Would the Minister tell us if all the information being sought in Questions Nos. 9 to 23 in the name of Deputy Deasy could have been assertained easily from the Minister's office or from the Department?

I consider it quite acceptable that a Deputy should use the means available to him in the House to get the information he wants for the people he represents.

That is not the question I asked. I asked the Minister if she will state whether all this information could have been readily available from the Minister's office or by means of a direct inquiry to the Department of Social Welfare?

I would make every effort to assist a Deputy to secure information through either method of approach. Seeking information is quite acceptable and I do not think it is my role as a Minister of State to suggest to Deputies how they should seek information. I suggest Deputies are capable of choosing from the methods open to them how best they can get the information.

Therefore the Minister would not agree with me that this is rather an obvious waste of parliamentary time by the Deputy concerned, since the information would be readily and easily available to him from the Minister's office or from the Department.

I am touched by Deputy Haughey's concern, but I had the same difficulty when he was Minister for Social Welfare and when his successor, Deputy Woods, was Minister. There seems to be great difficulty in the Department, which has been plagued by problems during the past couple of years. I am asking the Minister what attempts have been made to solve these problems and if any success have been achieved.

A number of matters relate to that problem. There has been a great deal of progress. The initial problem was mainly due to the change over to computer and the connection with the Department of Finance when we moved over to pay-related benefits. Most of the problems have been ironed out. The difficulty which caused the Deputy's first question was an administrative error. Many of these difficulties have been looked into and have been ironed out. By the end of June all records were practically up to date but then a new industrial dispute caused further problems. In relation to the problem about replies, obviously in the past Deputies found it necessary to seek urgent information or action in this way. I would hope that, with increased efficiency in the Department, that need will not continue for much longer.

I reject the assertion by Deputy Haughey that people should write letters and not ask questions. This is our democratic right. If my constituents can get results within three days by having a Dáil question asked instead of in three months, which is the normal waiting time after writing a letter, I will ask a question and so should everybody else.

Could I ask the Minister of State if the putting down by a Deputy of a number of questions in detail of this sort takes up a great deal of administrative time and effort in the Department and, in fact, contributes to the delay and the problems to which she has adverted?

What about the hardship caused to the people concerned?

The problem dates from Deputy Haughey's time as Minister for Social Welfare.

The Minister of State to reply to a supplementary question.

The question related to one person. I would imagine that the same administrative attention would be given to the problem whether it arose in a letter to my Department or in the form of a Dáil question. Ultimately the same amount of investigation would go into it. It is regrettable that in the past Deputies found this necessary, and that this tradition has built up. I would hope that a more efficient service will emerge over the next 12 months or so as the new Ministers begin to make an impact on the Department. The problems with the changeover which caused the original delays have been cleared up and should not recur. If we come back to this problem in ten or 12 months perhaps the need to put down this type of question will not exist.

Is the Minister of State assuring the House that she is taking steps to ensure that Deputies will get information much more freely from the Department of Social Welfare than has been the practice over the past two, three or four years? Will she assure the House that she will take steps to ensure that Deputies and members of the public will be able to get through to the Department on the telephone within a reasonable time? I suggest that a reasonable time would be within half-a-day because very often it takes up to half-a-week to get through on the telephone to the Department.

The Deputy is making a speech. He should confine himself to a question.

That problem has been there since the Leader of the Opposition was Minister for Social Welfare. Will the Minister assure the House that that situation will be improved?

(Limerick-East): Can the Minister guarantee that if any other sections of the Department of Social Welfare are computerised in the future, she will run a parallel system until the bugs are taken out of the computer? This is normal procedure when one changes over to a computer. If she did that we would not have the silly situation which appertained over the past 12 months. The computer programme failed and people were left without disability benefit.

I welcome the Deputy's comments. The procedure he recommends would be much more desirable than the one which existed in the past. In reply to Deputy McMahon, the Minister is committed to making the system more efficient. Apart from replies to inquiries by Deputies, the service to the public should be more efficient and more speedy. I hope that the problems about letters to the Department and questions in the House will become less urgent.

Does the Minister agree that parliamentary questions for written reply will have the same effect as parliamentary questions for oral answer and that there is no need to put down a question for oral reply in the interest of constituents?

I am not convinced of that.

I am putting the question to the Minister. I believe that is the case. It would be more helpful to the Minister of State if questions were put down in that form.

There was more talk than action from the Deputy.

There was a parallel system. I should like to thank the Minister of State for making it clear that the problems in the Department were dealt with by the end of June. It was very gracious of the Minister to make that point clear. I wish her every success.

While I have been fascinated by the exchange of views between Deputies, I should like to point out that Question No. 24 tabled for today some time ago by a Deputy with great foresight asks all these questions and may not be reached today because of the impulsive conduct of some Members of the House who ask irrelevant questions. With the greatest of respect I suggest that in future Members of the House should read their Order Paper before entering the House so that we can have an orderly processing of questions and answers.

There was a question about written and oral answers. I should imagine that the written answer, while giving information, takes up less of the time of the House but there is no possibility of asking supplementary questions which everybody here seems to enjoy so much.

15.