(Waterford): Is the Minister aware that the commitment given by the Minister for Finance was not to review the section of legislation under discussion but was a written guarantee to amend it? If the Minister accepts this as so — he was present during the course of the discussions — how soon will the proposed discussions take place with the trade union movement and when will we see the amending legislation before the House?

As soon as the discussions are completed, any amendments arising from them will be proceeded with immediately. The Deputy need have no worries about that.

I am perturbed at the attitude of the Minister.

A question please, Deputy.

Can the Minister assure me that, if he decides not to amend the legislation, the payments made to the workers will not be recouped by the State? Will the Minister state the funds from which the payments will be made? It was stated that they would be equivalent to the unemployment benefit and I should like an assurance that they will not be recouped by the State in the event of the Minister deciding not to amend the Act.

Payments were not made under this legislation and there is no question of them being refunded in any event. The question deals with the legislation and the legal aspect of it. I have explained the legal position, given the Act which we have. If Deputies consider that is inadequate in relation to particular disputes — this view was expressed in relation to this and other disputes — it should be remembered that this is the matter of the review which is under way at present. A similar review took place in 1967 when two additional relief clauses were built in at that time and have been in operation since then. I will proceed urgently with any amendments which arise from this review.