asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he is aware that a veneer merchant (particulars supplied) was put out of business by the fact that a permit which he held to export logs to France for cutting into veneer strips was withdrawn; that he had a successful and flourishing veneer trade while he had the permit to export logs for reimportation; that he was compelled to have the logs cut in the State; that the log-cutting firm was inefficient and the work badly done; that he got a decree for damages but that it was not sufficient to cover loss and damage; and that a grave injustice was imposed on the merchant by the withdrawal of the permit; and if he now proposes to compensate the merchant for his loss and damage and thus enable him to resume his trade.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Withdrawal of Log Export Licence.
I am aware of the case to which the Deputy refers. The measure of compensation for loss or damage to the logs in question is for the courts to decide and is not a matter in which I have any function.
Is the Minister aware that by his action and that of the Department this merchant was put out of business completely, that his losses are very heavy and that he is now practically destitute?
I am not aware of the personal circumstances of the man referred to by the Deputy, but, as the Deputy is aware, every country in the world organises control of essential raw materials for the public benefit and in particular for the benefit of native industries. In regard to the export of logs suitable for manufacture into veneer, there has been a control exercised over such export for over a quarter of a century for the protection of Irish workers and of Irish industry. In so far as licences are issued from time to time, these are licences which may be withdrawn at any stage, having regard to the capacity of the home industry to cut these logs into veneer. I am informed that the Irish industry has not less than three factories who are engaged on this work and who are doing it as well as any firm in any other part of the world.
Surely the Minister is aware that the court found otherwise, that a decree was given for malfeasance, for a badly done job. While it is true that protection is necessary for Irish industry, protection is also necessary for the native Irish. This is an Irish citizen. Companies were established here to do this work and they did it so inefficiently that it put this Irish citizen and his workers out of employment. That was due solely to the Minister's withdrawal of the permit this man had to export logs for reimportation. When reimported there were a large number of employees engaged in the trade. Is the Minister further aware that prior to the withdrawal of the permit, this man was very wealthy and wasted all his goods trying to utilise the materials he got from the so-called Irish firms?
The court case to which the Deputy has referred concerned a particular consignment of logs which the person concerned as plaintiff claimed were damaged by the company who processed the logs. Compensation was given in respect of the damage done to the logs by the firm but there was also a decree in favour of that firm in respect of a counter claim they lodged against this person. That was a case concerning a particular consignment. I understand the Irish mills are now equipped to process these logs as efficiently as any concern in any part of the world.
Is the Minister aware that the company that was doing this processing for him, when he took the action against them, went out of business and sold to another company? It is this company which is processing the material but this man is not now in a position to purchase the logs. That is why I am asking the Minister if he is not satisfied that on the facts this man is entitled to compensation to enable him to recover his trade.
The court gave him compensation but I deny responsibility for providing compensation for the man concerned.