asked the Minister for Finance to state the up-to-date position regarding recruitment of extra tax inspectors in recent months; how many additional such staff have been employed; and to what sector of the public service tax spectrum they have been attached.

In the past few months, over 500 new posts have been authorised for the Office of the Revenue Commissioners; 330 of those posts have been filled during that period for the purpose of expanding and strengthening the taxes staff of that office. Of the posts filled, 61 are tax inspectors and the balance is support staff. The precise allocation of the remainder of the staff has not yet been finalised and will depend on the needs of a situation in which the tackling of tax evasion is the factor of paramount importance. They will be appointed and deployed as soon as circumstances permit.

Is it true that, of the 61 tax inspectors appointed, the overwhelming majority if not the totality of that number have been allocated to the PAYE sector?

I have not information to tell me precisely where they have been allocated to except that it is clear from the grades involved that some of them are covering more than one area. The Deputy may take it that the whole scheme of recruitment for and strengthening of the Office of the Revenue Commissioners is designed to tackle tax evasion in all areas.

The Minister said he has not information available indicating to which sector they have been allocated. On what does he base his apparently complacent conclusion that all sectors are being tackled equally? Can the Minister tell me precisely in which sectors the tax inspectors are operating?

No. The Deputy did not ask that question. As to on what I base my attitude that all sectors are being tackled and will be tackled, the answer is on my personal instructions to the Chairman of the Revenue Commissioners.

Can the Minister say to me that the allegation that the 61 tax inspectors recruited and appointed have all been allocated to the PAYE sector is not true?

I have already indicated to the Deputy that I have not available here the areas to which they have been allocated. Therefore, I cannot make any categorical statement. I am not prepared to make one without having the information available.

Which sections of the taxation machine did the Minister regard as being in need of strengthening when he authorised this massive extra recruitment of inspectors?

That is a separate question.

No, it is not. It arises directly out of the Minister's reply. Which sections did he regard as being in need of strengthening?

The investigation branch, and also strengthening in each district, because experience has shown that the operations in each district can be very effective in making the investigation branch effective.

The investigation branch deals with revenue arrears of all kinds. Is that the size of it?

That would be so.

Or may we take it that it is on the PAYE sector in particular that the emphasis is being laid?

No, we may not.

That is the first time we have heard that. Deputy Keating put that straight to the Minister.

The Minister has given two contradictory answers.

Deputy Keating put a different question to me. He asked me to which sector were the 61 inspectors of taxes allocated. That is a different question.

I asked the Minister if he could deny that these people were allocated exclusively to the PAYE sector.

That is not the question Deputy Kelly put to me. It is a totally different question.

The Minister said he was not in a position to give that assurance.

We cannot have argument.

If the Deputy really wanted that information he could put down a question.

I got the answer I wanted, the answer I need.

The answer the Deputy wanted. He was right the first time.

May I take it that if Deputy Keating or I put down a question to the effect suggested by the Minister, it will not be ruled out on the grounds of repetition?

The question will be dealt with on its merits.