asked the Minister for Defence if tenders were requested from more than one manufacturer or contractor prior to the order for five Timoney APC's by his Department; if so, if he will give details of each, and if not, why, as there was more than one contractor available.

Tenders were not invited in this case.

After full consideration, it was decided that the five APCs should be procured from the Timoney companies which had developed the three prototype vehicles and had produced the vehicle which was regarded as suitable for use by the Defence Forces.

Is it a regulation or rule within the Department in seeking tenders that there must be more than one? Is there any EEC directive to insist on it being open for tender in other member states?

In this case it was reasonable where an individual designs and produces the prototype vehicle, that the contract for production models be given to him.

I am not talking about it being reasonable. Are we compelled in any way to seek more than one tender for an article of that kind? Is there any EEC directive to compel us?

I could not be certain but presumably there is not.

Was it advertised? Were tenders invited?

Research and development.

They are the underlying words and I am glad that the Deputy has raised this principle.

Who paid for it?

I suggest to the Deputy that he visit some of the industries in his own constituency——

They are closing down by the hour.

——and ask them what money was spent on research and development and how many times they had to change course in the course of the development.

I am calling the next question.

The Deputy would begin to understand what is involved.

The Minister is to answer Question No. 32. This is Question Time.

The whole thing is unsatisfactory.

The Chair is trying to muzzle Deputies.

The Chair is not trying to muzzle anyone. We have got through only 31 questions in one hour and forty five minutes and there are more than 100 questions on the Order Paper.

I asked the Minister if advertisements were issued. I understand that is standard procedure.

I would assume so but as I am not absolutely sure I cannot answer the question.

Surely the Minister should have that information.

They were not advertised.

At any rate, I am satisfied the correct thing was done.

The Chair has called Question No. 32.