asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he has satisfied himself that his recent trip to Canada and the United States was justified by the results; and if he will state why such a trip was necessary.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - An Tánaiste's Visit to Canada.
The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative, and the second part does not, therefore, arise.
Can the Minister give the House any explanation as to why his trip to Canada was necessary and, assuming that his trip to Canada was for the purpose of opening the office in Montreal, can he give the House any information why his trip to the United States was necessary; and, failing to give the House such information, would he now say what benefits have come as a result of the Tánaiste's recent trip, beyond the fact that he had a very good holiday at the expense of the taxpayer?
That is worthy of the Deputy.
The people know it quite well.
The people know that good national work was being done.
The people also know he went against the wishes of the majority of the Government.
That is not true.
It is true.
I should know better than the Deputy.
The Department of Finance objected.
They did not.
The silence of the Minister will prove that.
The Minister for Finance is not here but I am acting for him and I say it is not true.
I have nothing but contempt for the Deputy.
The Minister has no explanation to give to the House.
It is a most unworthy suggestion.