asked the Minister for Justice the number of prosecutions which have been taken by the Garda under the Gaming and Lotteries Act, 1956, for breaches of the law relating to illegal gaming in amusement arcades or gambling halls in the last five years, giving details of the different categories of offences committed.

The information sought in relation to prosecutions taken by the Garda under the Gaming and Lotteries Act, 1956, and the details of the different categories of offence committed is not available in the form requested by the Deputy. However, I am informed by the Garda authorities that the number of detections of breaches of the Act in the last five years is as follows: 1983, 239; 1984, 816; 1985, 678; 1986, 868 and 1987, 127.

Is the Minister telling me the Garda said these are detections and successful prosecutions?

I am informed they are the number of detections of breaches of the Act.

And successful prosecutions?

The number of prosecutions is not available, but I am informed that each detection usually leads to a prosecution. Perhaps we are as close to the real figure as we can get.

I thank the Minister for this information and accept that it is not available in the form set out in my question. However, there are a number of supplementaries I want to ask. Given that in 1983 there were 239 detections and in 1986 868 detections, would the Minister agree that the number of such breaches suggests that there is a need to update the legislation and that the legislation is failing in what it set out to do? This is the tip of the iceberg. Has the Minister any information relating to the difference between the figures for 1983 and 1986 and the fall to 127 in 1987?

If I may take the latter part of the Deputy's question first. The Garda have informed me that the decrease in 1987 is attributable to a number of factors, including the fact that the majority of detections in 1984, 1985 and 1986 were in the Donegal region and there were fewer breaches of the law in that area in 1987. Other factors were challenges in the High Court and the Supreme Court of certain aspects of the legislation and the situation concerning the issue of summonses which obtained in 1986 and 1987. With regard to the review of the legislation, during the course of the debate in which Deputy McCartan and others were involved, that request was made and is being considered.

How seriously and how urgently is the Minister reviewing this because the public at large see this ineffectual law as a scandal? It has fallen into disrepute and is bringing legislation into disrepute. Is this an urgent priority?

It is a priority, but everything raised here is in the hope that it will be given top priority. This is a matter about which we are concerned and I will look at it.

In the context of the review and appreciating the Minister's absence from the House in the last week or so, has his attention been drawn to proceedings currently before the High Court that could have a very serious impact on the interpretation of what is a gaming machine and, if successful, might lead to premises being re-opened?

The Deputy realises I could not comment on that for the time being, but we are aware of what is going on.

In the context of the review, will the Minister take into account the point I made last Friday during the Estimates debate, that he consider setting up a gaming board thereby relieving the local authorities of that responsibility?

That matter has been drawn to my attention since the Deputy raised it and I will give it consideration.