asked the Minister for Posts and Teelgraphs if he is aware that a copy of a letter dated 19 August 1983 which was confidential to the Board and Chief Executive of Údarás na Gaeltachta came into the possession of his Department; and how the copy came into the possession of his Department.

My Department have been notified that legal proceedings may be instituted in regard to certain aspects of this matter. In these circumstances it would be inappropriate for me to make any comment at this stage.

Would the Minister agree that this letter did come into the possession of his Department?

Yes. A letter was received by the Department on 7 November from a firm of solicitors, indicating that the intention was to institute proceedings against the Department within five days unless a reply was received and certain action taken by the Department in regard to an aspect of the matter which is the subject of the parliamentary question. The Department have been legally advised that in the circumstances it would be inappropriate to make any further comment on the case.

Is the Minister saying that the copy of the letter referred to in the question was given to his Department by a solicitor?

I told the Deputy already——

Is that what the Minister is saying?

In the circumstances it would be inappropriate for me to comment further on the case.

I only wanted to confirm what the Minister had said——

Does the Deputy want me to repeat it?

——in a supplementary reply. Did the Minister say that the copy of the letter was made available to his Department by a third party — a solicitor?

I shall give again the information that I read out.

Does the Minister not remember what was in it?

I will read it out for the Deputy's benefit.

The Minister read it several times before he came into the House.

I did, but I do not want to make any slip.

It is a very delicate matter.

Does the Deputy want me to continue? A letter was received by the Department on 7 November from a firm of solicitors indicating that the intention was to institute proceedings against the Department within five days unless a reply was received and certain action taken by the Department in regard to an aspect of the matter which is the subject of the parliamentary question. The Department have been legally advised that in the circumstances it would be inappropriate to make any comment on the case.

A final supplementary, Deputy Molloy, please.

Would the Minister confirm that it would be improper for any member of his staff to knowingly take a copy of any letter which was passing through his service?

I have no intention of commenting on the matter.

Surely the Minister could reply?

Could the Minister not reply? He is the person with responsibility to answer this type of question, to ensure that the public retain confidence in the service.

I have no intention of replying to the Deputy in relation to the question he has raised.

I appeal to the Minister to make a statement in relation to the matter. No doubt he has to uphold the integrity of his own service.

A question, please, Deputy Leyden.

I am asking the Minister to reply to Deputy Molloy's question, that the integrity of the post is sacred.

I hope so.

The Minister hopes so. I hope he makes sure so.

Is the Minister saying——

A final supplementary, please.

Is the Minister, through his refusal to answer the question, saying that he is not prepared to give a public assurance that letters going through the service of his Department——

Of course, I am prepared to give a public assurance to that effect.

——will retain their confidentiality? Is the Minister not concerned that a copy may have been made of a letter passing through his service — improperly made I mean? Is the Minister not concerned about that?

Of course, the Deputy can make any charge he likes.

I am not making a charge. I am asking for an assurance that no such thing will happen or has happened.

Of course, I give an assurance. Do not complicate the issue.

Does he give an assurance that improper copying of confidential letters will not be done by any servant of his Department?

Certainly.

The Minister could have done that at the beginning.

23.