asked the Minister for Education if, in view of the objection of the entire INTO profession to the new school commencement age, he will be prepared to reconsider the Government's position with a view to withdrawing the new regulation.

As I have already stated in reply to Question No. 5, I have been informed by the INTO that congress of the INTO at its special congress on 14 November 1981 adopted a resolution that the organisation "shall seek a Declaration in the Courts that the Minister for Education is in breach of contract or has induced a breach of contract of teachers in National Schools".

In the circumstances I do not consider that it would be appropriate for me to answer this question at the present time.

Could I ask not a final, but one supplementary question? Would the Minister direct his reply to the contents of my question? Is he prepared to reconsider the Government's point of view? When replying, would he advise the House whether he has had any assessment carried out, taken that the outcome of the legal proceedings would be favourable to the abolition of the circular, in relation to those teachers who would have had to be placed on a panel from superannuation and other points of view?

The general tenor of the Deputy's supplementary question gives proof to the correctness of my original reply. I have been asked now to comment on the likely outcomes and results of possible court cases.

That is not what the Deputy said.

7.