.

That is not the fault of the Chair.

This seems to amuse some Ministers, but I suggest there is nothing to laugh at. The question was put down on the instructions of the Dublin Boaid of Health in our joint names. I suggest the laugh is on the Ministers who will not provide a proper burial ground for the people.

Perhaps we will keep it until the Deputy is in a position to open it.