asked the Minister for the Environment if sworn affidavits relating to house improvement and solid fuel conversion grants were accepted by his Department after 31 January 1980; the number of affidavits accepted in each case; if such affidavits are still being accepted; if any public notices were issued to the effect that such affidavits might be accepted; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

Every application for a solid fuel grant must incorporate a statutory declaration by the applicant that the information given on the application is correct. In addition, in the administration of the various housing grants schemes, sworn affidavits are from time to time accepted by my Department as a means of verifying particulars in relation to the applications. A record of such affidavits accepted is not kept. Each relates to an individual case and is associated with the other papers relating to that case. Since the question of the need for and the acceptability of an affidavit arises in individual cases and is pursued directly with the applicants, a public notice on the lines suggested by the Deputy would not be appropriate.

Many people applied for this type of grant and their applications were either mislaid or could not be found when the time came to look for them and in some cases affidavits appear to have been accepted by the Department. Is the Department still accepting affidavits in relation to reconstruction grants and solid fuel conversion grants?

Affidavits cannot be accepted as evidence that the grant application was received in the Department because the condition lays down quite clearly that the application would have to be received by a certain date and an affidavit does not mean it was received.

(Cavan-Monaghan): Is it not the case that many applications have been lost and that replies from the Minister's Department to that effect have been sent out?

Many claims have been made to the Department that applications were mislaid or lost but we have no evidence that they ever arrived at the Department.

That is because they were lost.

(Cavan-Monaghan): Is the Minister aware of cases where inspections were carried out and the files lost? Inspections could not be carried out unless the applications were in.

I am not aware of any such applications.

Would the Minister confirm that in fact in no case were affidavits that the document had been sent to the Department accepted as proof?

I am not aware of——

I asked the Minister if they had been accepted. Will he tell the House at a later stage whether they were or were not?

Yes.

12.

asked the Minister for the Environment whether he has now located the correspondence and application form of a person (details supplied) in County Dublin in connection with a house improvement grant application; and, if so, the present stage of the application.

Despite an exhaustive search, ther is no record in my Department of the receipt of an application for a house improvement grant for the person named. Unless evidence can be produced to indicate that an application was made in time to reach my Department by 1 February 1980 nothing further can be done. The correspondence already received from the applicant and the Deputy does not provide such evidence.

The Minister will be aware that this applicant has gone through the only conceivable means available to him to get this grant, or to send in the application, and then he discovers the Department have lost the application. The only way he can state that the application was lodged is to send further information by way of registered letter. Has the Minister any memory of that registered letter being received?

Yes, but a registered letter is not an application. The registered letter was received after the closing date. It had nothing to do with the application. The application, as far as I am concerned, was not received before the closing date and I do not accept that the application got lost in the Department.

Then if the person in this situation were to make a sworn affidavit, as has been suggested in the previous question, would the Minister not be prepared to accept the sworn word of that person that he had applied prior to the closing date?

A sworn affidavit cannot be accepted as proof that the application was lodged with my Department before the closing date. If there is any further evidence such as a receipt or acknowledgment from the Department we will certainly accept that as proof but, in the absence of that application, which has to be in the department by a certain date, unfortunately that is the position.

The Minister will be aware, as we all are, that there was considerable confusion in the Department after this grant scheme closed, and the confusion ran to such an extent that the public office was locked for a number of weeks because the office was not able to cater for the number of people calling. Public representatives were not allowed to call and at one stage Ministers were not able to get into their own offices. In a situation where they could manage to lose a junior Minister is it not conceivable that they could lose a number of applications? Surely the Minister could accept the sworn word of an applicant. Otherwise he is questioning evidence given by a person under oath that he applied prior to the closing date.

There are a whole lot of points. He could have delivered the letter by hand or posted it.

Posting of a letter is legal proof of sending the application.

Is the Minister saying that a persons sworn word will not be accepted by a Department of State in a so-called Catholic country?

That is not relevant.

13.

asked the Minister for the Environment the reason for the delay in the payment of a house improvement grant to a person (details supplied) in County Galway.

There is no record in my Department of the receipt of an application for a housing grant from the person named.

14.

asked the Minister for the Environment the reason for the delay in the payment of a solid fuel grant to a person (details supplied) in County Galway.

Any delay in dealing with this case is due to the huge number of applications being processed in my Department. The grant will be paid shortly.

15.

asked the Minister for the Environment when a grant for an extension and the installation of water, which were passed by an inspector 18 months ago, will be paid to a person (details supplied) in County Kilkenny who wrote four times requesting payment but received no reply to date although he received an acknowledgment to three other letters which were registered and if he will explain the reason full replies were not sent to the seven letters.

A grant will be paid when an inspection establishes that work has been satisfactorily completed and is eligible for a grant. The inspection will be carried out very shortly.

As the file in this case became mislaid, I regret that it is not possible to give information about the correspondence.

Could the Minister tell me how the file was mislaid or whether it was found or can he give some details or some explanation?

There was a very large volume of applications as I already said and this created certain difficulties for the staff and for the inspectors and, unfortunately, in this case the file got lost and despite an exhaustive search it has not been found but the matter has been dealt with and the person will be paid his grant.

(Cavan-Monaghan): Have many files to be reconstructed?

Could this be related to the previous question about applications being mislaid and lost and no acknowledgement or receipt being received from the Department? It could relate to this.

No, it could not.

Could the Minister explain why four letters written to the Department were not replied to?

As I said, a certain strain was put on the staff because of the large number of applications received. Unfortunately in this case the file got lost and now we have arranged for an inspection to be carried out.

Did the four letters get lost?

A final supplementary.

Why were they not replied to?

They are too busy looking for files.

Why were those four letters not replied to? Why were the three registered letters acknowledged but not replied to? The question is there and the Minister should give me an explanation.

I have given an explanation.

The Minister did not say why this old age pensioner who was due a grant for 18 months had not received a reply to her letters. The Department were not prepared to make the grant available to her. In frustration she came to me to try to get the grant. The Minister should explain why she did not get a reply to any of her seven letters. I am not talking about files but letters.

A final supplementary.

Is the Deputy saying those letters were addressed to me?

They were addressed to the Minister for the Environment. Deputy Fahey is the Minister and tells me now——

The only answer I can give is the one I have before me, that is, that the file was mislaid and that there is a huge backlog of work in that Department.

I asked a specific question. Why were these letters not replied to?

Question No. 16.

I am waiting for an answer to a question which is on the Order Paper.

I am sorry, Deputy, but I have allowed——

I am sorry if I am disorderly but I am waiting for an answer to a question——

I have allowed five supplementaries on this one question. I will allow one final supplementary.

I am asking the same question I have already asked three times. What is the Minister's answer? Will the Chair instruct the Minister to answer me?

I have no responsibility for the Minister's answers.

Are you not the lucky man?

I am calling Question No. 16.

I am not sitting down. I want an answer to my question. Why were this woman's letters not answered?

(Cavan-Monaghan): They do not answer letters from individuals.

This is only the tip of the iceberg. I have people coming to me every day with this type of question.

We do not want a debate.

I do not want a debate but I want an answer.

I have already given the answer: the file in this case was unfortunately mislaid.

Accepted.

The Deputy asked about the letters. I have no knowledge of those letters other than that the file was lost. Perhaps the letters were attached to the file. I am not prepared to waste the time of a busy Department trying to get grants paid——

Wasting whose time?

——and carrying out extensive investigations.

Question No. 16.

I do not accept that as an answer.