asked the Minister for Justice the action, if any, taken on the recommendations of the Committee on Court Practice and Procedure on the interest rate on judgment debts which was presented to his predecessor in December 1969; and if the recommendations have been examined and/or accepted in principle.

I would refer the Deputy to my replies to his question and to supplementaries on 13 June, in the course of which I repeated a previous statement of mine that I hope to introduce legislation in due course relating to interest on judgment debts and to do so as soon as possible. There are, however, quite a number of legislative proposals under consideration or in preparation in my Department. The work is extremely time-consuming and questions of priority arise. It is quite likely that this particular question will be dealt with in conjunction with another one.

In saying that I hope to introduce legislation, I was of course aware of the fact that certain recommendations on the matter were made in the Tenth Interim Report of the Committee on Court Practice and Procedure. I cannot, however, indicate in advance of the publication of the legislative proposals whether or how far they will correspond with the committee's recommendations.

I appreciate that the Minister is not the only one responsible for this situation. The matter has been before successive Governments since 1969 but would he consider a situation to be satisfactory where a committee set up by the Government which reported to the Government in 1969 has not resulted in the introduction of legislation to implement the recommendations concerned? No Government have given an indication as to whether they agree with the recommendations.

The question relates to the interest rate—4 per cent—paid on judgment debts. During the debate on the Courts Bill yesterday I expressed the view that this figure is unconscionable and unreasonable and said that it will be changed upwards.

Would the Minister take a personal interest in having this matter dealt with urgently? Is he aware that the low rate concerned is inhibiting commerce and is encouraging the nonpayment of just debts?

I will take a note of what the Deputy says. I agree with the second part of his supplementary.