I appreciate that. I would not like that to happen. In relation to the problem of itinerants generally or, as I describe them scrap metal merchants in many instances, can the Minister say how many families are in need of re-siting in the County Dublin area?

That seems to be a separate question.

I have not got that information with me. I understand the Deputy's concern. I recall that he raised this matter in this House on an earlier occasion, about four or five months ago. I recognise the seriousness of the matter. All I can say is that the council meeting of 14 February this month passed a section 4 motion directing the manager to initiate proceedings under section 27 to restrain the unauthorised use of those lands at present occupied by the itinerants. These proceedings — and this is the critical point — are to be against the owners of the land and the occupiers of the land.

Their role has been disgraceful. They did not discharge their social obligations to the scrap metal merchants and the local community.

Deputy Molloy with a final supplementary.

A very fundamental principle is involved.

In the Minister's reply he indicated to the House that it was his opinion that the people referred to in Deputy Andrews' question are obliged to apply for planning permission. I think the Minister recommended that the local authority should apply the Planning Acts and the Sanitary Services Acts in these cases. Arising out of that advice to the House, is the Minister distinguishing between fairly well-to-do traders who happen to reside in caravans and who move their business around the country and the deprived section of our community who are the concern of the itinerant settlement committees? Is he also suggesting that the ordinary deprived itinerant citizen is to be required to apply for planning permission to place his tent or his camp on the side of the road?

I am very glad the Deputy asked that supplementary, because there is a distinction in my mind and in the minds of most Deputies between the traditional tinker or itinerant in our society and the kind of unauthorised illegal trader to whom Deputy Andrews referred.

Sometimes local residents cannot appreciate that sophisticated distinction.

I take it the Minister is aware that, if they move these people, the local authority will be expected to provide another site?

I am so aware.

Democracy is under threat.

Could I ask one final supplementary?

No. I called the final supplementary.

We did not ask any supplementaries on the earlier questions. We do not wish to take up the time of the House.

You cannot save them all for one question.

One important principle has arisen from what Deputy Walsh said. Hitherto there was an unwritten agreement among the local authorities, the managers and the Department, that itinerant members of our community would not be prosecuted if the local authority were not able to direct them to an official halting stand where they could park their tents and caravans. Is the Minister now saying that has changed and these members of our community will be prosecuted in the courts where the local authority have failed in their duty to them?

No, I am not saying that at all.

What is the Minister saying?

Ceist 10.