asked the Minister for Finance if the Government propose to postpone payment of any current expenditure commitments falling due in 1986 to the 1987 budget expenditure programme.

The Government do not propose to postpone payment of any such commitments as this would be completely at variance with the principles of Government accounting which require that all matured liabilities be paid within the financial year.

How can the Minister reconcile that statement in view of the fact that £25 million was provided in the budget Estimates this year for house grants and that £240 million will be paid next year? There was a provision of £140 million for public sector pay, excluding special payments, but that has now risen to £380 million. There is also a projection for low interest rates for farmers and, as reported in today's newspapers, back payments will have to be made to married women for social welfare amounting to £30 million. From those few examples, it is clear that over £400 million is being transferred to next year's Estimates for commitments given this year, although the Government claim they will reduce the budget next year by £300 million. They cannot face up to the consequences of their disastrous economic management. The Minister must be aware of the fact that those figures are ascertainable, especially in relation to the Department of the Environment. We will be paying next year for the Minister's promises.

That is one of the most ridiculous questions I have heard in my many years in the House. The only way one could avoid the situation to which Deputy O'Kennedy referred would be to pay next year's salaries to public servants this year——

What about last year's salaries?

No one in their sane mind believes that would make any sense. In regard to house improvement grants, the only way you could avoid paying people next year on the basis of works approved this year would be to pay them the grants before the work is finished——

The works are finished and the people are waiting for the grants.

That would not make sense because the work might never be completed and the money might be put into the bank. Is Deputy O'Kennedy seriously suggesting there is something unusual about waiting for people to do the work before they are paid? Deputy O'Kennedy did not give much thought to what he considered a sleuth-like question and indeed displayed a profound lack of understanding of the way in which commitments are carried forward from one year to the next in the public finances.

The Minister said I had not given any thought to this question but I am speaking about grants for which people have qualified but have not been paid.

We all know of such cases.

Awards were made to teachers but will not be paid until next year, although they will be retrospective from this year. I am speaking about the sum of £400 million which the Government of fiscal rectitude decided they would not pay——

Question Time is concluded.

May I have written replies to my other questions as they are very important?

That is done automatically. You do not have to ask for it.

I will send the Deputy a Christmas card as well.

Deputy Sheehan and Deputy Joe Walsh have each been given permission to put a question to the Minister for Communications. I assume that both questions are being taken together.