Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 6 May 1965

Vol. 215 No. 7

Committee on Finance. - Vote 40—Industry and Commerce.

Tairgim:

Go ndeonófar suim nach mó ná £4,544,000 chun slánaithe na suime is gá chun íoctha an mhuirir a thiocfaidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31ú lá de Mhárta, 1966, le haghaidh Tuarastail agus Costais Oifig an Aire Tionscail agus Tráchtála, lena n-áirítear Seirbhísí áirithe atá faoi riaradh na hOifige sin, agus chun Ildeontais-i-gCabhair a íoc.

Tá breis de £465,680 sa Mheastachán don bhliain reatha thar an méid a deonadh do'n bhliain 1964-65.

Tháinig méadú mór sa ráta forbartha tionscalach i rith na bliana 1964. Méadaíodh ar an gcur amach le suas le 10 faoin gcéad chun árdchéim nua do bhaint amach. In a theannta sin meadaíodh ar líon na bhfostaithe ins na tionscail dhéantúsaíochta go dtí174,000 nó 5,600 níos mó ná an bhliain roimhe. I rith na bliana 1964, freisin, tosnaíodh ar thairgeadh earraí i 32 ionad idir mhonareain nua agus sean-mhonarcain ab éigean a leathnú toisc éileamh níos mó ar a gcuid earraí. Meastar gur fiú suas le £10 milliún iomlán an capiteal atá ins na tionscail seo agus go méadófar ó líon fostaíochta de 1,900 i dtúis báire go dtí 4,800 i ndeire báire. Lean an t-Udarás Forbartha Tionscail go dlúth le tionsclóirí eachtrannacha a mhealladh chun tionscail a bhunú sa tír seo agus cuireadh tuille airgid ar fáil dóibh ionus ná beadh bac orthu beart níos treise a dhéanamh feasta.

Shrois ár geuid onnmhairí figiúir buaice de £223 milliún i 1964. In a choinnibh seo, méadaíodh ar ár allmhairí go dtí £347 milliún. Ní misde a choimeád i gcuimhne go laghadfar go mór ar an "mbreis allmhaireachta" seo nuair a bainfear líon na dtuillteanas neamh-fheicse dhe. Ní misde cuimhneamh freisin go bhfuil ar na h-allmhairí seo innealra déantúsaíochta agus talmhaíochta a sholáthar a chuirfidh le líon ár bhfostaíochta amach anso agus a bhainfidh go maith de líon na n-earraí teaghlaigh atá á gceannach againn fé láthair ó thíortha iasachta.

Taispeánann réamh-fhigiúirí chéad ceathrún na bliana seo go raibh líon ár n-onnmhairí níos lua ná mar a bhí sa tréimhse chéanna anuraidh. Is deallrathach, mar sin féin, gur lua go mór an chur isteach a dhein breis-cháin Allmhaireach na Breataine ar ár n-onnmhairí tionscalacha ná mar a measadh i dtús réime. Níl dabht ar bith ach go bhfuil moladh mór tuillte ag ár n-onnmhaireoirí as an tslí in ar fhreagair siad an dubhshlán seo. Deinim cogháirdeachas leo as a fheabhas is d'éirigh leo a ngreim do choiméad ar a gcuid margaí sa Bhreatain agus margaí nua do sholáthair dóibh féin. Ba léir don Rialtas nár mhisde cúnamh a thabhairt d'ár n-onnmhaireoirí ualach an bhreis-cháin d'iompar. D'aithnigh an Rialtas an dochar mór a dhéanfaí d'fhorbairt eacnamaíochta na tíre dá gcuirfí isteach ar onnmhairí tionscalach ag an am seo agus an dul chun chinn atá déanta cheana féin ag ár dtionscaileoirí freastal ar na beartanna is gá dhóibh a chur i gcrích chun dubhshlán réime na saor-thrádála do shárú.

