asked the Minister for Labour the number of days in 1970 on which the No. 1 section and the No. 2 section of the Labour Court met (a) separately and (b) together.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Labour Court Meetings.
20.
The Labour Court has informed me that it does not consider it necessary for its purposes to keep records of the type referred to in the Deputy's question.
Is that not a rather extraordinary statement? Does the Labour Court not know on how many occasions the two sections of the court met, or are they saying that it is not necessary to know that? I would be interested to know if the long delays which occur from time to time are due to the fact that the court is understaffed or underworked?
That is a separate question.
It is not. It is a question which I put down and which I will repeat because it is ludicrous that——
The question is purely statistical.
I am giving the Deputy the reply which the court gave to me.
Surely the Minister has more "savvy" than to accept a reply like that. It is an impertinence to give him that reply.
Would the Minister contact the Labour Court and express his dissatisfaction with their reply?
I might be able to ask them to keep these records but——
They must keep the records. Otherwise they do not know——
The Labour Court might meet three or four times in one day.
But are there many days on which they do not meet at all?
(Interruptions.)
For all I know they may be working very hard but I would like to know.
The Deputy may rest assured that they are.