asked the Minister for Social Welfare if she is aware that the Eastern Health Board informed Deputy Gay Mitchell that delays in issuing fuel vouchers in his constituency at the beginning of the year arose because Dublin Corporation were allegedly having the vouchers printed and there was a problem with the printers; if, in view of the fact that the corporation deny this, she will ascertain why the Deputy was so informed; and if she is satisfied that such delays will not recur.

The Deputy's question evidently refers to the issue of supplementary vouchers to implement the increase in the value of the fuel scheme from £2 to £3 weekly under the 1981 budget. I am not in a position to comment on this allegation regarding the information stated to have been given by the Eastern Health Board regarding delay in having supplementary vouchers printed but I am satisfied—and from discussions I imagine this is the main thrust—that such delay as did occur did not affect the position of the recipients. The corporation and the health board involved moved separately with the result that at no point were the beneficiaries without the vouchers or the value of the vouchers and they had sufficient vouchers in their possession from mid-January to avail themselves of the budget increase until the supplementary vouchers were available.

My grouse is not with the Minister or her Department essentially except for the fact that without doubt and as a matter of honour I want to put on the record of this House——

A question.

Would the Minister consider that it would be a very serious matter for a public representative to be informed that there was such a delay on the part of a public body by another public body? I accept that the Minister has been advised as she has been by her officials and other authorities, but would she consider that it would be a very serious matter should that occur?

I would consider it fairly serious if anybody was misinforming anybody else, and particularly a Member of the Dáil. I gather from my reading of the correspondence in the matter that where delay was mentioned in one case the reference was to a normal delay and it may have been interpreted as an exceptional delay. The difficulty may be more apparent, but if the Deputy feels that there are matters still outstanding about which my reply has not satisfied him I will be willing to meet with him personally and discuss this with him further.

Would the Minister confirm on what date the approval was given to the corporation to proceed with the printing?

I do not think I have that in my file. The important consequence was that pending the printing by the corporation extra vouchers were issued to cover the increase until the point where the supplementary vouchers were ready and printed by the corporation.

Is the Minister of State saying, therefore, that in effect the delay in reaching a decision about the rate which was to be applied to the vouchers meant that there was difficulty in the printing process for the corporation and presumably for others who had to face that problem? Would she ensure, therefore, that a similar situation does not arise now in relation to the Christmas double week? As she knows, that double week is to go into operation in the week commencing 7 December and as yet the legislation has not come before the House.

We will do everything to ensure that there are no delays.

Did I understand the Minister of State to say that she would be making herself available to discuss these matters concerning individual clients with individual Members of the House? She said she would be making herself available to discuss these matters privately with individual Members of the House.

I indicated that I was willing to pursue the matters raised in public in this House with the Deputy off the floor of the House to facilitate everybody involved if it would improve his understanding of the situation.

Would this be the means used due to the lack of communication with the Department by telephone?

15.