asked the Minister for Finance the steps, if any, intended to deal with the shortfall in revenue over expenditure as revealed in the estimates for the first nine months of 1979.

The Deputy will appreciate that a significant part of the shortfall is due to the effects of the post office dispute in delaying the collection of revenue. The backlog of revenue is being followed up since the resumption of postal services and much of it has already been received, though a sizeable amount is still outstanding. I do not contemplate any further steps at this stage of the year to deal with the shortfall referred to in revenue vis-à-vis expenditure.

Obviously the shortfall spells out grim news for the PAYE taxpayers in that presumably it will have certain implications in the matter of raising tax. Could the Minister say whether he foresees before the end of this year, this alarming deficit——

The original question asks the Minister what steps he intends to take. The Deputy may not enlarge the question. The question must be relevant.

I am asking the Minister whether in the normal way he foresees this deficit being closed by the end of the year or whether he sees this alarming gap still being visible at the end of the year.

I have already indicated in my reply that a sizeable amount is still outstanding. In fact, a fairly substantial amount will be outstanding at the end of the year.

I anticipate that the bulk of that will be recovered next year.

What is the current estimated total of the shortfall at the end of the year likely to be?

That is a separate question.

It is related directly to the question.

It is related, but it is a separate question.

We are asking about a shortfall——

The Deputy will understand that we cannot ask every question that may be related.

What is the current estimated total shortfall at the end of the year?

The Deputy should put down a separate question. If the Minister wishes to answer that he may, but the Chair must discourage widening the scope of questions having regard to the large number of questions.

Would the Minister agree that the shortfall in revenue with which he will have to deal in the next budget is only in small part accounted for by the postal dispute and that any attempt——

That is an argument, Deputy. Question No. 3.

I would ask Deputy Kelly to co-operate, please.

Is the Minister planning any budgetary steps between November 7 and the end of the year?

I replied to that question last week. In case the Deputy does not know, no autumn budget is contemplated.

If the Minister really believes that a sizeable proportion of the deficit at the end of the year will be due to the postal strike, when does the Minister expect the postal service to return to normal?

That is a totally separate question.

Does the Minister definitely rule out——

The Chair must relate to the Standing Orders. Question No. 3.