asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the communication, if any, he had with RTE or any national newspaper on Monday, 28th February, 1977, on the conduct or likely outcome of this country's fishery negotiations within the European Community.

On learning from Brussels that the Minister for Fisheries and my Parliamentary Secretary, who were then about to leave Brussels for Dublin, wished to make a statement to the media on arrival at Dublin Airport on the subject of the discussions with Commissioner Gundelach, I notified representatives of the media of this fact. I later received a telephone call from the RTE correspondent in Brussels.

Is the Minister saying that the absent Minister or the Minister who was present at the negotiations requested that he would, in fact, arrange a Press conference for the Minister for Fisheries on his return and that was the purpose of his call to the media?

Yes. I learned in Brussels that the Minister for Fisheries——

Did the Minister for Fisheries request the Minister for Foreign Affairs to arrange this and was this the purpose of the call?

If the Deputy would let me answer the question. I learned from the ambassador in Brussels that the Minister for Fisheries and the Parliamentary Secretary wished on arrival at the airport to make a statement to the Press and, in order to ensure the fullest opportunity for the Press to hear that, I contacted the newspapers and RTE to tell them of his intentions.

That is not the answer to the question I asked. Would the Minister tell me precisely whether or not the Minister for Fisheries requested that he, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, would arrange this Press conference?

No. The meeting with the Minister for Fisheries was immediately after the meeting resumed at the airport in Brussels. That communication came from the ambassador.

There is a lot more to this. That is only one aspect of it. The next aspect is, is the Minister now telling us in fact this was the only purpose of his call to RTE and the various newspapers, simply to request them to be present at the airport to meet the Minister for Fisheries on his return for a Press conference?

That was the only purpose.

Does the Minister not recognise it seems very strange for him to take on the role of asking the media to arrange a Press conference when there are, I presume, Government services available for that purpose?

Yes. We all have our own style of doing things and, as they were about to board the aircraft arriving in Dublin an hour and a quarter later as the Deputy is well aware, it seemed to me more appropriate to communicate rapidly instead of at that hour of the night moving through the normal channels and, by doing so, I succeeded in alerting the media. The Deputy may feel that is unusual but if one is lying in bed and has nothing else to do and there is a matter of great urgency then it seems to one useful to do one's bit in those circumstances, and I did.

The Minister regarded it as doing his bit. The Minister for Fisheries and the public did not take that view. Incidentally, how many of the media were contacted? Was it all the newspapers?

I contacted the four daily papers and RTE with my customary efficiency.

The Minister's modesty overwhelms me. Did the Minister express views to each of the national dailies and RTE of the likely effect of the postponement, as they published on the following day, namely, that what the Commission would eventually propose would probably be better than what the Minister for Fisheries had proposed earlier?

No. I did not express views to each of them. In certain cases where my notification of the desire of the Minister and Parliamentary Secretary to make a further statement at Dublin Airport led to further discussion and informal inquiries, I did reply, for the record, to the questions asked and I expressed the view in one or two cases, I think —it is difficult to remember every detail as the Deputy will appreciate— that once the possibility existed of a Community solution which could be as satisfactory, or even more satisfactory, than a unilateral one, I felt the Government were justified in postponing action until they discovered what the new proposals would be.

We cannot continue on this question. I am calling Question No. 19.

We have waited a long time for the Minister to come back. I welcome him back.

If the Deputy wishes to debate the matter then it must be done at the proper time.

I have had to postpone this question for four weeks.

I will allow the Deputy a further brief question. I have already allowed him a series of questions.

The Chair will recall the Taoiseach said a few weeks ago that this was the proper forum in which to debate this matter.

This is not the time for debate. The Chair is following the rules applicable to Question Time. There can be no debate. The Deputy may ask a brief question.

Does the Minister not recognise that what he was doing was, in fact, undermining the position of the Minister for Fisheries for whom he now says, with his customary modesty, he was arranging a Press conference? The comments he made to the newspapers which they published as they understood them were undermining the position of the Minister who was conducting negotiations on our behalf that day.

I recognise nothing of the kind. The Deputy is talking utter rubbish.

Why then did he write to the Minister for Fisheries explaining——

I am calling Question No. 15.

Will the Minister say why he wrote to the Minister for Fisheries?

Because I was in bed and could not talk to him.

The Minister told the newspapers——

The Deputy must resume his seat. I have called Question No. 15.

We are getting to the nub of the question but I am being prevented from doing so by the Chair.

I have given the Deputy every facility but now he seeks to defy the Chair.

I have put a question to the Minister.

The Deputy will desist. I have told him he must resume his seat. Question No. 15 has been called.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply I intend to raise this matter on the Adjournment.

The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.

15.