asked the Minister for Justice the reason for the delays in filling senior Garda positions within the Dublin city centre area; and whether such intended promotions and appointments have now been made.

I assume the Deputy is referring to the filling of vacancies for detective inspectors in the Dublin Metropolitan area.

The commissioner has informed me that all these vacancies have now been filled. The reasons for the delay related to matters of internal Garda administration on which I do not consider it would be appropriate for me to comment. The statutory position regarding the making of the appointments was set out in the reply which I gave to a question on 8 November last.

To say the least of it that reply is most unsatisfactory. While respecting the Minister's position and not wishing to ask him to divulge anything which would be in contravention of security and so on, is it the position that a list of proposed appointees put forward to him was rejected by him, and a subsequent interview board with different personnel was set up which held a second series of interviews and proposed a second list of appointees? Was there a difference between the personnel of the first interview board and the second interview board and their findings?

These are matters of internal Garda administration. The practice in this House has always been not to comment on matters of internal Garda administration. In an effort to be helpful, I should like to say to the Deputy that I could again read for him the statutory position with regard to these matters.

Is the Minister aware that there is a certain degree of disquiet about how the delays, which ran to many months, in filling these positions were caused? Could it be said that these delays contributed in some degree to the urban crime on which he has moved with alacrity in other regards? Is there reason to believe there is a degree of political jobbery involved in this case which hits at the heart of the traditional integrity of the promotion system within the Garda?

I reject out of hand the insinuations in the Deputy's comments. They are completely, totally and wholly untrue.

Question No. 4. I have warned several times against questions which have implications and innuendos and are actually speeches.

Since the Minister related this matter totally to internal Garda arrangements, I want to ask him had he any hand, act or part in the approval of these lists or in the ultimate promotion of the people involved?

I have more than enough on my hands without involving myself in matters in which I have no concern whatsoever.

Do these matters require the approval of the Minister in any way?

I refer the Deputy to the answer I gave on 8 November last which spells out quite clearly the statutory position in this regard.

I am interested in the actual situation. Is the Minister giving a categorical assurance to the House that he did not have hand, act or part in these promotions?

I reject the implication in the Deputy's question if the inference is that I interfered in any way with promotions of any type within the Garda force. They are none of my business.

The Minister did not give a guarantee.

I do not have to give a guarantee because my position is spelled out statutorily.

The Minister is running for cover.

I am not running for cover in any way.

Will the Minister give the assurance I requested?

It is not necessary to ask for that assurance but the Deputy can have it.

It is a pity the previous Government could not have given such an assurance.

We could have.

Question No. 4.

If the Deputies who are raising this question want to know more about it they should ask the man who held my job before July 5.

He never interfered with the list.

They could ask him that one.

Deputies should not push their luck.

The Minister is bluffing again.