asked the Taoiseach if he will list the matters in respect of which the introduction of legislation is currently pending but which have been held up due to the pressure on Parliamentary time, distinguishing between (a) those items in respect of which this delay has been notified to the Dáil by way of Ministerial statement and (b) other items.

There has always been the problem of the expeditious passing of legislation due to pressure on Parliamentary time, but every effort has always been made, and continues to be made to expedite the passage of urgent legislation.

In this House from time to time we are told that various matters cannot be dealt with because legislation is required and pressure of Parliamentary time prevents it being introduced. Indeed one hears of legislation being held up for one, two, three and sometimes four years; in one instance I have been told of legislation waiting for even five or six years in a particular Government Department. Surely this House is entitled to know what is the queue of legislation so that we may judge the extent to which we need to modify our procedures to cope with it. Could I ask the Parliamentary Secretary whether he would consider answering the question therefore?

I have answered the question. I have already pointed out there is no lack of Parliamentary time in connection with legislation. The Taoiseach, on the 14th June, for the information of Deputies, did set out a number of items which would be introduced before the recess. A number of these measures have been introduced and the following remain to be introduced: Registration of Marriages Bill, Registration of Deaths, Births and Marriages Bill, Drugs Bill, Trade Union Amalgamation Bill, and the European Communities Bill. With great respect to the Deputy, if he were given 24 hours a day it still would not be sufficient for him personally.

The Parliamentary Secretary has said, rather curiously, that there is no lack of Parliamentary time. Could he state why the Ministers and Secretaries Bill to establish the Department of the Public Service, which was announced for April, 1971, has not yet reached us? I have raised this matter privately and publicly on numerous occasions on the Order of Business and elsewhere and I have been told each time that through lack of Parliamentary time it has not been possible to meet it. The entire reform of the Public Service has been held up for at least 18 months because of lack of Parliamentary time. How then can the Parliamentary Secretary have the effrontery to make that statement here?

If Deputy Garrett FitzGerald did not abuse the courtesy of this House by speaking five and six hours at a time and gave the other Deputies a little time to contribute, we might get through a lot of business.

I do not like to be subjected to this third degree cross-examination.

The Parliamentary Secretary does not like to answer questions.

I have answered the question.

He resents the democratic procedure of this House.

I shall not describe that to be what it is, but it is an absolute untruth and the Deputy knows it.