asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce whether he is aware that in the report of the chairman of Cement, Limited, to the annual meeting of the company on 8th February, it was stated that (a) the company had put forward to him proposals for the installation of increased production capacity amounting to 250,000 tons at a cost of £1,900,000; (b) he had announced in the Dáil on 25th May, 1950, that plans for such extensions had been approved; (c) the company had since received no information of this, and (d) because of the delay it was doubtful if the company could now adhere to these proposals; and if he will state (i) the reason for the delay in confirming to the company the statement made in the Dáil in May last, and (ii) the present position in the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - The Cement Industry.
I am aware of the statements made by the chairman of Cement Limited at the recent annual meeting of the company.
As regards the last two parts of the question, the reason for the delay is that alternative propositions have been under consideration.
Is it a fact that the Minister for Industry and Commerce stated last May that he approved of certain proposals submitted to him by Irish Cement Limited, and that confirmation of that statement by the Minister was never conveyed to the company?
That is a fact.
Can we get an explanation as to why the Minister did not confirm to the company the statement he made in the Dáil?
Because, in the meantime, alternative propositions for the establishment of independent manufacturing units for the production of cement were under consideration. In the circumstances, action on the statement which the Minister made here in the Dáil was deferred.
Does the Parliamentary Secretary not think that the Dáil is entitled to a more lucid explanation than that? Were these alternative proposals known to the Minister when he made the statement in the Dáil or did they become known to him during the subsequent 24 hours or within a week after he made the statement?
Why did he make the statement until he was sure of them all?
You can never be sure of anything in this world.
Except window-dressing from that side of the House.
One of the propositions was the subject of investigation at the time of the Minister's statement. The other became known later.
Three months subsequently, in fact.
One of them was under consideration. Sufficient information was not available about one of them. The other became available subsequently.
Is it not a fact that the other proposition arose out of a report submitted by the E.C.A. investigator?
No.
The political shop window has been dressed up.
asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he will state (a) whether a levy is made on home-manufactured cement to subsidise the price of imported cement; (b) the current amount of this levy per ton; (c) whether the yield from this levy was more or less than the amount required to subsidise the quantity of cement imported in 1950; and, if so, the extent of the surplus or deficit; (d) the actual difference in the c.i.f. cost of imported cement and the ex-factory price of Irish cement during 1950, and (e) whether it is anticipated that the levy on Irish cement will need to be continued during 1951; and, if so, at what rate.
(a) A surcharge or levy is made on home manufactured cement to enable imported and home manufactured cements to be sold at the same prices.
(b) The present surcharge is 8/- per ton.
(c) The yield from the surcharges in operation during 1950 was £72,104 more than the amount required.
(d) It is considered that a more realistic comparison would be the exquay cost of imported cement with the net ex-factory price of home produced cement. On this basis the average difference was approximately £1 19s. per ton. On a c.i.f. basis the difference was approximately £1 13s. per ton.
(e) It is anticipated that the surcharges on home produced cement will need to be continued during 1951. The rates of such surcharges will depend upon the tonnage produced in the home factories and upon the tonnage and cost of the imports required.
What is going to be done with the £72,000 excess levy collected last year?
It is being used to offset the increase in the price of imported cement which otherwise would become effective.