asked the Minister for the Environment whether it is the Government's intention to call for the establishment of a public inquiry into the Bundoran fire disaster, County Donegal.

Garda reports have gone to the Director of Public Prosecutions who, I understand, is in correspondence with the Garda in the matter. Consideration of further appropriate action has been deferred pending issue of the Director of Public Prosecution's direction.

What is the reason for the delay in the publication of this report? Has any other inquiry been carried out other than the Garda inquiry, which I understand was completed as far back as last September? What is the delay in its publication?

The Garda did not finish their inquiry as far back as last September.

They finished their inquiry in October.

The Director of Public Prosecutions is still in correspondence with the Garda on it in relation to additional information. However, it is a question for the Director of Public Prosecutions as to when he makes a decision on it. As far as other reports are concerned, the fire adviser to my Department and the local acting chief fire officer in the Donegal area also prepared reports.

Is there not a danger of confining this to an internal inquiry when we have accepted the principle both in relation to the Stardust and Whiddy disasters that there should be a public sworn inquiry? A number of people died in this fire and it had many features common to the Stardust disaster. If this tribunal had been held and a report been published it might have obviated the dreadful disaster of the Stardust.

Could we leave the matter until the Director of Public Prosecutions has acted and at that stage further action will be taken?

Could I ask——

Deputy White, please.

Could I ask——

No. Deputy White, please.

Is the Minister telling the House that he does not know the findings of the Director of Public Prosecutions' office seven months after this serious fire in Bundoran? Is there something wrong? There is a big question mark over this. Why this delay? It is now seven months since ten people were burned to death.

A Garda report was forwarded to the Director of Public Prosecutions who requested further information from the Garda. That involved further inquiries. The information has now gone to the Director of Public Prosecutions who is still in contact with the Garda and it is up to the Director of Public Prosecutions as to when he makes his decision.

Would the Minister agree to making public the findings of his departmental inquiry into this matter? This would be beneficial not only to the people in Bundoran but presumably to the tribunal sitting at present.

Consideration of further appropriate action in relation to the Bundoran fire disaster would include the report to which the Deputy refers. Any other action is being deferred pending the decision of the Director of Public Prosecutions.

A final supplementary from Deputy Browne.

Is there not a special urgency now in so far as that one of the problems here was that this is a small town with a population of about 1,700 people which in summertime is inflated to about 25,000 people? This is a common feature in the summer period. In those circumstances is it not particularly urgent that the Minister should do something about it in order to contact the ESB in relation to electrical faults, the fire services in regard to their gross inadequacy and Bord Fáilte so that they will do something about protecting people who go to these hotels, some of whom suffered so terribly because they accepted in good faith that Bord Fáilte had carried out their responsibility, that the Department had carried out their responsibility in respect of fire inspection, fire protection and fire services? The Department, through successive Governments, have grievously failed in this responsibility.

The Director of Public Prosecutions is totally independent of me or any other member of the Government and his decision and his timing of it is totally independent. It would be inappropriate for me to contact him on the matter.

Will the Minister explain the logic of the procedure by which in this instance he refuses a public inquiry until after a decision about prosecutions has been taken, whereas in relation to the Stardust a public inquiry takes place before any question of prosecutions? Why are two different procedures attached to these two cases? Will the Minister explain it because nobody understands it?

When will the Department make known their findings?

Please, Deputy.

Ten people were burned to death and that is a very serious thing.

Question No. 3.

It is only right that we should ask questions.

If Deputy White continues to interrupt I will——

Could I ask the Minister——

The Deputy cannot.

It is a disgrace. There is discrimination between Dublin and Donegal in this case——

Will the Minister reply to Deputy FitzGerald and this will end the discussion on the matter?

——and the Minister is refusing to answer questions. I understand the Minister knows the decision of the Director of Public Prosecutions on this.

The Minister will not make his Department's findings known to the public. I want to know why not?

Will Deputy White please resume his seat?

I must reply to one issue raised. The decision of the Director of Public Prosecutions is not known and it is scandalous that the Deputy should make such an accusation in this House.

Why does the Minister not make the findings known?

In relation to the question of calling an inquiry in relation to the Bundoran——

People lost their lives because of the delay in the Minister's Department.

Will Deputy Browne please stop interrupting?

——case, it was not called immediately. It is now with the Director of Public Prosecutions and it would be inappropriate for me to take action at this stage pending the decision of the Director of Public Prosecutions.

The Stardust inquiry was within weeks.

Question No. 3.

One law for Donegal and another for Dublin.