It is proposed to take business in the following order: Nos. 2, 3, 7, 8, 1, 11, 12, 13 (Resumed), 14 and 9. Business will be interrupted at 5 p.m. to take item No. 9 and the order will not be resumed thereafter.

Arising on No. 7, could I ask the Taoiseach if he would indicate to the House the reasons for the exceptional prolongation of the Easter adjournment to a period of almost a month when the practice has been to adjourn for two weeks, or 18 days or so, in view of the amount of business before the House in terms of Estimates which have not been tackled and for which additional time has not been provided so far? On the presumption that the Government have some legislative programme, why is it that the Dáil is being asked to do nothing for this prolonged period?

My view is that we have afforded the Opposition parties ample opportunity to deal with all the matters which they wished to raise. We have given them opportunities to debate current issues as they arose. Ministers are anxious to spend some time in their Departments over the recess.

For the first time for four years.

Will they be able to find their way?

Will the porter let them in?

Does that include the Minister for Health?

The Taoiseach without interruption, please.

The Opposition parties are giving a very clear impression of a gaggle of geese at a crossroads. By the arrangement I propose we will sacrifice a day and a half's sitting only, and we have every intention of making that up between the resumption and the summer recess.

On the Order of Business, would the Taoiseach not consider it entirely inappropriate that the Dáil should have an over-long adjournment over Easter in view of the economic disaster which the country is facing under him as Taoiseach?

I do not accept for a moment the title "economic disaster". Many of the comments by the Opposition recently on these matters have been less than helpful and, in fact, they have been irresponsible. I do not think any contribution made by the Opposition parties in the Dáil would contribute in any way to the solution of our economic problem.

I am fully aware that the Taoiseach is not the greatest democrat in the country, but surely he subscribes——

We cannot have a debate on the Order of Business.

——to the rights of the Opposition in a parliamentary democracy to make legitimate and appropriate comments on the very sad performance of the Government.

Of course I do.

They are cutting and running away from legitimate opposition and that is no answer to the problems facing the country.

Item No. 2.

I am entitled to reply to that. I have some democratic rights in this House and I am entitled to reply to what Deputy Cluskey said. Any impartial observer inside or outside the House would recognise that, since this House resumed after the Christmas recess, we have given the Opposition every opportunity to debate any issues they wished to raise here. If they have not done so, it is their own fault because they wasted their time on a whole lot of side issues.

Arising out of the Taoiseach's remarks——

We cannot have a debate on the Order of Business.

Arising out of the Taoiseach's remarks——

I allowed questions on the Order of Business and now we are having a debate.

My question is on the Order of Business. I want to ask the Taoiseach whether there is not urgency about discussing the Estimates in view of the very grave doubts which exist about the validity of those Estimates.

I am sorry Deputy. This is a debate and I am not allowing it.

It is a question.

This is a very urgent matter which I want to raise. I sought to raise it in the House yesterday. It is the threatened closure of the Talbot motor company which has widespread implications.

It is not in order to raise that matter on the Order of Business.

Will my Private Notice Question be allowed?

That question is being processed.

Will it be allowed today?

It is being processed and I will communicate with the Deputy. Deputy.

It is a matter of urgent public importance and it has very serious implications. I want to know if I will be allowed to raise it at Question Time today.

In view of the fact that the Minister for the Environment has assured the House that he will be introducing legislation shortly giving legal force to the draft building regulations, can he tell the House now when that legislation will be ready?

Early next session.

Does that imply that we will be coming back?

He would not know.

Could the Minister say when he will supply a copy of the Building Regulations to Members of the House?

Everybody in the country knows about them.

No.

I wish to give notice that I intend to raise on the Adjournment this evening a question regarding the request made last weekend by the Stardust Relatives Committee to the Taoiseach to commit to writing the verbal assurances given by him concerning (1) the State paying compensation to the injured persons involved, (2) the building of a community centre in the area, (3) ostensibly the position of the Department of Education in relation to the Stardust tribunal, (4) ostensibly the position of the chief fire adviser to the Minister for the Environment in relation to the tribunal and (5) the payment of mental distress compensation to the persons involved.

I will communicate with the Deputy.

If some further device is found for ruling that out of order today for the third day——

It is entirely unruly to suggest such a thing.

I withdraw that, I should also like to give notice of my intention to raise on the Adjournment the misleading of the House by the Taoiseach during Question Time on Wednesday of last week.

I will communicate with the Deputy. I am calling Item No. 2.

The Chair will communicate with somebody else first.

That remark of Deputy Kelly's was totally uncalled for and beneath contempt.