Spreag an bhreis-cháin Breataineach suim an phobail agus na ndéantúsóirí sa scéim chun an mharga sa bhaile le haghaidh earraí Gaelacha do leathnú. Tá mé lántsásta go bhfuil an pobal agus na déantúsóirí taobh thiar den scéim anois agus go raghfaidh an scéim i bhfeidhm ar an dá aicme toisc go n-oibreoidh sé chun tairbhe an dá thaobh nuair a tuigtear gur fiú earraí Gaelacha a cheannach ní toisc go bhfuil siad Gaelach amháin ach go bhfuil siad ionchurtha maille le praghas, fiúntas agus rogha lena macsamhail ó áird ar bith eile.

Is soiléir gur rí-thábhachtach do thionscail na h-Éireann agus chúrsaí eacnamaíochta na tíre go coitianta an chéim ar aghaidh a tógadh i rith na bliana seo caite. Ní thig le duine ar bith gan an chaoi inar ghlac ár dtionscalóirí leis na h-áiseanna a cuireadh ar fáil dóibh chun bainistíocht d'ath-riaradh, oibrí do chur in aithne do mhodhanna teichniúla nua agus atheagrú geinearálta do chur i bhfeidhm, d'aithint agus do mholadh.

Measaim go bhfuil gach comhartha ann gur maith an bhail a bheidh ar chúrsaí eacnamaíochta na tíre amach anso agus tá súil agam go leanfar feasta leis an dul chun cinn a deineadh i rith na bliana atá thart.

In the Book of Estimates, the net Estimate of £7,544,000 for the year 1965-66 compares with a sum of £7,078,320 granted in 1964-65, including token Supplementary Estimates for £20, and shows a net increase of £465,680. On 11th February, 1965, too late for inclusion in the Book of Estimates, an additional token sum of £10 was granted by way of a further Supplementary Estimate, bringing the total amount granted in 1964-65 to £7,078,330. The actual position is, therefore, that the Estimate of £7,544,000 for 1965-66 exceeds by £465,670 the total sum of £7,078,330 granted in 1964-65.

The principal increases arising in the financial year 1965-66 result from an increase in the Grant-in-Aid to the Institute for Industrial Research and Standards of £194,000, an increase of £120,000 in the provision for Departmental salaries and wages, an increase of £57,598 in the Grant-in-Aid to the Industrial Development Authority, an increase of £16,500 for An Cheard Comhairle and net increases of £22,000 and £15,000 to the Irish National Productivity Committee and Coras Tráchtála respectively after taking Supplementary Estimates of £8,000 and £60,000 in February last into account. New services—the Buy Irish Campaign and the National Building Advisory Council—account for £44,990 and £25,000 respectively. Minor increases in other subheads amount to £8,810, bringing the total increases in expenditure to £571,898, to which must be added a decrease of £2,287 in Appropriations-in-Aid, giving a total of £574,185. When allowance is made for the token Supplementary Estimate £10 taken in February 1965, expenditure under the subheads which I have indicated, arising in the financial year 1965-66, will exceed expenditure under these subheads in the present financial year by £574,175.

There will be decreases in expenditure under a number of other subheads in the year 1965-66. There will, for instance, be a reduction of £10,000 in the provision for laboratory equipment for the Institute for Industrial Research and Standards, while the provision which will require to be made for the New York World's Fair will be down by £58,000. Decreases in other subheads will amount to £40,505, bringing the aggregate of the decreases to £108,505. The net increase in the Estimate for 1965-66 compared with the year 1964-65 is, therefore, £465,670.

The year 1964 was characterised by an impressive expansion in industrial output. The average of the provisional indices of volume of production for the year (to base 1953=100) was 167.6 compared with a corresponding average in 1963 of 152.6. This is equivalent to an increase of almost 10 per cent in the volume of industrial production, and it represents a new record in the level of industrial output.

