asked the Minister for Finance the number of people in the PAYE sector who have take-home incomes per year after deductions of between (a) £1,000 and £5,000; (b) £5,000 and £10,000; (c) £10,000 and £15,000; (d) £25,000 and £30,000; and (e) over £30,000.

Statistics are not available which would enable the precise information requested by the Deputy to be given. Deductions for PRSI are levied on reckonable earnings, that is, gross income less superannuation contributions. Information is not available which would show the amount of these deductions by range of gross income.

From the information available an estimate of the amount of income tax deductions has been made by a range of total income, that is, gross income less superannuation contributions, interest relief, medical insurance relief and allowable expenses, and the reply to the Deputy has been compiled on this basis. The following table sets out the information which I propose to circulate in the Official Report:

1982-83

Notes on table:

1. The figures given under the heading "Number of persons" are compiled on the basis that a married couple is one unit for tax purposes regardless of whether one spouse is earning or both spouses are earning.

2. The figures are based on a provisional distribution of taxpayers compiled for 1982-83. Actual figures for the year are not yet available. The latest actual data available is contained in tables 83 to 89 of the annual report of the Revenue Commissioners for the year ended 31 December 1980, copies of which are in the Library.

3. The very high numbers of persons reflected in the lowest range shown in the table would be to some extent accounted for by incomes of persons commencing or ceasing employment during the course of the year which would not have been collated with other income of the same persons.

4. For the sake of completeness the ranges of £15,000 to £20,000 and £20,000 to £25,000 have been included.

I may have missed an important part of the Minister's reply. Is the computer at the disposal of the Revenue Commissioners not in a position at the touch of a button to provide the information Deputy Flaherty wanted? Does it not show what everybody's net income is after at source deductions? Is it not possible to sum up the totals in a way corresponding to that in which Deputy Flaherty put down this question?

As I said, deductions for PRSI are levelled on reckonable earnings, that is gross income less superannuation contributions. It is on that basis that the information I referred to is available. It does not seem unreasonable to suggest, as the Deputy does, that we should have a breakdown of the information on the basis of gross income levels and that, among other things, is receiving attention in the consideration we are giving to computerisation generally in the Office of the Revenue Commissioners.

Is the Minister saying the Department do not have available the net income — the take home pay — of everybody in the PAYE sector?

Deputy Flaherty asked for information on deductions from gross incomes. I said the information is treated by the Revenue Commissioners on the basis of reckonable income, which is not necessarily the same as gross income.

I was interested in take-home pay and I presume that information is available in the tabular statement.

The information in the tabular statement has been compiled on the basis of an estimate of the amount of income tax deductions by range of total income. On the basis of that estimate the number of persons with take-home pay per annum in the ranges £1,000 to £5,000, £5,000 to £10,000 and so on——

As well as an oral and written answer, we have now introduced into Question Time a kind of hybrid, that is a mixture of both. This makes it very difficult, if not impossible, to have supplementaries. Questions should have either a written or an oral reply. If it is a written reply it is not suitable for supplementary questions but supplementaries may be asked on orals.

I am sorry, Sir, but by making that ruling you are inviting Ministers to get as many of their answers behind the barrier of written replies as they possibly can.

The Chair has no such intention.

I recognise that but it may be taken up like that, and I hope it would not be an iron rule from the Chair, whoever occupies it.

The Chair has no iron equipment; I am merely making gentle suggestions which I think would improve the structure of Question Time.

I appreciate that you mean well but what I am trying to put to you, respectfully, is that when I was on the far side of the House there were many instances, when a Minister had plainly gone out of his way to try to squash the answer to a question which was unwelcome to him into tabular form so that it would be insulated against questions. The attempts of the Opposition, or the Chair's own colleagues who have some interest in questioning him——

The Chair is calling Question No. 10.

Before giving the answer to Question No. 10, I would like to make an observation. The Chair stopped me a few moments ago when I was about to add an explanation to the information contained in the tabular statement circulated. I did so out of concern that the answer would be as complete as possible. If I have in that sense transgressed on your ruling, I am willing to accept chastisement.

The Chair wants to make it clear that he is not referring specifically to the Minister for Finance, but that Minister gave an example of why I made that ruling. Part of his answer was written and the other part oral, but when answering supplementary questions on the oral part he was forced to read part of the written reply.

The Spring Show is a time for cross-breeding.