asked the Minister for Agriculture whether he is aware of the large number of complaints from land owners in County Kerry who are anxious to avail of the benefits of the land rehabilitation project, that inspections of proposed drainage schemes are not being carried out and whether he is in a position to expedite the inspections in the large number of cases now outstanding.

I am aware that a number of farmers in all counties in which the land project is in operation have in recent months made representations to have their holdings inspected mainly because they want to get on with the work during the slack season or to reclaim small areas of land in time for sowing this spring. The Deputy will appreciate that faced with some 34,000 applications in respect of an area of over 300,000 acres of land, it would be impossible, without the appointment of an unwarrantably large staff, to meet all demands at the same time. Inspections are being carried out in County Kerry, and will continue to be carried out as expeditiously as the staff available can cope with them. It is expected that the land rehabilitation project will be in operation for at least ten years, and I cannot recommend the recruitment of staff on a scale sufficient to complete the programme in less than this period of time.

asked the Minister for Agriculture if he will state (a) how many applications under the land rehabilitation project have reached his Department from County Limerick; (b) the number sanctioned, and (c) the number on which work has commenced.

I would refer the Deputy to the reply I gave yesterday to a similar question by Deputy Patrick J. Maguire.

asked the Minister for Agriculture whether he is aware that some farmers fear that if they take advantage of the credit facilities available to them under the land rehabilitation project their claim to the ownership of their farms will be weakened and their title adversely affected, and whether he will make a statement in the matter.

I am very glad the Deputy affords me this opportunity of dealing with three rumours which have been sedulously spread by evilly disposed persons who desire to hinder the successful development of the land project. These three rumours are:—

(1) that the owner's title to his land will be affected;

(2) that the period during which his purchase annuity is payable will be extended;

(3) that if he gets his land rehabilitated under the land project, his valuation and, consequentially, his rates, will be raised.

Each of these three allegations is a falsehood; no one of these three falsehoods has any basis of fact or probability; each of these three falsehoods has been deliberately concocted and are being methodically disseminated by members of the Fianna Fáil organisation——

On a point of order. I want to know whether this reply is in order. It has been the custom of the Minister for Agriculture to make replies of that kind to parliamentary questions which are abusive of individual members of the Dáil and groups of members. I want you to say, Sir, whether these replies are in order, because I promise you that, if the practice continues, you will have a considerable amount of trouble on your hands in maintaining order during question time.

It would be better to omit such charges in replies given in the House and not to raise contentious matters.

I want you to rule that it is out of order.

The Chair will rule if it thinks fit.

Does the Chair think fit to rule that these replies are out of order?

I am not ruling on the type of the Minister's reply, but I think introducing such matters is very undesirable.

May I respectfully suggest to the Chair that he should try to control the type of the Minister's reply when it is out of order?

I have been troubled about rulings from the Chair, and if both sides are not satisfied, they have their remedy. If any ten Deputies wish to take it, the remedy is there.

There is nothing personal so far as the present occupant of the Chair is concerned, but I want the Chair to understand that members on this side of the House resent the permission given to the Minister to adopt this type of tactics. So far as we are concerned, we are not going to allow that.

I think it is most inadvisable.

That is not enough. I think if the business of the Dáil is to be properly conducted——

That is for me to decide.

——this type of reply should not be allowed.

Does the Deputy desire me to leave the Chair?

I desire you to rule more definitely on this type of reply.

I am not ruling beyond what I have done.

I submit that it is not fair to a Deputy to ask him to accept the onus of some action which you might take because I am registering here what I think is a legitimate protest against an abuse of the Dáil.

I think it is an abuse, but whether it is for the Chair to resent the type of answer given by a Minister is another thing.

If the Chair thinks that Ministers are abusing the privileges of the Dáil the Chair should do something about it and not put the onus on the Opposition.

I want to say with the fullest sense of responsibility as a Minister of this State——

I warn you that this is going to lead to disorder. I am appealing to the Chair. This is an abuse of the privileges of the Dáil and somebody has to do something about it.

I am fully satisfied that, for a political reason, the false rumours which I have described in reply to Deputy Timoney's question were disseminated by members of the Fianna Fáil Party.

That is untrue.

Withdraw it. That is untrue.

That is untrue and we will have to have it withdrawn. That man is a strutting, purse-proud blackguard. You are a lying, purse-proud blackguard and you will withdraw that or this assembly will come to an end now.

This is going on in Paris.

It will go on here.

We have had examples of this type of abuse from the Minister for Agriculture already and we are not going to stand for it any more. It is all right when the Minister makes an abusive statement in the heat of debate but, when he reads one out in reply to a question, it is an indication of the type of tactics he adopts.

What I have said is the truth.

It is a lie.

The horse pond is necessary again.

The Minister's statement is quite true.

It is a lie. The Minister is a cowardly liar.

This will have to stop.

It is going to stop now.

What is it that has got to stop? Is it the charge of the Minister being a liar, a coward and a blackguard?

He is all these three.

On a point of order. Are these expressions to remain on record and not to be withdrawn?

Will the Minister withdraw his charge?

May I ask what is the purpose of parliamentary questions? It is to elicit information about administration, and I think that it would be desirable in the interests of the House generally that replies should be confined to that.

I think so.

I will not sit down until something happens after this statement has been made.

Then the Deputy will withdraw from the House.

I will not withdraw from the House.

Might I move the adjournment of the House?

It is not necessary. The Chair can do that.