As was expected, the notable increase in industrial output has been accompanied by a considerable rise in employment in manufacturing industries. The average number of workers employed in the year rose to an estimated level of 174,100 which represents an increase of no fewer than 5,600 over the preceding year.

The pace of industrial development continues to accelerate, and this is evidenced by the substantial number of important new industrial undertakings which commenced operations during the year 1964. In that year no fewer than 32 new factories or extensions to existing industries went into production. The success achieved by the Industrial Development Authority in attracting new industry from abroad is reflected in the fact that 25 of these new industries were started with external participation. The total capital investment represented by the 32 new industrial units is estimated to be of the order of £10 million.

The employment, which will be in the region of 1,900 in the initial stages, is expected to develop to the point where 4,800 additional jobs will have been created. These new industries cover a wide variety of products and processes. The range of end-products will include aluminium anodising, plastics, asbestos cement pressure pipes, refractory lining materials, filter tobacco process machinery, adding machines, industrial thermometers and recorders, electric food mixers, pharmaceutical raw materials and hypodermic syringes and needles. The promotional campaign of the Industrial Development Authority is being actively carried on in the USA, in Great Britain, Germany, France, Italy, Austria, Denmark, Belgium, Netherlands and Switzerland.

Additional financial resources have been provided for the Authority to enable its promotional campaign to be further intensified, and, as Deputies are probably aware, the Authority has recently opened an office in Germany—at Cologne—which is the first office to be established by it in Europe. It has, of course, an office in New York. The Authority has two full time representatives in the USA and three full time representatives in Europe.

An Foras Tionscal approved grants during the year ending on 31st March, 1965, amounting to £2,040,200 for industrial projects located in the undeveloped areas. This brings the total provision for these grants to £8,892,960, of which grants totalling £5,614,590 were paid up to the 31st March, 1965. The total capital investment involved in projects which have been approved amounts now to almost £23 million and it is expected that ultimately employment will be provided for 12,600 persons.

In all, 144 industrial projects have now been approved for the undeveloped areas. Of this number 121 are now in production and the remaining 23 projects are in varying stages of development. About half of the projects which have been approved were promoted entirely by Irish interests, the majority of the other projects were promoted by foreign industrialists, while in a number of instances industries were sponsored by a combination of Irish and foreign interests. It is worthy of note that a substantial number of these industrial projects will find an outlet for their production on external markets.

The grants scheme for industries outside the undeveloped areas continues to develop satisfactorily, and during the year ended 31st March, 1965, An Foras Tionscal approved grants for new industries amounting to £2,072,799. This brings the aggregate of grants approved under the scheme to £8,018,592, of which amount rather more than half had been paid at the end of March last. The total capital investment in the approved projects amounts to over £33 million, and it is expected that employment will eventually be provided for 17,800 persons.

The new factories will send most of the goods produced to foreign markets. More than 60 industrial projects assisted by An Foras Tionscal are in production outside the undeveloped areas. There are 28 other projects for which grants have been approved and which are advancing towards the stage at which production will commence. A majority of the projects approved have been sponsored by foreign interests, though a considerable number have been promoted by Irish groups.

Exports in the year 1964 reached a record figure of £223 million—an increase of £27 million compared with the year 1963. Imports also reached a new level of £347 million, a figure which exceeds by £41 million the value of imports for the year 1963. The import excess arising from visible transactions will, of course, be offset to a very substantial extent by invisible earnings, and it must be remembered also that a considerable proportion of our imports consist of industrial and agricultural plant and machinery which will give productive employment and remove the necessity for the importation of considerable quantities of consumer goods which are imported at the present time.

The detailed trade figures issued by the Central Statistics Office show that virtually all categories contributed to the increase in exports in 1964. Exports of live animals brought in £67 million, an increase of £14 million; food, drink and tobacco brought in £73 million, an increase of £1 million; exports of manufactured goods (excluding food, drink and fuel) increased by 32 per cent from £41 million to £54 million accounting for almost one-quarter of total exports in the year.

