asked the Minister for Defence if he intends to recruit extra personnel for the Naval and Air Corps Services.

Yes. The strengths of the Naval Service and the Air Corps will continue to be built up so as to ensure that, as far as possible, adequate resources in manpower are available to discharge the tasks allotted to these services.

Can the Minister say the number likely to be recruited and how many are likely to be assigned for fishery protection?

In regard to the Naval Service the establishment in 1972, when the Deputy's party were in office, was 435. In 1974 the present Government increased that to 500 and again last year the present Government increased the establishment figure to 600. Therefore the Deputy will see there has been steady progress in relation to the Naval Service personnel by this Government. In regard to the Air Corps, if the Deputy is interested, in 1972 under Fianna Fáil the establishment figure for all ranks was 818. In 1974 it was increased by the present Government to 863 and last year, 1976, it was increased again by the present Government to 869. Therefore, the present Government and the Minister for Defence particularly since 1973 are giving more to the Air Corps and to the Naval Service than the clap-trap that they usually get and have got from Fianna Fáil.

Now will the Minister answer the question put to him? That is what he is paid for.

Ceist a 14.

On a point of order, this is at least the second time, indeed I think the third time in the last five minutes that this Minister has failed to answer a question put to him. If, as a result of that kind of conduct Deputies on this side of the House are being asked to leave the House, let us be quite clear who is responsible for the disorder in this House.

I have answered the question put by Deputy Gallagher.

The Minister has not.

I have given the Deputy more information than he required. He asked for information in connection with the Naval Service. I have supplemented that by giving him information about the Air Corps.

Will the Minister now answer the question I asked in relation to the intention of assigning X people to the Naval Service and the Air Corps for fishery protection.

The assignment of additional personnel will be considered when it is necessary. We will meet that when the time comes. At the moment there is no shortage of personnel. If any question of shortage of personnel arises we will be there to put that right as we have done since 1973.

Is the Minister not in a position to tell me how many extra officers are to be assigned for fishery protection both in the Naval Service and the Air Corps?

On the question of the Naval Service the additional vessels will now be made available. I have already indicated in replying to a question today that the Danish vessel, I hope, will arrive within the next few days.

It is personnel that we are talking about.

There will be no difficulty in relation to suitably qualified and experienced personnel for protection by either air or sea of our fisheries. The Deputy can take it that that is so.

Ceist a 14.

Since the Minister appears incapable of answering the question could we ask him to take it step by step?

I have allowed a lot of latitude on this question.

May I suggest, with all due deference, that if the Minister totally fails to answer questions put to him, we are entitled to ask him the questions in order to get an answer? Might I ask the Minister how many of the personnel of the Naval Service will be allocated to the Danish vessel to which he referred?

The full requirements, that will be needed.

This is leading to argument.

How many are required?

For the naval vessel which has not arrived yet?

Yes.

I do not know yet. If the Deputy puts down a question, when the vessel arrives I will be in a position to answer him.

Is the Minister seriously telling the House that he does not know how many will be required to serve on a vessel that is already ordered and on the way?

Whatever staff will be required will be readily made available.

This is leading to repetition and argument. Question No. 14, please.