asked the Minister for Agriculture (a) the number of fertiliser samples taken in 1982; (b) the number of samples found to be deficient in quality; and (c) the number of prosecutions.

(a) 372 official samples were taken in 1982; (b) in the case of 50 samples the results of the analysis showed a deficiency under the terms of the statutory standards. In nearly all cases, the deviation was attributable to a segregation of ingredients rather than a deficiency of ingredients; (c) there were no prosecutions in 1982.

If 50 samples were found to be deficient, would the Minister agree that it is hard to understand how segregation of ingredients was the cause?

As I pointed out in reply, the total quantity analysed contained the correct amount of ingredients except that the type of process being used — the blended compound, where various components are mixed compared to the old one where the ingredients were blended together and then granulated — lends itself to some segregation. This does not mean that there is a shortage of any ingredient.

I should have said this some time ago; this is a statistical question and the Minister might not have all the information with him.

Has it not been accepted over the years that when those ingredients were being mixed some of them were not compatible and neutralised one another? Could this have happened in some of the blending plants?

This is a very technical subject.

There is no question of chemicals interacting and negativing each other. It is a problem of granules of nitrigen or potash breaking away from other granules.

Ceist 20.