asked the Taoiseach if he has expressed to the Law Reform Commission the Government's priority in respect of laws to be investigated by them; and, if so, if he will indicate these priorities.

The commission are an independent statutory authority under section 4 of the Law Reform Commission Act, 1975 and it is the function of the commission to prepare their programme for submission to the Government.

The first such programme has been laid before the House and it refers to the fact that the Attorney General has requested the Law Reform Commission to undertake an examination of the law in certain areas including aspects of the marriage laws.

The report is concerned with issues which, though important in themselves, are relatively unimportant. Is the Taoiseach suggesting that since the Minister has indicated a specific question—divorce and so on— it is likely that the commission will now take up this issue and consider it and, if so, is that why the Taoiseach has answered in this way?

First, it is not certain that the interpretation of the section would entitle the Government or the Taoiseach to lay down orders of priority. The Government may modify a programme submitted to it by the Law Reform Commission but the interpretation is that that does not give a right to establish priorities. The next section, section 5, entitles the Attorney General to require the commission to examine a particular aspect of the law. It is clear that under that section they are bound to examine a particular aspect of the law if it is so required by the Attorney General.

Has a precedent been established here? Is this the first time for this Government to indicate a particular subject?

Yes, not by my Government though, but by the Attorney General who has a statutory function and whose predecessor on at least three or four occasions required the commission also to examine a particular aspect of law.

Would the Taoiseach accept that the rather limited staffing arrangements of the commission do not permit of any great output? Are there any proposals to extend the staff?

That is a separate question.

It arises on the question.

I have no knowledge regarding the functioning of the commission being limited by reason of the staff situation. However, if any such matter is raised with me I shall have it examined.

Question No. 2.

Why am I not being allowed to ask a supplementary?

The Chair has decided that we have had three or four supplementaries on that question, and we should move on to the next question.

But surely we can discuss a little further this non-political and non-contentious matter.

The Chair is not concerned as to whether the matter is political and has decided that sufficient questions have been allowed on the question.

With respect, you are keeping us on an unreasonably short rein in this instance.

The matter has been covered sufficiently. The Deputy may not argue with the Chair.

The Chair is being unfair. I am anxious to ask the Taoiseach about something that he mentioned specifically.

The Deputy will have other opportunities.

This is the opportunity.

We must move on to the next question.

You are being unfair to me not for the first time.