asked the Minister for the Environment if he is aware of the recent statement by a leading European expert, that the Wood Quay site was the second most important archaeological excavation in Northern Europe, and that additional time would be required to complete the work there, and if he will act on this recommendation.

In replying to the Deputy's question of the 14 December 1977 regarding Wood Quay, I thought I made it clear that my only function in this matter related to loan sanction in respect of the office development, a function which has been discharged.

I have seen a newspaper report of the statement mentioned, but since the matter is not one in which I have any function, I do not consider that any intervention by me is warranted. As I said before, the corporation is acting in a responsible manner. I understand that they have given a formal undertaking to facilitate the further excavation thought proper by the National Museum or the Commissioners of Public Works. It is not for me to consider whether the statement in question introduces any new element.

Would the Minister not agree, first of all, that no construction work should commence until portion of the site has been fully excavated and, secondly, that no building should take place on a part of the site where there are remains of such a character that they should be preserved in situ from an archeological point of view, from the point of view of our national heritage and from a tourist point of view? I have a further question but perhaps the Minister would answer that first.

As I said in my reply, I have no function other than the sanction of a loan. The Commissioners of Public Works have a function but I do not have any further function.

Would the Minister not admit in saying that he has no function, that the Government have a function to preserve our national heritage because he is part of this Government with collective responsibility? To whom should we address ourselves in order to ensure that the points I have made are taken into account and that our national heritage is preserved appropriately?

The Department of Finance—because of the Office of Public Works coming under its aegis —and the Minister for Education has a function because——

I think we had better put a question to the Taoiseach.

Might I ask the Minister if, in the discharge of his functions and responsibilities in regard to loans, he would favourably consider an application from Dublin Corporation for a substantial loan to provide for the preservation and permanent display of any artefacts that might be discovered on the site, which would be in excess of the amount of money they have so far sought under the Act?

That is a separate question.

I would consider it but I could not say at this stage whether or not I would do so favourably. There is no such application or proposal before me at this time.

Would it not be reasonable to give an indication of a favourable consideration as distinct from a courteous one, that it would be the minimum indication of support for the preservation of our national heritage that the Minister, in his specific responsibility for the environment, could give the House at this stage? That is all the Minister is being asked to do—to give favourable consideration—and he is declining to do that.

I will certainly consider it if it is my function——

The Deputy's question relates to a statement.

I said there are two other Departments who may have an involvement under this heading. I am not aware whether or not they have at this stage.

The Minister is replying as Minister for Local Government. He is no longer that; he is Minister for the Environment. What does his appointment mean if it does not mean protecting the environment?

It means protecting the environment.

But the Minister is saying he has no responsibility for doing so.

I am not saying that I have not; I am saying that other Departments may as well. I have told the Deputy that I will certainly consider such an application or proposals.

The Minister said he had no responsibility for it.

I have told the Deputy I will consider such an application.

The question here relates to a statement alleged to have been made to which the Minister replied. That question does not permit of every supplementary now being asked.

I fully accept that, but the Minister in his reply did indicate the narrow area of his specific departmental responsibility and it does cover the question of loans.

But not the environment.

As he is Minister for the Environment I felt it relevant to ask the question that in the event of artefacts being found of such a value and so on and necessitating additional expenditure if he, in his capacity as Minister, would favourably consider— not grant—the application. It is very little to ask.

Yes, I said I would consider it——

I asked the Minister if he would consider it favourably?

Favourably, then, yes.

Thank you very much; blood out of a stone.