asked the Minister for Economic Planning and Development if he will state in relation to the National Board for Science and Technology, the Act for which became law on 16 November 1977, (a) if the board have been yet established, and if so, the date on which they were established; (b) if he has yet asked the board for any advice under section 4 (1) (b) or (e) of the Act and, if so, on what matters and when such request or requests was or were made; and (c) if he will summarise the activity of the board to date.

The National Board for Science and Technology have not yet been established. It is expected that they will be established in the very near future.

Would the Minister accept that it does not show a red hot commitment to technology or science that this board, four months after the Act, has still not been set up, notwithstanding that the Minister for Economic Planning and Development, under whose aegis this board fall, specifically referred to them last week as having a function in regard to the promotion of afforestation and the development of biomass as an energy source?

I would not agree at all with the assumptions made by the Deputy. This Government are committed to the establishment of the board and recognise the important role that they will play in the development of our country in the years ahead. No time will be lost in formally establishing the board.

Have not four months been lost already? Would the Minister tell the House the reason for the delay?

I do not consider that any delay to date is unreasonable in view of the fact that the Minister is only a few short months in office. It is important that the selection of personnel to participate in the board should be given careful consideration. I have indicated to the Deputy that the board will be established in the very near future and the names of the personnel on the board will be announced.

Have invitations to act on this board been issued?

Yes.

Have they been replied to?

In most cases, yes. I do not think this relates to the original question. I do not mind being as generous as I can in the reply, especially when it is not my own Department, but I do not think I should be subjected to that kind of cross-examination by the Deputy. What is bugging him?

It is not our fault that the Minister is answering questions for one of his colleagues.

The Minister gave a clear indication last week that he would not be here this week and he was stalled by supplementaries all the time.