Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 23 Mar 1949

Vol. 114 No. 10

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Government Loan.

asked the Minister for Finance whether the Irish banks subscribed to the recent 3 per cent. loan; and, if so, if he will state the amount subscribed by each bank.

asked the Minister for Finance to state in each case the total amount subscribed to the recent loan (i) from funds under Ministerial or Departmental control; (ii) by the joint stock banks; (iii) by other applicants for amounts in excess of £100,000; (iv) by applicants for amounts in excess of £10,000 but not exceeding £100,000; (v) by applicants for amounts in excess of £1,000 but not exceeding £100,000, and (vi) by all other applicants for amounts not in excess of £1,000.

I propose, with the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, to take Questions Nos. 12 and 13 together.

As I told the Dáil on the 2nd March, when announcing the recent issue of £12,000,000 of 3 per cent. Exchequer Bonds, the amount allocated for public subscription was £8,000,000, the balance of £4,000,000 representing applications on behalf of Departmental funds. Public subscriptions amounted to £7,697,000 and the actual investment on behalf of Departmental funds came to £4,303,000. By arrangement with the joint stock banks none of them subscribed to the issue.

It has not been the practice to give details of the kind asked for by Deputy MacEntee in the concluding part of his question.

Are not the details which I have asked for available in the Department?

Have they ever been asked for before?

Will the Minister refer me to the occasion upon which they were refused?

When the Deputy himself, in 1934, 7th February, refused similar details.

In respect of what loan?

In respect of the Fourth National Loan.

I see. The Minister, no doubt, will remember that on that occasion the Fourth National Loan failed to fill. Is the same reason operating in this case?

The Fourth National Loan got from the public £2,500,000 out of £6,000,000.

I understand, therefore, the Minister is following the precedent set by one of his predecessors for the same reason as actuated that particular person?

In that Minister's time there were, I think, five loans, only two of which were subscribed fully.

That is not so.

I did not hear the Minister's reply to the question as to how much was subscribed by the joint stock banks.

I am sorry the Deputy did not hear me. I said that, by arrangement with the joint stock banks, none of them subscribed to the issue. I asked them not to.

They are cruelly disappointed, God help them.

Top
Share