The preliminary returns for the first quarter of 1965 show that total exports were £5.6 million below the level of exports in the corresponding quarter of 1964. In the absence of a detailed breakdown of the quarter's export figures it is not possible to say how particular categories of exports fared. It would appear, however, from provisional figures that industrial exports generally, while showing some improvement on the figure for the corresponding quarter last year, have been affected by the British import surcharge.

It will be unnecessary to remind Deputies that our growing export trade with Great Britain received what at first sight appeared to be a major setback towards the end of last October when the British Government, introduced a temporary charge of 15 per cent ad valorem on imports of manufactured goods into Britain. Our contractual right of entry free of duty to the British market was thus set aside, and Irish exporters were immediately confronted with a situation of unprecedented difficulty.

The reaction of Irish exporters to this challenge was quite remarkable, and I think that they are to be congratulated on the success of their efforts to maintain their export trade to Britain and to develop new markets, the potentialities of which had to be investigated at once. Irish industry has managed to avoid the worst consequences of this threat to production and exports, and it is a considerable tribute to our industrialists that they have adapted themselves so successfully to this new and difficult situation without any major breakdown of production.

Recognising the necessity for rapid intervention the Government, for their part, introduced immediately a scheme designed to assist exporters affected by the British import levy. Under the scheme, market development grants are payable to exporters with the object of encouraging a continuance of our export trade at the highest practicable level. The aggregate of market development grants paid up to 30th April, 1965 is £254,750. It is clearly necessary to avoid a reversal of the trend of expansion of exports which has been such an encouraging feature of our economy for some years and which might upset to a dangerous extent the projections on which the Second Programme for Economic Expansion is based. If there were to be an inhibition of our industrial exports at the present juncture, it would be a most unfortunate development, since it would come at a time when industry's efforts to adapt itself to free trading conditions are fairly well advanced and programmes for further export development are beginning to take shape. Furthermore, a number of new firms are now reaching a stage at which their export trade would be capable of making a significant contribution to the export drive. The decision of the vast majority of exporters to maintain, as far as possible, their position in the British market is a wise one, since it is clear that it would be difficult and expensive for exporters to retrieve a major loss of position in the British market. The fact that the British import charge will be of temporary duration, only, is a relevant factor in this connection.

As Deputies will recall, the British Government announced some time ago that there would be a reduction in the amount of the levy from 15 per cent to 10 per cent, effective from the 27th April, 1965. While this reduction will be of limited value to Irish exporters, nevertheless, it is to be welcomed as confirmation of the expressed intention of the British Government to terminate the import levy at the earliest practicable date.

The Buy Irish Campaign, which was a spontaneous reaction to the British import levy, has got off to a most encouraging start. Since it is basically a public relations exercise, the results of such a campaign are naturally difficult to measure, but I am informed that Irish industry has experienced a perceptibly increased demand for its products and that the probability is that this is attributable in large measure to the effect of the Buy Irish Campaign. There is no doubt but that the campaign has the support of the vast majority of business people in this country, and the public has given ample demonstration of its goodwill. A number of distributors have already established special promotions in support of the campaign, and further developments of a similar kind may be expected. If the campaign is to be as successful as one would wish, it is essential that traders should co-operate in a way which will ensure that goods of Irish manufacture are consistently brought to the notice of the public at the point of sale. The Buy Irish Committee has taken into account increased consumer sophistication in the matter of quality, price and value for money generally, and it is fully aware of the need to present to the public products which will make an effective appeal not merely because they are of Irish manufacture but because they are acceptable from the standpoint of price, quality and variety.

