I wish to lodge a protest at the Minister's conduct in taking Question No. 39 with Question No. 13. I was not here at the time. They should have been put together on the Order Paper if they were being taken together. I was prevented from raising important supplementaries because I was not present.

The Minister asked permission and received permission to answer both questions together. We are dealing with four questions at the moment, Nos. 16, 17, 18 and 19.

I can assure the Deputy that no discourtesy was intended and nothing that would give rise to a protest.

Could the Minister repeat the answer so that I will have an opportunity of asking supplementaries?

We will have supplementaries on the questions before the House.

I have been prevented from asking supplementaries because the Minister answered both questions together.

The Minister asked the permission of the Chair to take the two question together. There was no objection from anybody and the two question were take together and were disposed of.

I was not here so I could not be expected to know they were being taken together.

The Chair is not responsible for who is here or who is not here. We are dealing with Question Nos. 16, 17, 18 and 19.

I wish, with your permission, to raise on the adjournment the subject matter of Question No. 39.

The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.

I hesitated to object, but I could see no rationale for taking Question No. 39 and not Question Nos. 36, 37, 38 and 34.

We cannot discuss questions that have already been dealt with.

Deputy Bruton said that I did not want to answer Question No. 39. I am not going to allow Deputy Bruton to make implications like that.

Would Deputy Bruton listen to the Chair? If the Minister wishes that the question be taken again I am sure the Chair will facilitate that being done and leave it on the Order Paper for the next day.

Question No. 13 answered separately.

Question No. 39 to remain on Order Paper.