asked the Minister for Finance if he is aware that certain bound annual volumes of Irish statutes are out of print and unavailable and if he will take steps to have same republished.

All the bound volumes of statutes from 1922 to 1973 inclusive are out of print. Full sets of the volumes are available in libraries such as the Law Library, Kings Inn Library and university libraries. All these statutes are available in single-copy form from the Stationery Office.

Republication of the out of print volumes has been considered. However, it is estimated that the demand for these volumes would be relatively small and the economic price of the volumes would be substantial. In view of this, and in view of the fact that all the statutes in the out of print volumes are available in single form it is not considered that republication would be justified.

Would the Minister accept that it is an incredible situation that copies of the Acts of Parliament are not available?

That is not the position.

Should they not be available in a sensible form? Anybody appointed to enforce the law or to advise on the law should not be expected to have to poke through piles of Acts passed since 1922 to find what he is looking for. Would it not be sensible that bound volumes of the Acts be available to such persons?

The Deputy has asked a question and he should allow the Minister to reply.

I am suggesting that the situation is incredible and I am urging the Minister to take steps to remedy it.

I must point out once more that copies of the statutes are available though it is true that they are not available in bound form year by year, which is what the Deputy is talking about, other than in libraries. The cost of reprinting these Acts and publishing them in bound form is estimated to be about £25 per volume. That would be per year and in most cases would be one volume per year.

Are we as broke as that?

We discussed this question with the Incorporated Law Society who took the matter up with us last year and they undertook to survey their members for the purpose of ascertaining the extent of the commitment there would be to purchase bound volumes should these be made available. We have not heard from the society yet in that regard. We have suggested to them that their members could purchase in single form the statutes of the out of print volumes and keep them in loose-leaf binders which is what many people do. Because the cost is so high and the demand, so far as we can ascertain, would be very small, I would not consider that there is justification for undertaking this expense especially when there is an alternative way of dealing with the matter.

If there are many people who are buying the unbound volumes and keeping them in loose-leaf folders, the only extra cost for making available bound volumes would be the cost of binding and surely that amount cannot be inordinate. In addition has not the State some duty to ensure the availability of statutes in bound form even if the cost is subject to some subsidisation? The Minister's solution is one that perhaps one of his colleagues might describe as an Irish solution to an Irish problem.

It may not be defective for that reason.

It is a question of incompetence and inefficiency.

Is every Deputy not entitled to a bound volume of the statutes covering his or her period of membership of this House?

Any question of privilege for Deputies in this regard is a matter for the Ceann Comhairle and for the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.

Am I to assume that we have no such privilege?

I do not know. That is not a matter for me.

Is the Minister saying that Deputies are not entitled to receive copies of the bound volumes?

I am not saying that. It is not a matter for me.

Current bound volumes are available to Deputies who request them.

Is it not unusual for a Minister for Finance to say that he is not aware of the position and will the Minister now accept from me—and I have been here for a little longer than he has been here—that we are so entitled and should receive bound volumes on demand?

I understood the Ceann Comhairle to say that the bound volumes are available to Deputies who request them.

I did not understand the Ceann Comhairle to rule that a Deputy is not entitled to volumes in respect of his period of membership.

The Chair is not ruling but is only explaining what is the existing regulation. Current volumes are not supplied to Deputies unless they are requisitioned.

But are they not entitled to the volumes for the period of their membership. I think the Chair will agree that they are so entitled if the Chair looks into the matter.

I think they must make the necessary formal application.

The point is that, haveing made the formal application, the Minister has got himself into a position where he cannot in fact give members what they are entitled to and he must be required to conform to the requirements of this House.

The Deputy makes that assertion. Has he any knowledge whatever to back up that statement?

What the Ceann Comhairle has just said.

He did not say it. He did not say any such thing.

We will refer it to the Committee on Procedures and Privileges——

I think that would be a more appropriate forum for it than here.

I should just like to mention that a long time ago I requested four volumes in writing to the Clerk of the Dáil and did not get them and I think I am entitled to them. As the matter has been raised here publicly in the House——

By the time Deputy Murphy has left the House it will be a couple of hundred volumes.

I should like clarification of this question.

Publish them and give everyone——