asked the Minister for Transport and Power if he will state the necessary conditions precedent to the granting of new merchandise licences, having regard to the existing legislation and any regulations made thereunder and with particular reference to his own powers and duties in such matters.

The necessary conditions precedent to, and my powers and duties in connection with, the granting of new merchandise licences under the Transport Acts are set out in Section 12 of the Road Transport Act, 1933 and in Section 115 of the Transport Act, 1944. No statutory rules or regulations have been made in regard to the grant of new merchandise licences.

In view of the principles enunciated in the sections of the particular Acts referred to by the Minister, will he now give a satisfactory explanation as to how he came to sanction the issue of eight new merchandise licences in a very restricted area, at the same time, namely, in Achill and the Corraun Peninsula?

That seems to be a separate question.

Arising out of the principles enunciated by the Minister, I want to know how an application of those principles enabled him to issue eight licences in one restricted area on the same day.

I gave a full explanation of the reasons which caused my predecessor to issue those licences or arrange for them to be issued. I gave a full explanation to the Deputy when he last asked the question. I am fully entitled to give a licence under the sections of the Acts which I have quoted.

If the entitlement is a natural consequence of the application of the principles of the Acts, having regard to that, is the Minister not aware of the difficulties in that area prior to then in getting a new merchandise licence or an explanation? Further, is the Minister not under some obligation to make inquiries as to the conditions which obtain in the area and as to the character of the applicants, and as to whether prosecutions were pending against them in the local courts?

I have already dealt with that matter in a reply to the Deputy.

With all respect, the Minister did not deal with it. He said it was a matter for the Minister for Justice. I suggest that it is his duty, when an applicant of that kind comes before him, to make some inquiry as to whether he is not using one section of the Transport Acts to contravene another.

Has the Minister got unrestricted power to issue a merchandise licence where and when he will?

He has not.

The Deputy might read the section of the Act. It will take a few moments but the position is made perfectly clear.

I should like to put on the records of this House that that is a typical question put down by a Deputy who——

Is that a question?

——does not reside in his own constituency. At a public meeting——

The Deputy must put a question. He may not make a speech.

I just want to say, Sir——

There is no question there.

A public meeting was held in Achill——

"Is the Minister aware?"

Is the Minister aware that a public meeting was held in Achill before the issue of those licences and people made it their business to approach the local Deputies. Deputy Lindsay was not included——

Fianna Fáil made sure I was not there. It was a Fianna Fáil meeting.

Is it seriously suggested that these licences were issued as a result of a Fianna Fáil meeting held in Achill—

Of course it is.

Does the Minister accept what Deputy Doherty says, that these licences were issued at a Fianna Fáil meeting, attended by Fianna Fáil Deputies who held themselves out as being in a position to bespeak these licences?

It was not a public meeting.

It was a public meeting and the fact that people were going to apply for licences was known to everyone in the area. There was no question of any political discrimination. The situation was well known to everyone in the area. One applicant was granted a licence and after the granting of that licence, the anomalous position of transport in the area came to light, that because there was no transport, in turn, C.I.E. were not interested. There was a position which had to be put right by the granting of a sufficient number of licences for local transport in the area. It was known to the whole community and there was no question of political discrimination.

Is the Minister not aware that special persons out of the total number of applicants were selected on a political basis because they were promised at this meeting?

The Deputy is completely misinformed. As I have already said in my reply on a date in April—I forget what date now—but the Deputy must take my word for it: I insist my word be taken in that regard——

I would place my personal, political and professional record against that of the Minister for Lands anywhere.

They are 100 per cent. Republicans.

If there is bribery of this kind——

Does the Taoiseach think it is right that these licences should be given to Fianna Fáil members?

Do not embarrass the Taoiseach.

There is nobody else in the area.

They were refused licences.

Order! Question 15.

If the Deputy lived in his constituency it would be much better.

Be fair to the memory of the late Deputy Ruttledge.