The Minister of State, Deputy John Curran, who is also Chief Whip, came into the House last week to respond to a private notice question on the High Court findings of the day before regarding the by-election situation in Donegal South-West. On the three previous occasions that I attempted to progress a motion here to move the writ for Donegal South-West, the same Minister of State came into the House to respond on behalf of the Government.

I understand the role and responsibility for electoral matters rests with the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy John Gormley, the leader of the Green Party. There was most certainly surprise and not a little frustration that the Minister, Deputy Gormley, did not present to take the private notice question last Thursday but could arrive quickly on its heels into the Chamber.

Deputy, there must be another way to pursue this matter, perhaps through a parliamentary question directly to the line Minister.

I am pursuing a very valid question. Where in the brief of the Minister of State, Deputy Curran, does responsibility for electoral matters before this House rest? Nowhere in the job description or in anything that the Taoiseach has outlined to us here today would suggest that it is a function directly under his aegis. I would like an explanation relevant to these questions as to why it is the case that the Minister who has responsibility has patently failed to face up to it but can present in the House otherwise and why the Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach is performing this role over a protracted period.

The Government dealt with the private notice question which came before it and set out the Government's position. The Minister of State, Deputy Curran, has dealt with the specific matter since it was raised in the first instance in the House. He was in a position to give a full and explicit explanation. The Minister, Deputy Gormley, was not in a position to attend at that time. It was dealt with on a Government basis and the Minister of State concerned explained the matter in full, which is the purpose of a private notice question.

That is my question. The Taoiseach said he has dealt with it when it has been raised on each occasion but my question is why the Minister of State, Deputy Curran, was given that responsibility which does not fall under any portfolio responsibility which the Taoiseach has seconded to him or within his Department? It falls within the ambit of the Minister, Deputy Gormley, who has at all times absented himself from the Chamber, just as he has today. He has absented himself consistently in regard to these particular matters, yet last week we had a situation whereby immediately following the private notice question he could present here in regard to another electoral matter, namely, the Dublin mayoral issue. I find the situation difficult to understand.

Deputy, there is far too much comment leading to your question.

Nothing in the Taoiseach's reply explains the situation in any way.

The question the Deputy asked succinctly was "Why". The reason was that the Government had not met. We had to meet regarding this matter, yet the question was taken despite the fact that the Government indicated that morning that it had to meet to consider the judgment. The Chief Whip was in the best position to explain the position, having been the person who was responsible for dealing with the moving of writs, which was the basis upon which the question was being asked. The insistence by Deputies on tabling a question before the Government had an opportunity to meet in order to find out what its view was on a High Court judgment, which was given that morning and which it had not yet had an opportunity to read or consider, has its own illogicality.

Was it not the case that on the one hand the Minister, Deputy Gormley, did not have the backbone to come here and face the issue and, equally, the Taoiseach did not have the confidence in him to take the issue because of the earlier pronouncements on the very same matter——

We have spent an inordinate amount of time on this matter

——on the plinth by members of the Green Party some hours before the matter was addressed in the House and several hours before the supposed meeting at 5 p.m.?

No, the Deputy is wrong on both counts. He can make all the assertions he likes but he is wrong on both counts. The point was that he asked what the Government's position was on a judgment that had issued that morning before it had an opportunity to meet. The idea that the Government, the Minister, Deputy Gormley, or anyone else could come in and tell the House what the Government's position was before it had met seems premature.

It did not prevent him from speaking on the plinth outside.

It did not prevent the Deputy from speaking on the plinth outside the Four Courts either.

Let us get real. He is supposed to be the colleague leader in the coalition Government.

He is my colleague. He is a very good colleague.

The Taoiseach has confidence in him.

Absolutely, but I am making the point that the Deputy, in his exuberance, sought to come in here to demand of the Government what its position was before it had an opportunity to meet to discuss the issue. That was the problem the Deputy had and therefore the Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach——

The problem was not of our making.

——was in a position to state specifically that while the Deputy was asking the question, the Government was about to meet. We cannot give an answer until we consider it. I do not know how Deputy Ó Caoláin's operation works, but that is the way it works in a democratic Government anyway.

The Government cannot be forced to take a decision. Those are the facts.

Deputy Ó Caoláin usually gets a directive on what to say.

A brief supplementary, Deputy Kehoe. We are over time on questions.

Deputy Ó Caoláin gets a script.