I have called Question No. 7 and I ask the Minister to reply.

7.

asked the Minister for Social Welfare the number of (a) small-holders who have had factual assessments of means since May 1983; (b) farmers who subsequently appealed to his Department and (c) who were successful in their appeals.

The number of small-holders whose applications for unemployment assistance have been reviewed on the basis of factual means assessment since May 1983 is 3,445. Of these 915 appealed against the deciding officer's decision and to date the appeals have resulted in a reduction in means assessed in 195 cases.

How many farmers voluntarily applied for reassessment of their situation, and how many of them lost their unemployment assistance?

Nine hundred and fifteen appealed against the deciding officer's decision and to date 195 cases have had their means reduced.

How many lost their unemployment assistance?

One thousand, one hundred and forty-one.

Lost it totally?

Yes, that is right: 915 appealed and, on appeal, 195 had reductions in their means assessments.

Does the Minister of State accept that the form of assessment for these people is totally inadequate? Is there any truth in the rumour that the Department are drafting a new assessment form which will be more equitable?

This is a statistical question. That does not arise.

The answers to statistical questions are normally circulated. Is that correct?

No, it is not correct.

Has the Minister available the total amount which was saved by the reductions made in this area? He must be aware that the unemployment assistance scheme has been undermined and wrecked by this Administration. Some people who have come back in under the assessment have come in at very reduced rates. Severe hardship has been created in some cases by this decision. What is the total saving?

As the Deputy is aware, it has nothing to do with this Administration or any other Administration. There was a court decision.

Come off it.

That is a fact.

The court case has been appealed. There is no need to take any action until the appeal has been decided. The Minister should not give us that line.

We are advised that we should take the action we are taking and that we have no choice.

A Cheann Comhairle, you allowed that question which was not of a statistical nature. My question is very important to my constituents. Is the Minister drafting a new form?

There may be some misunderstanding about that. I sent out a booklet to all Deputies, which I hope they got, indicating the reform of assessments. I am in the process of designing a new assessment form.

Which will knock off a few remaining ones.

We want to ensure that all expenses are taken into account and listed on the form so that there will be no ambiguity or doubt in anybody's mind. That should help.

I intend to exercise my discretion and ensure that only supplementary questions which are related to this question will be asked. Deputy Geoghegan-Quinn.

My question is relevant.

I will decide that when you ask it.

Would it be correct to assume that the administrative costs of the new arrangements are greater than the amount of money which was saved by the Department?

I have not got the answer to that.

It is a separate question.

The Chair is answering for the Minister.

I am saying it does not arise.

It does arise.

It does not arise on the question. If the Deputy who put down the question wanted that information he would have asked for it.

The Minister wants to answer it.

I do not mind whether he does or not.

I mind.

I have discretion as to what questions may be asked. I am moving on to question No. 8. Uimhir 8.

I asked a supplementary question.