(Cavan-Monaghan) asked the Minister for Fisheries and Forestry the number of staff employed in his office on 1 January 1982; the number employed at the present time; and the number of staff employed in the office of his Minister of State.

There were ten heads of staff employed in the Minister's office on 1 January 1982. At the present time the number of staff employed is 12.

There are ten heads of staff employed in the office of the Minister of State.

(Cavan-Monaghan): It follows that that is an increase of 12 since 1 January.

There are 12 in the Minister's office and ten in my office.

(Cavan-Monaghan): But the Minister of State's office did not exist on 1 January. It follows therefore, that there is an increase of 12 between the two offices.

There is an increase of ten.

(Cavan-Monaghan): In the Minister's office on 1 January there were ten. There are now 12 in the Minister's office and ten in the Minister of State's office. Surely that is an increase of 12?

That is right.

(Cavan-Monaghan): Could the Minister say what they are engaged in?

What they are engaged in? There are ten in the Minister of State's office. That was a new section in the Department set up by the Taoiseach — Minister of State at the Department of Fisheries and Forestry — and ten people were employed in that office.

To do what?

(Cavan-Monaghan): Could the Minister tell us what duties have been assigned to him as Minister of State?

The Forest and Wildlife Service.

(Cavan-Monaghan): Just one more supplementary question, please.

Just one more, Deputy.

(Cavan-Monaghan): Would the appointment of the ten new people in the Minister of State's office, with the transfer of the Forest and Wildlife Service to that section, not permit of a reduction in the numbers employed in the Minister's office, instead of an increase there as well?

There are 12 employed in the Minister's office at present.

(Cavan-Monaghan): I appreciate that, but does the Minister not appreciate that he has told me that the duties in connection with forestry and wildlife were transferred from the Minister to the Minister of State? In spite of that, the number of staff in the Minister's office was increased by two and ten new people were employed in the Minister of State's office. Can the Minister explain that?

Impromptu.

The ten people in the Minister of State's office were already in the Department and there are no advisers. Neither was there anybody from outside.

(Cavan-Monaghan): A final supplementary. I do not think there were any advisers there — perhaps around the Department. If the senior Minister was relieved of duties in connection with forestry and wildlife, why was it necessary to increase the staff in his office by two and to create ten new jobs in the Minister of State's office?

The volume of work in the Minister's office was responsible. When my appointment was made I heard Deputy Fitzpatrick complain that it was about time a Minister of State was appointed to that Department, and that the work there was too much for one man.

(Cavan-Monaghan): I cannot let that go. Did the Minister not realise on that occasion that I was having him on, that I was being jocose, that I told him my wife thought I was a hell of a fine fellow altogether because it was taking two people now to do the job that I had been doing when I was there for seven months? Did the Minister take me seriously?

I do not think the Deputy's wife did.

The Deputy was looking for five extra Ministers of State last week.

I think I heard the Minister say——

Ask a question, please.

I will have to lay the ground for it first. I think I heard the Minister say that the extra staff now in private offices, either his or the Minister's, were recruited from inside the Department.

Yes.

What has happened to the jobs which those people left behind them at ordinary Departmental desks when they moved to the Ministers' offices?

They were filled through the ordinary recruitment process.

In other words, the suffering people of Ireland are carrying another ten people on their backs in order to facilitate the constituency work of Deputy McEllistrim and the Minister. Is that not the long and the short of it?

How many of the 12 and the ten are engaged in constituency work?

The ten people are required to do the Department's work.

I asked how many are engaged in constituency work?

Two.

Two of the 22? I asked a question about the ten and the 12. I asked how many of the ten and how many of the 12 are engaged in constituency work and how many work entirely in the Department?

I cannot answer for the Minister.

But the Minister of State is answering for the Minister. If he is not, what procedure do we adopt to get an answer from the Minister?

That is not the question I was asked. That is a separate question.

If that question is put down as a separate question I hope it will not be ruled out of order.

It is a separate question and therefore it would not be disqualified.

In view of the Minister's last remarks, if I was to assume that ten out of the 12 in the Minister's office were engaged in constituency work, I could be correct?

I do not think so.

But I could be. The Minister of State does not know.