asked the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Energy (a) the number of civil servants above or of the grade of higher executive officer which his Department contained in the sections dealing with (i) energy generally; (ii) oil supply on 1 January 1979; (b) the number of such civil servants contained in those sections on 1 January 1977; (c) whether his Department have the services on a standing full-time basis, of any non-civil servant consultant or adviser on energy and particularly on oil supply problems; and (d) if so, how many and since which dates such consultants or advisers have been employed.

The information requested by the Deputy is as follows: (a) (i) 17, (ii) 4; (b) (i) 18, (ii) 4.

The answer to (c) is no and (d) does not, therefore, arise.

The numbers given as serving on 1 January 1979 are the same as those serving on 13 September 1977—the date on which the energy function was formally transferred to my Department.

The numbers given as dealing with oil supply include the assistant secretary in charge of the Energy Division and a principal who, while dealing with oil matters, have responsibility also for other energy functions.

Will the Minister state why he considers (c) does not arise? Why should he not have non-civil servant consultants as advisers on this highly difficult matter, notwithstanding the presence of civil servants in the sections he referred to?

I did not say that (c) does not arise. I said the answer to (c) is no and (d) does not, therefore, arise. I have no full-time non-civil servant consultant in regard to energy specifically.

Has the Minister a part-time non-civil servant consultant?

I have one full-time commercial adviser who in recent times has had to spend a lot of time involved in energy. In addition to that, advice on various aspects of energy and of the oil situation in particular has been and is being obtained from outside consultant firms who do not come within the ambit of the question.

I am calling the next question.

I want to get this clear because for once this is helpful. Is it the case that the Minister is getting advice on oil problems from outside consultants whom he consults on an ad hoc basis from problem to problem?

They are advising or making inquiries on a number of matters at the moment.

Did the Minister invite their advice around the end of 1978 when he saw how the Iranian situation was developing as to how they thought oil supplies would be in the spring?

I am calling Question No. 10.

I asked some questions.

We cannot have an inquisition across the floor of the House arising out of one parliamentary question. The Chair has been more than lenient on the number of supplementaries. There are other questions that have to be answered.

I put down a question with regard to consultants which the Chair could have ruled out of order. The Minister volunteered——

Ten questions have been answered in 30 minutes. If the Deputy is going to take the Chair to task for not permitting more questions, I am afraid the Chair is not of that opinion.

I have never tried to do that. I do not care how many questions are answered provided they are answered.

All the questions asked have been of a similar nature.

No, Sir. I want to know if the consultants—who presumably are being paid for by the State—warned the Minister at a time when everybody else seemed to know it that there was an oil shortage on the way at the end of 1978 or beginning of 1979? Were the consultants asked about that or did they offer a view?

I do not know what consultants the Deputy has in mind.

The ones the Minister spoke about, the ones the Minister has said he has retained.

I am calling Question No. 10.