Apart from the special value which a Buy Irish Campaign is capable of having in the present situation in which our export trade has been impeded by the British import charge, a Buy Irish Campaign in the long-term can do much to increase the demand for goods of Irish manufacture and to promote a greater feeling of solidarity between the purchasing public and Irish industry. There is an identity of interest in this matter between the different sections of the community, and, in my opinion, a Buy Irish Campaign conducted on a long-term basis is capable of creating new opportunities for employment in industry, increasing the volume of industrial output and rendering unnecessary the importation of products of various kinds which can be manufactured at home. I am confident that the community at large will continue to extend to this campaign the active practical support which it undoubtedly deserves.

The Grant-in-Aid of Córas Tráchtála shows an increase of £15,000 over the provision made in 1964-65. The Board's activities in the field of export promotion, overseas market development and design development are being extended in accordance with the Government's plans for economic expansion. Since its establishment as a Statutory Board in September, 1959, Córas Tráchtála has received grants-in-aid totalling over £1½ million. The grant-in-aid for 1965-66 will bring the total to over £2 million.

The work of design development is becoming an increasingly important part of the activities of Córas Tráchtála. The Board are establishing a number of design workshops in Kilkenny, and there are already in operation workshops for textile printing, silverware, pottery, poplin weaving, candlemaking and wool weaving. The need for an improvement in the design of industrial products has been obvious for a considerable time, and I am hopeful that any ground lost will now be recovered.

I hope that an Ireland House will soon be opened in London in premises which have been secured in New Bond Street. This will make it possible to bring together under one roof a number of Irish State agencies which, until now, have been located in different parts of London. An Ireland House should help to project a better image of Ireland in the British capital and facilitate the promotion of our export trade with our most important customer.

The Committee on Industrial Organisation which was set up by the Government in 1961 has completed its task of making a critical appraisal of the measures required to secure a re-organisation of Irish industry to enable it to meet conditions of freer trade. Survey teams appointed by the Committee carried out detailed surveys of 26 industries in which some 87,000 persons are employed. The Report of each team, accompanied by a covering report by the Committee giving its views on the survey, has been published in 25 cases; the 26th report will be published as soon as possible. In addition to these survey reports, five interim reports which are of general application to industry have been published by the CIO. The Committee has prepared also a final report reviewing, generally, the entire programme of work for which it was responsible. This report will also be published shortly.

There can be no doubt that this Committee has rendered an extremely valuable service to the nation for which the Government are very grateful. So far as I am aware, similar industrial studies in such depth have not been carried out in any other country, and it is a source of gratification to learn that the work of our Committee has been very favourably received and commented on in responsible quarters abroad.

The fact that the Committee on Industrial Organisation has completed its appointed task does not mean that there can be any slackening in the efforts which industry is called upon to make to adapt itself in the shortest possible time for freer trading conditions. As mentioned on other occasions, a new branch was established in my Department nearly three years ago for the special purpose of ensuring that the recommendations in relation to industrial efficiency made by the Committee on Industrial Organisation are implemented. In this matter, the Industrial Reorganisation Branch of my Department works in the closest possible contact with the different industrial sectors, and the necessity for bringing about the changes in the structure and organisation of industry advocated by the Committee on Industrial Organisation is constantly emphasised.

I am now able to report that no fewer than 21 Adaptation Councils have been set up by industry. The establishment of these councils was recommended by the Committee on Industrial Organisation as the most effective medium through which its recommendations might be implemented. Some of these Adaptation Councils have already made remarkable strides in the short time since their formation, and they have given striking evidence of what can be achieved by industry in the realm of reorganisation and readaptation by co-operative effort. There are, nevertheless, a limited number of industrial sectors which have not yet fully realised the advantages capable of being derived from full and effective participation in the work of the Adaptation Councils. I would urge these particular industries to adopt a more positive and farsighted policy. Unless they participate in the general movement towards re-organisation and readaptation, they may well find that they will be quite unable to cope with the difficulties and problems which will be presented in conditions of freer trade.

In accordance with a recommendation made by the Committee on Industrial Organisation, arrangements have been made for the creation of standing trade union advisory bodies which will be available for consultation by the Adaptation Councils in all matters affecting the interests of workers. The establishment of these advisory bodies is now well under way, and there are at the present time more than 20 of these bodies in existence.