On a point of order. May I ask if the Minister can substantiate his statement by giving evidence to this House of the accusation he has made against the Fianna Fáil Party? I, as a member for County Monaghan, can deny that charge for the county I represent.

Every member of the Party can do it.

I submit that it is an abuse of the privileges of the House, and that something must be done about it.

Arising out of the supplementary question——

Are we going to have a ruling on this charge, which has been made in a cowardly way, as it is always made, by this Minister? We have had to put up with this for two years and it is definitely going to come to an end.

Will somebody protect the dignity of the House?

The Leader of the Opposition asked a supplementary question to which I want to make a reply.

We do not want to hear the Minister.

Now we know.

The Minister will not be allowed to talk here.

He will.

He will not.

Put down a motion.

We know what happens to motions of that kind. We had a similar motion about the same man when he abused the privileges of the House before. There was a recommendation by the Committee on Procedure and Privileges, but the Government majority voted against it. That is no protection. It was the same Minister who was involved in that case.

Arising out of the supplementary question——

Is the Minister to be asked to withdraw the charge?

I think the Taoiseach should express his view on this type of conduct. Does he regard this as an abuse of the privileges of the House?

If I am to express my view, I regard the type of conduct of Deputy Lemass and his colleagues as a concerted attack on the order of the House.

Are we to take it that the Taoiseach stands over and approves of that kind of conduct? (Interruptions.)

You will not listen to it.

We will not listen to anything here that is an insult to everybody on these benches.

You understand, Sir, the Taoiseach has said that, despite your observation, that is a type of reply of which he approves.

These are the methods being practised in Paris.(Interruptions.)

May I make a suggestion? May I propose that the House adjourn until this disorderly conduct stops?

This disorderly conduct will not stop until we get a ruling on this.

This disorderly conduct will not stop until we get a ruling on this.

This disorderly conduct will not stop until we get a ruling on this.

Did I understand you, Sir, to call the next question?

Question No. 25.

There will be no next question or next business until we get a ruling on this.

And until you withdraw that false observation.(Interruptions.)

In regard to part one of the Deputy's question——(Interruptions.)

No, no, we will not listen to it.(Interruptions.)

Withdraw.

Withdraw.

The House is adjourned for an hour.

Business suspended at 3.30 p.m. and resumed at 4.30 p.m.

Considerable time has been lost, and the remaining questions will be postponed until tomorrow.

As to the incident from which the protest arose, I should like to say that political charges have never been considered disorderly. I have recollections of political charges being made against all Parties here. The Chair has control over questions. Over Minister's replies it has no control, except when a Minister is out of order, when the Chair will so state. In the excitement to-day most disorderly statements were made on both sides of the House— most disorderly statements—for which Deputies should be expelled or named. Perhaps it is better to let them lie now and try to forget them. We will now proceed with the ordinary business.

On behalf of the farmers, I am an Independent Deputy——

On a point of order. I think Deputy Fagan is out of order.

I represent the farmers, and I do not want anyone to say anything against our present Minister for Agriculture. If any of the Fianna Fáil Party so wishes, I will resign and fight my seat again against any of them.(Interruptions.)

The bullocks.

Order.

With regard to the question of order and what is permissible in the case of replies to questions, I submit that it is desirable that we should have, not now because it is obviously a difficult matter, but at some early stage, some statement from the Chair which would indicate to everybody within what limits a Minister should keep in replying to questions. The parliamentary position is that question are addressed to Ministers to elicit information with regard to certain administrative matters. You, Sir, have control over the questions that are submitted. You can consider if there is any undesirable imputation of any kind, and unhesitantly refuse to allow such questions to be put, if you think there is. I think there should be some limit imposed also upon the type of replies to be given. I think these replies should be confined to a statement of fact in answer to the questions asked. If Ministers or Deputies wish to make statements, because there are matters of a political character to which they wish to draw attention, there are opportunities for doing so other than through the medium of answers to questions.

I would only say, in reply to what the Leader of the Opposition has said, that the fundamental task we have to fulfil is to do the nation's business. In order to secure that that will be done it is essential that there should be order in this House. The custodian of that order is the Ceann Comhairle and we, on this side of the House, while we are on this side of the House, will do what we have always done no matter on what side of the House we happen to be; we will take the order and obey the Chair. I submit that the type of reply, and the question as to whether a Minister or anybody else has exceeded his duty in connection with that, is entirely a matter for your ruling. When you so rule on any occasion we will obey it, as we have always done.

I would give this warning to the Leader of the Opposition: the making of a general rule is fraught with danger. The Ceann Comhairle can only act on precedent and on each question asked and answer given as they arise.

This is not the time to continue a discussion on this particular matter, but I do not agree with the Taoiseach on the question of general rules. We have Rules of Order here laid down in this book. These rules have been carefully considered in order that they might be a guide, not merely for the Chair but for every member of the House. I think a general rule for the guidance of Ministers in regard to replies to questions so that they would not transgress would be extremely desirable. Since the change of Government I have spent a considerable time here listening to replies to questions and I do not think there is anybody who——

On a point of order. Is this in order?

Sit down.

Is this discussion in order in view of the fact that you have called the Order of Business some considerable time ago?

I think it would be desirable that the discussion should cease now. It can be conducted outside, or elsewhere, if necessary.

I agree.

I shall consider that question but, in the ultimate result, the onus will be on the Ceann Comhairle to decide in any particular case whether or not the matter is in order.

Might I say that I unreservedly subscribe to what the Taoiseach has said?

And the Rules of Order should be circulated opposite.