(Cavan-Monaghan) asked the Minister for the Environment if large numbers of applications for home improvement reconstruction grants which were lodged in his Department in or about January 1980 have been lost or mislaid or were destroyed; if he is aware that as a result many applicants have suffered the loss of grants to which they were entitled; and if he will take steps to make good the loss to those concerned.

I do not accept that large numbers of applications were lost, mislaid or destroyed.

Following the announcement of the termination of the old scheme of house improvement and solid fuel grants on 21 January 1980, a huge number of applications were received by the closing date of 1 February 1980. Applicants who maintained that their applications had been submitted in time to meet this closing date, even though there was no record in my Department of their receipt or they were recorded as not having been received in time, were given the opportunity to verify their claims by the submission of certificates of registration or posting.

Furthermore, all applications forwarded through the post were accepted when it was clearly established from the postmark on the envelopes that they had been posted not later than 31 January 1980 and in the case of the Dublin area not later than the morning of 1 February 1980. In the circumstances, I do not consider that any further action on my part is required.

(Cavan-Monaghan): Does the Minister agree that practically every Deputy has numbers of replies from the Department stating that certain applications cannot be traced, that certain applications were late, and asking for further information about the names of the applicants and the situation of the houses? Does that not suggest that something has gone wrong in the Department, probably arising from the enormous number of applications, totalling 40,000 according to the Minister, which were received?

As I said earlier, anyone who comes to me or the Department and who says he posted the application, when it can be identified on the envelope that it was posted on 31 January outside the Dublin area, or that it was posted on 1 February in the Dublin area, is accepted in my Department. I am surprised at the Deputy. His Government had a look at this and did nothing about it.

They did so.

Deputy Enright knows what they did. They took the house loans from the single people.

We re-introduced the grants.

They applied conditions with them. That will come up on a later question and I will answer that too. I am not changing my attitude with regard to the question I was asked. Deputy Fitzpatrick is a senior Member of this House, and he was a Member of the previous Government. As far as I know, this was raised at a Fine Gael Party meeting and they did nothing about it. They said we did the right thing. I will not change it.

(Cavan-Monaghan): The Minister should be cool. The people involved are very concerned about this and they would like to see us dealing with it in a cool, calm and collected way. Might I remind the Minister of two things? First, he is now the Minister in charge. Secondly, as has been pointed out, his Government cancelled the grant and created the deadline. I want to suggest to the Minister by way of question that there is chaos in his Department. There is confusion in his Department. Does he not agree that files have been mislaid and lost? As evidence of that he told me yesterday that a grant was paid on 14 April 1980 and I was able to produce a letter from his Department dated May 1981, 13 months later, saying that the file had gone to the inspector for checking and payment of the grant if necessary. Does he not think there is something wrong in his Department when I can tell him that as recently as yesterday I got two replies about the same grant from his Department? In the reply to Question No. 913 I was told his Department were waiting for a tax certificate and the grant could not be paid until that tax certificate was furnished. Yesterday I also got a reply to Question No. 865, dealing with the same case, saying the tax certificate had been received in the Department and the grant would be paid shortly. Those two replies were given to me yesterday by the Minister. I ask him to accept that as evidence that, to put it mildly, all is not well in his Department. Might I suggest that he should set up a small committee of people in his Department to interview these people and assess them? One person I was speaking about today is a personnel manager and another I have in mind is a senior employee in the Post Office. Will the Minister set up a small committee in his Department to interview these people and make up their own minds about them? If they certify that they should be paid, will he pay them? On the question of money, the Minister is bringing in a Supplementary Estimate on Friday next asking for——

On a point of order——

(Cavan-Monaghan): I did not expect this from Deputy Molloy.

——is the Deputy entitled to make a speech at Question Time?

It is a long supplementary. I know the Deputy was trying to clarify a point.

(Cavan-Monaghan): A Cheann Comhairle, if you were down the country doing clinics and having these people coming in to you every week, you would know the enormity of this mess.

Indeed I do.

(Cavan-Monaghan): On the question of finance, is the Minister not introducing a Supplementary Estimate on Friday to pay for the Gregory deal and other deals, and could he not add another few million pounds and clean up this mess?

I am having an investigation into the case raised by the Deputy with me yesterday. I was quite annoyed that that should happen. I have nothing further to add to the reply I gave the Deputy.

Has the Minister looked at the question of transferring this matter back to the local authority engineers who, in many cases, pass by the houses of these applicants ten times more often than the engineers or the inspectors from a Department? Would he not agree that that would make for much more effective government and cut out all the extra bureaucracy which is piling up these difficulties.

I have looked into that. I have made a decision on it and I will not do it.

That is a poor day for the local authorities.

A question please, Deputy.

Will the Minister investigate this? Grant inspectors called to houses in my constituency and I got replies from the Minister's Department no later than last week saying no applications were received.

A question, please.

Will the Minister investigate this situation and not have Deputies acting as messenger boys for the Department's inspectors.

If the Deputy gives me the names I will be only too glad to have them processed.

Would the Minister accept that, in the ordinary course of events, people corresponding with his Department, or any other Government Department, would anticipate that their letters would be received, filed and dealt with and, for that reason, they do not find it necessary to obtain evidence of postage? Therefore, the apparent concession he made is his statement is of little value. If that concession is of little value, and if Deputies from every side of the House are expressing annoyance at the present situation, would the Minister accept that manifestly things are not right in his Department and he has a responsibility to go further than he has gone?

I am having the matter looked at. The Deputy will appreciate that I have been back in the Department for a couple of months only. I have some very important decisions to make in regard to finance which the Deputy's Government failed to supply. I am expected to wave a magic wand in a couple of months, but I am not in a position to do that.