asked the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs if he will outline all the developments planned and accepted by his Department for the development of telecommunication services at Portlaoise, County Laois; and the time scale for his proposals.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - County Laois Telecommunication Services.
28.
The main developments proposed are new buildings for exchanges and for staff headquarters, the provision of additional exchanges and trunk circuits and strenghtening of the local cabling network. The strenghtening of the local cabling will be a continuing feature. The other projects will be completed in 1983-84.
Does the Minister propose, as decided by the previous Government, to provide a telecommunications school in Portlaoise? The main project of the previous Minister has to develop Portlaoise as one of our major centres for telecommunication development. I did not hear the Minister make any reference to the telecommunications school. Does he propose to go ahead with this project and could he give the time scale and the proposed date of commencement of work?
If the Deputy is referring to a letter from the former Minister of State at my Department in answer to a letter dated 2 June 1982, all I can tell the Deputy is that the information given in that letter was incorrect.
I am not satisfied—
The Chair is not responsible for the replies of the Minister.
Disgraceful.
I am not satisfied with the reply I have received to my question.
The Deputy may ask another question.
I am not satisfied with the reply which the Minister has given and I am certainly not going to be fobbed off by him.
The Deputy cannot make speeches. He should ask a question.
I want to put a question straight to the Minister. Is it his intention to proceed immediately with the erection of the telecommunications school in Portlaoise, in accordance with the decision of the previous Government? Will he state when this telecommunications school will be provided?
Which question has the Deputy asked?
The Minister does not even know. The one in reply to which he was talking about me.
I have given the Deputy the answer to the question. That is the official position. Any other information which he has been given is incorrect.
I will be interested to hear if the Minister would be courteous and kind enough to the House to read the letter in question?
I have not the letter with me.
It is not good enough for a Minister to walk into this House and make another wild, serious and obviously biased comment, such as he has made. That is not the truth. Would the Minister outline all the districts in which it is intended to erect a telecommunications school of training?
It does not arise on this question.
I need protection too and I seek the protection of the Chair. It has been specifically pointed out that the information I gave Deputy Hyland was incorrect. I need the protection of the Chair. The Minister cannot just ballyhoo his way through this House.
(Interruptions.)
If the Deputy wishes I will circulate his letter with the Official Report.
Is there or is there not going to be a telecommunications school in Portlaoise?
The information I have given to the Deputy is what was asked for and I am giving nothing more.
What is it?
Does the Deputy want me to read it again?
Is the Minister aware that his Department applied for planning permission to Laois County Council to provide a telecommunications school at Portlaoise and that that planning permission has already been granted? In view of the fact that the application was received and permission granted by Laois County Council I would ask the Minister whether there is to be any watering down by his Department of the plan to proceed with the programme of development for the town of Portlaoise? In view of the evasiveness of the Minister's reply, one can only conclude that there is a deliberate intention on his part and on the part of the Department to abandon that project? I put a straight question to the Minister and I am entitled to a reply. In the absence of a reply I can only conclude that there is now a Government decision to water down that proposal for the development of a telecommunications system in Portlaoise. Perhaps the Minister would have the courtesy to reply to the question.
Will the Deputy give the Minister a chance to reply?
I have nothing to add to my reply.
The Minister does not know the answer.
(Interruptions.)
There are other ways of dealing with this.
An allegation has been made by the Minister that somebody told lies. Is he aware that planning permission for the school was sought and got by Laois County Council?
I wish to correct the Deputy. I would never use that word in relation to Deputy Killilea. What I said was that the information given in a letter dated 2 June was incorrect.
What was in the letter?
It is not here but if the Deputy wishes me to circulate it with the Official Report I will do so.
What was in the letter?
Incorrect information.
That is not true and the Minister knows it. How dare he come into this House and speak in such a tone?
We are going on to Question No. 29.
A Cheann Comhairle, in deference to Deputy Killilea, he may have interpreted my remarks as meaning that he purposely gave wrong information. I did not mean that he gave wrong information purposely. What I am saying is that, unfortunately, the information he gave was incorrect.
The Minister does not know what information I gave. He should not take it into account if he does not know what it is.
I do.
Then let the Minister tell the House the information. Why does the Minister make allegations when he cannot back them up with fact?
We cannot have an argument over this.
It is a statement of fact.
Could we have Question No. 29, please?
I wish to state that I am entirely dissatisfied with the deliberate evasiveness of the Minister. I propose to raise the matter on the adjournment.
The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.