asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he has made a formal protest to the British Government in regard to the recent campaign carried out by the British Army, which has resulted in the disruption of the road system which is a vital factor in the day to day lives of citizens of this State; and, if so, on what date and in what form the protest was lodged; and what reply, if any, has been received.

A protest was made to the British authorities in this matter as the Taoiseach indicated in the statement he issued on 13th October. The British Government, despite the protest, the inconvenience caused and the general futility of the exercise, nevertheless have persisted in this road cratering policy.

Is the Minister aware that the Taoiseach stated in this House as recently as yesterday that since 13th October, deliberate crossings have been made by the British Army on two known occasions for the purpose of cratering roads in this part of the country? Is the Minister in a position to give the results of the Garda investigation of the two latest allegations of deliberate crossings and craterings of Irish roads?

We totally deplore —and I think everybody in the House will agree with me here—this policy of road craterings adjacent to the Border which in our view—and I take it that this is the view of everyone in the House—only escalated and aggravated the situation. We have made that point of view known to the British authorities.

Is the Minister aware of the Taoiseach's statement here yesterday that the British Army deliberately and knowingly crossed the Border for the purpose of blowing up roads south of the Border? What protests have been made since 13th October, in view of these recent developments? Has any protest been made?

The Taoiseach has made protests all along the line. This House made its view known. Only last week it expressed a pretty well national view on this matter on which all parties have joined together.

The Minister was absent. He was not in the House.

It is not our fault or the fault of anybody in this House that there are stupid, bovine people in the Stormont and Westminister regimes.

Question No. 27.

Can the Minister say whether there was an incident today and if so what it was?

That does not arise on this question.

Can the Minister give us some details?

Deputy Corish is right. There was, but I have not got the full facts yet.

Various rumours are going around the House. We should hear the truth about it as soon as possible. I regard that as important and that is why I asked the question.

I appreciate that the Deputy has a responsible interest in this.

Will the Government seek compensation from the British for the damage done to the roads?

That is a separate question. There is nothing about compensation in the question.

This is a matter of concern. It happened only today. The Deputy is right in his information. This is part of what I was referring to. The escalation and the aggravation of violence caused by this cratering policy adjacent to the Border have brought areas into conflict which were not in conflict until this policy commenced. Today's events are further evidence of what I was talking about.

Can the Minister give us the details of today's events?

I have not got the full facts.

Have the Government investigated whether the northern authorities have a legal right to crater roads on their side of the Border?

The trouble is that there are too many people both in Stormont and Westminster who do not appear to have any regard for legal and humanitarian rights.

I am calling Question No. 27. I will hear no further supplementaries.

While I cannot address certain questions to certain people in Stormont and Westminster who were mentioned by the Minister, I have addressed a question to the Minister. I asked him the simple question: Have the Government investigated whether in fact the British Government have a legal right to do this?

The Deputy has asked that question.

I have not got an answer.

The Deputy knows that we are up against factors like de jure and de facto here.

Is that the only answer a Minister for State can give?

It is a practical answer.

It is an impractical answer.

Question No. 27.

Would the Minister answer my question? Will we make a further protest to the British Government and demand some form of compensation?

There is nothing about compensation in the question. That is a separate question.

It arises from the supplementaries.

This is complete hypocrisy coming from the party responsible for the whole thing anyway.

Get out of it.

It is the long fellow in the Park who was responsible for the civil war and for everything that happened.

Will Deputies allow questions to continue?

Fianna Fáil have been promising to end the Border for 50 years. They misled the people into thinking they would do something about it. They are playing politics now.

The Minister is the one that got away.

Order, Question No. 27.

The Minister's father was in the Free State Army.

The Deputy should behave himself.

He need not talk about the people on this side of the House. If he looks for it he will get it.

The Deputy cannot behave himself at any time.

Of course I can behave myself but I very much resent a Minister making an ignorant remark like that.

We were not there in 1912, or in 1920 when the Ireland Act was passed and the Border was created. Get your history right. If the Minister does not know his history he should not be answering questions for the Minister for Foreign Affairs.

Order.

I know all about 1922, 1925 and 1949.

In 1920 the Ireland Act was passed and the Border was created and the Minister knows that.

They are the three dates and a betrayal occurred on each date.

If you had used the Treaty instead of sabotaging it and starting a civil war we would not have what we have today.

Order. Question No. 27.

The people on this side of the House stood for peace and your party did not. They were robbing banks, the same as other people are now, at one time, when it was profitable to do so.