andMr. Bruton asked the Minister for Finance if he is satisfied, in each case in which all objects discovered in the licensed archaeological excavations in the past ten years have not been lodged in the National Museum, that the objects are (a) in safe keeping, (b) within the State, (c) have not deteriorated, (d) have been adequately documented for future study and (e) are available for study by all interested Irish archaeologists; if not, the action he proposes to take in the matter; and if adequate powers are available to him to deal with the situation.

Excavation licences are granted to reputable achaeologists and I have no reason to believe that they would be in any way lacking in the care and documentation of objects discovered during their excavations. Neither have I any reason to believe that such objects are not or will not be in due course available for study by other interested archaeologists.

The answer by the Minister for Education to Question No. 295 of 18 October 1977 gave details of objects which were discovered during excavations in the past ten years and which were temporarily exported for research, conservation, and similar purposes.

Can the Minister be satisfied about the safe keeping of the objects when, in reply to a question some weeks ago, he admitted that he does not know where they are?

That is wrong.

I suppose it is a separate question.

I assume that archaeologists will keep finds safe and free from avoidable deterioration. I also assume that they will document them.

Will the Minister prepare a manifesto of the list of archaeological objects?

If money is given out, regardless of how reputable the recipients might be, would the Minister agree that it is his responsibility to find out where those objects are? Would he agree that it is his responsibility to satisfy himself, regardless of the bona fides or otherwise of the people to whom he gave the money, as to where the objects are?

I have just told the Deputy that they belong to the land owner.

The Minister does not understand this matter and I suggest he keep quiet.

I know more about the matter than the Deputy.

A question has been addressed to the Minister responsible and I should like to know if he will be given an opportunity to reply.

Minister Haughey is not the leader of his party yet.

The Minister responsible has answered the Deputies on at least ten occasions. The Deputies are only interested in attacking the archaeological profession. Deputy Bruton was in a position of responsibility for four years and he did nothing about this matter.

What does the Minister know about it?

The Deputy should not talk about responsibility or I might have to control him.

I am not going to be intimidated by Deputy Haughey.

The Deputy might have to withdraw another letter.

That letter stands. I will answer it this week.

On a point of order, is it in order to have a Minister threaten a Member and infer things about him in the House without your intervention?

If he were threatened I would ask to have it withdrawn, but I do not accept that there was a threat involved. If we could cease having argument across the House we might make some progress.

On a point of order, are the innuendos thrown across the House by that Minister to be allowed by you?

What innuendo?

I heard it.