Apologies have been received from Senators Martin Brady and Nicky McFadden. The minutes of the meeting of 20 January have been circulated to members. Are they agreed? Agreed? I propose to proceed with our discussion with the Minister for Social and Family Affairs, Deputy Mary Hanafin, and then go into private session to deal with correspondence and related matters afterwards. Is that agreed? Agreed.

As we did not have an opportunity to deal with any matters in private session because of the difficulty in getting a quorum we did not have an opportunity to discuss the format for this session. The format, as proposed on the agenda, is somewhat sterile. The Minister will make a speech for 20 minutes, Deputy Olwyn Enright and I have ten minutes each to reply, other members will then speak and the Minister will wrap up. It does not make for productive exchanges. I am not interested in coming in here and making a ten minute statement. I would like to question the Minister on some issues about which I am concerned, hear her reply and have a debate.

The Deputy will have to be satisfied with the time limits set for the meeting. I will not change that for anyone.

It is not a question of being dissatisfied with the time limits. We want to discuss the issues and I hope we will have the opportunity to do so. The clerk to the committee seems to agree that we will be able to do so.

We will proceed with the meeting and will be reasonable with everyone.

The Opposition members are raising these points but did any of them communicate with the clerk before the meeting?

No.

We were sitting in private session. The meeting has just begun and this is the first opportunity we have had to raise it.

Is this a democracy or a dictatorship?

Why are Opposition members bringing the matter up in public session without notifying the clerk or the Chairman in writing?

We met in private session because the Government side was not able to produce a quorum. Does Deputy Thomas Byrne get it yet?