I am glad to be able to report that our industries are availing themselves of the special grants and loans which are available to facilitate the attainment of higher levels of efficiency through a process of reorganisation and adaptation. Up to the end of March, 1965, over 450 applications for these special grants and loans were received, and the proposed capital expenditure involved amounted, in the aggregate, to nearly £39 million. The total amount of grants approved up to the present is in the region of £5 million, of which nearly £1,500,000 has already been paid out to industry.

While the particulars which I have given in relation to readaptation grants are impressive, it would be a mistaken view to regard industrial readaptation solely in terms of improved plant, equipment and premises. The importance of modern buildings and equipment is self-evident, but there is a danger that sufficient emphasis may not be placed on attitudes of mind.

No matter what assistance, advice or persuasion may be forthcoming from my Department or from other agencies concerned with improved efficiency or higher productivity, in the last analysis what really counts is the readiness of individual firms within industry to get down, both at management and staff level, to the practical problems of readaptation in a realistic, vigorous and intelligent way. I have every hope that the increased dynamism of our manufacturers, so vividly reflected in the export figures I have given you, will likewise be reflected in their progress with the all-important work of adaptation.

The Government realise that the achievement of the targets set out in the Second Programme for Economic Expansion and also the movement towards freer trade are not matters divorced from human problems. An increase in skilled workers and the availability of adequate numbers of persons with the requisite skills, are as essential to the achievement of the targets as are the adaptation and modernisation of industry. Adaptation to conditions of freer trade will be accompanied by changes in employment opportunities. Mechanisation or automation may create redundancies in particular industries, though the ultimate expansion of those industries, according as efficiency improves, may eventually result in increased employment in the industries. The Government feels it necessary, at this stage, to indicate the steps it is taking and will take to deal with the human problems involved, so that there need be no apprehension in the minds of workers about what the future holds for them.

It is proposed to set up a manpower forecasting agency whose function it will be to predict, over a period ahead, the likely requirements for various classes of workers, particularly skilled and semi-skilled and the likely available opportunities under these heads in the ordinary course. It will be part of the task of this agency to estimate the number of persons in various categories who are likely to become redundant as a result of the movement towards freer trade and the preparations being made to increase the efficiency of industry towards that end. If, as is to be assumed, the forecast reveals shortages in particular skills, it will be the task of the Government to ensure that adequate numbers of persons are trained or re-trained so as to meet estimated requirements. For this purpose, the Government is preparing to introduce legislation to provide for the setting up of a training body.

It is the aim of the Government to create a situation in which the worker who becomes redundant in the circumstances envisaged above, will have his suitability for training or re-training assessed and will be provided with such training or re-training as he requires. Financial provision will need to be made for the workers and a system of redundancy or stand-off payment, covering the period of training or re-training, is being worked out. The Government's intention is that a worker need have no apprehension that if his employment has to be terminated because of the adaptation of the industry or because of the incidence of freer trade, he will be left without reasonable resources or left without an opportunity of being re-trained for absorption into another industry.

The task of placing re-trained persons in industry will involve an extension of the functions of the employment exchanges and the re-orientation of their activities. It may be taken, however, that a situation will exist in which a worker who becomes redundant will be eligible for redundancy payment and for re-training if he is found to have the necessary aptitude. The purpose of this re-training will be to equip the worker with a skill for which there is a demand and thereby ensure, as far as is humanly possible, that he will be in a position to avail of suitable employment opportunities.

It will be appreciated that the implementation of the Government's proposals which I have just outlined will involve a considerable amount of organisation and planning. The overall responsibility will rest with the Minister for Industry and Commerce and it is envisaged that he will have the assistance of an advisory body constituted on a broad representative basis.

