asked the Minister for the Environment if he will make moneys available to Roscommon County Council to carry out improvement works on Barrymore and Glanduff railway crossings.

Dublin South-East): As the level crossings referred to are located on county roads, any contribution which the road authority might make towards the cost of improving these crossings would fall to be financed from the road authority's own resourcs, as supplemented by the general or block grant allocated annually by my Department.

It would appear that the Minister is totally out of touch ——

The Deputy must ask a question.

Is the Minister aware that the Roscommon local authority are unable to finance the improvement of those two level crossings, to which CIE are prepared to contribute 50 per cent? Is he also aware that at least four major accidents occurred at one of those crossings? Is he and his Department prepared to allow this state of affairs to continue and fail to honour their obligations by making money available to the local authority in view of the fact that the local authority do not have any money for road improvements and county roads? Is he prepared to make a special grant available?

(Dublin South-East): The Deputy implied I was not au fait with the Roscommon situation. I am now to give him the fullest information I can. Roscommon County Council wrote to the Department on 22 February 1982 requesting the allocation of a special grant of £30,000 to meet 50 per cent of the cost of installing warning bells and lights on two of the level crossings mentioned. The balance of the cost was to be met by CIE who would undertake the work. While a reply has not issued to that request, engineering advice is that the normal method of financing would apply, that is own resources and a block grant contribution by the road authority is appropriate.

The Department of Transport submitted draft orders providing for the automation of the level crossings. For this Departments's observations on 9 November 1979 and 21 February 1980 respectively, these orders are proposed to be made by the Minister for Transport under section 22 of the Transport (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1971, which requires consulation with the Minister for the Environment before the orders are made. When consulting with this Department the Department of Transport indicated that Roscommon County Council had also been consulted. This Department considered that, before giving observations on the draft orders, it would be desirable to see the comments of the county council, and the Department of Transport were informed accordingly. The views of the council have not yet been received in this Department. It has been confirmed by the Department of Transport that orders have not been made in these cases.

Section 23 of the Transport (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1981, provides that where an order has been made under section 22 of that Act, the relevant road authority shall recoup CIE 50 per cent of the cost incurred by the Department in providing and maintaining any works required by that order. It should be noted however that where CIE decide on their own initiative to improve a level crossing no cost would fall on the road authority.

The question of lights and bells at crossings is currently under consideration by a working group consisting of representatives of the Garda, the Department of Transport, CIE and this Department. It is understood from the engineering section that agreement to the general introduction of such crossings is not likely in the immediate future. In 1969 this Department indicated they had no objection in principle to the provision of lights and bells by CIE at seven locations, including Barrymore. It is unlikely therefore that this Department would object at this stage to the Barrymore installation but any further extension of these installations should await the outcome of the working groups consideration of these crossings. That is as thorough a reply as I can give.

(Cavan-Monaghan): I am sure Deputy Naughten is deeply grateful to the Minister for his reply, but does the Minister not agree that the history he read out seems to indicate that there is a situation at these crossings which could amount to a death trap? Since 1969 the Department of the Environment and the Department of Transport have been wrangling about this problem with Roscommon County council like a fool in the middle waiting for a reply. In the meantime nothing has been done to make the level crossing, which is over a public road and owned by a State body, CIE, less dangerous.

Deputy Fitzpatrick was Minister for Transport. Why did he not fix it?

No interruptions, please.

(Cavan-Monaghan): I was not Minister for Transport since 1979.

The Deputy said since 1969. He hung himself on his own hook.

(Cavan-Monaghan): I am surprised that Deputy Bellew, a Deputy from Dundalk, who should have a knowledge of railways——

Deputy Fitzpatrick——

I am surprised that a Deputy from Cavan-Monaghan——

Deputy Bellew and Deputy Fitzpatrick, please. Even I have lost the trend of Deputy Fitzpatrick's supplementaries. Ignore all interruptions and ask your supplementary.

On a point of order, I am entitled to be referred to as "Deputy", not as Deputy Bermingham has referred to me.

For a moment we will refer to you as "Deputy".

(Cavan-Monaghan): The Minister's reply to the supplementary would seem to indicate that there is a very unsatisfactory and dangerous state of affairs at this level crossing and it suggests this has been going on far too long because of discussions between his Department and CIE. Would he now take steps, as the Minister in charge of roads to see that this crossing is made safe and cut out the red tape?

(Dublin North-Central): We seem to be having speeches at Question Time. There are 800 questions on the Order Paper and I do not think the Opposition are serious ——

It is within the discretion of the Chair to allow supplementaries. I allow them where the Deputy must elicit further information. I presume Deputy Fitzpatrick is acting on behalf of Deputy Naughten in asking these supplementaries. Will the Minister now reply to Deputy Fitzpatrick's supplementaries and them we will move on to Question No. 6.

(Dublin South-East): The Deputy's question went in many directions but the answers were in my reply.

In view of the fact that Roscommon County Council, not CIE, requested that those two crossings be up-dated and that the local authority do not have any money as a result of the 1977 derating of private dwellings and the removal from the local authorities of the authority to strike a rate, will he make the money available to Roscommon County Council to carry out the improvements necessary on those crossings?

The Deputy asked those questions before.

I fully agree with the sentiments expressed by the Deputy on the other side of the House. This is a very serious problem. It is a simple matter to place bells and lights on railway crossings and this work should be carried out quickly and there should not be any further delay. A cyclist without a light or a bell on his bicycle is liable to be prosecuted. We have a national responsibility to ensure people's safety ——

I am calling Question No. 6.

(Cavan-Monaghan): It is on the record of the House——

(Dublin South-East): In reply to Deputy Naughten, for the third time, the information is contained in my reply to Deputy Andrews. I said that the Department would not in any way view the matter of placing bells or signals in any unfavourable light.

Could the Minister not give instructions to CIE?

The Minister has come into the House consistently reading out replies which give no information.

(Dublin South-East): That may be the Deputy's interpretation, but that is totally inaccurate.

Question No. 6.

6.