asked the Minister for Labour the professional qualifications and experience of those appointed as placement officers in the national manpower service.

The regulations made by the Civil Service Commissioners under section 15 of the Civil Service Commissioners Act, 1956 for the competition from which the placement officers were appointed, prescribed, as essential qualifications and experience, that all candidates must—

(i) be well educated;

(ii) show evidence of having themselves had, on or before the 22nd April, 1970, a background of at least three years employment experience, for example, personnel, work study or supervision, particularly suitable for the work of a placement officer; and

(iii) otherwise, possess the requisite knowledge and ability and be suitable to enter on the discharge of the duties of the position.

Candidates for at least three of the appointments were required to possess a knowledge of Irish, sufficient to enable them to discharge the duties of the position efficiently through the medium of Irish.

Could the Minister tell us what he means by "well educated" or what the Local Appointment Commission mean by it?

These were the regulations prescribed by the Local Appointments Commission. I should like to point out that these appointments were made by the Local Appointments Commission in the same manner as they make other appointments. I had nothing whatever to do with the appointment of the people concerned.

Appreciating the fact that the Minister had nothing to do with the actual appointments, can the Minister tell the House if it is a fact that two manual labourers were appointed to the posts of placement officers?

I am not aware. Actually, I could not say what type of persons were appointed but I am sure they were very good.

Mr. Cott rose.

It is approaching four o'clock.

I fully realise that but there is no point in the Minister standing up and telling us that the people who were appointed were well able for the job, or words to that effect.

That is a separate question.

I have already pointed out to the Minister——

The Deputy may not make a speech.

I am asking him for the professional qualifications of the people appointed, Sir.

I am asking the House to deal with Question No. 31.

I beg your pardon, Sir. The Minister has not replied to my question. I have asked him for the professional qualifications of those appointed and he has not given that information to me. What the Minister has said is that he feels sure that those who were appointed were well educated or something to that effect. Could he please tell us what are their professional qualifications, if any?

Question No. 31.

I could not tell the Deputy anything about their qualifications. I have merely quoted for him the qualifications which were prescribed by the Local Appointments Commission in advertising the post. I should like to remind the Deputy that a manual labourer could have qualifications too. It is no disgrace if he is employed as a manual labourer.

Hear, hear.

I do not know whether a manual labourer is on it or not.

I did not ask the Minister——

Will the Deputy please allow questions to continue? There are other questions on the Order Paper.

When he gets an answer.

I appreciate that, Sir, but I did not ask the Minister for the terms laid down by the Local Appointments Commission. I asked the Minister specifically to tell us what the qualifications of those employed were and he has not answered that.

That is not a matter for the Chair. Question No. 31.

Is the Minister going to answer?

I have answered it fully. I have answered it as far as anybody has ever intervened, in relation to appointments made by the Local Appointments Commission, in this House. They have been regarded as being above board. I will not go any further.

Deputy FitzGerald would like us to interfere with the Local Appointments Commission, the Civil Service Commission.

I certainly would if they would hold public competitions, honest competitions. I certainly would love you to interfere.

If the Deputy is saying they are not honest he should specify what he is talking about.

The Minister's reply is not honest anyway.

I will tell the Minister, I will tell the Chair——

Will the Deputy please sit down?

In view of the unsatisfactory reply obtained from the Minister I wish to give notice that I should like to raise this matter on the Adjournment.

The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.

I might give the Deputy a lot of information.

(Cavan): Why did the Minister not give it in reply to the question?

It was personal. I had due regard to the Deputy whose brother was interested in the appointment.