In the field of industrial relations generally, one of the most important developments during 1964 was the operation of the national wage agreement which provided a generally accepted basis for wage settlements and helped to obviate the haphazard negotiation of wage claims, which tended in the past to disrupt employer-labour relations. There was, unfortunately, a major stoppage of work in one industry in which both employers and workers suffered considerable loss before a settlement was reached. Clearly, we must continue our efforts to improve the machinery of industrial relations so as to ensure that the production losses and social suffering arising from prolonged strikes should be obviated as far as possible. I have recently taken the initiative in the formulation of proposals for the overhaul and modernisation, where necessary, of the industrial relations machinery established under the Industrial Relations Act of 1946. The organisations representative of employers and workers are considering my proposals which were outlined for them at meetings held a short while ago.

An Cheard-Chomhairle, the National Apprenticeship Board, since its establishment in 1960 has made substantial progress and has introduced statutory apprenticeship schemes in the furniture trades, the engineering and metal trades, the electrical trade and the trade of motor mechanic. It intends to bring similar schemes, for the printing and building industries, into operation during the coming year.

The Board is very conscious of the need to ensure that training will be geared to the needs of the future. The Board's aim in the case of the skilled trades is to ensure that a sufficient number of suitable boys are recruited and that their practical and theoretical training during apprenticeship is such as to prepare them adequately for their future roles as skilled workers.

The intake of apprentices is, of course, governed to a great extent by the availability of training facilities on the one hand and the prospect of job opportunities on the other.

In many of the skilled trades the Board has already prescribed training rules to ensure that the apprentices will be given a comprehensive practical training on the shop floor, and it has appointed technical staff to ensure, by frequent visits to factories, that these rules are implemented. Modern employers are increasingly conscious of the importance of training as a factor in increased production and of the fact that training expenditure is a worthwhile investment. On-the-job training may of course pose difficulties in that, apart from a possible conflict between the firm's production function and the training function, the nature of the work or the machinery in individual concerns may militate against the apprentices obtaining a comprehensive practical training. Technical school instruction is essential not as a substitute for shop floor training but as a necessary complement. On-the-job training combined with the technical school instruction in practical, theoretical and social disciplines is designed to increase the all round efficiency and understanding of the apprentices.

There has been no change in our aim to secure membership of the European Economic Community. No major developments have taken place during the past year, but our desire to resume negotiations, when circumstances permit, leading to membership of the EEC is well known. In the meantime, we are maintaining contact with the Community at various levels, and we have continually in mind the possibility of improving our trade relationship with the member countries of the EEC.

The Kennedy Round of trade negotiations provided a suitable opportunity for the re-opening last year of our application for membership of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. It is possible that the examination of our application for membership will commence within the next few months. Our accession to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and our participation in the Kennedy Round, if achieved, will involve the acceptance of commitments affecting tariffs and trade arrangements. Corresponding benefits would accrue to industry and agriculture from our Association with GATT.

Discussions are proceeding with the British Government with the object of improving the permanent trading arrangements between both countries. I am not in a position at the present time, however, to indicate the stage which has been reached in these discussions or to express an opinion concerning the possible outcome.

While emphasis is now principally on multilateral trade agreements, nevertheless, we still have a number of bilateral trade agreements with countries such as France, Germany and Finland. These agreements are reviewed from time to time, and advantage is taken of the possibilities represented by them to develop our export trade with these countries at increasingly higher levels.

Two general 10 per cent reductions have been made in the level of industrial tariffs, generally, and similar enlargements have been made in the quotas which apply to particular industrial products. A third general reduction of tariffs had been visualised for the 1st January, 1965, but, having regard to the difficulties created for Irish industry by the British import charge, the Government decided in the circumstances to defer for the time being the application of the third round of tariff reductions. This decision does not, of course, imply any change in Government policy, and it certainly does not provide any grounds for a relaxation by industry of the efforts necessary to proceed with adaptation and re-organisations schemes designed to achieve the highest possible level of efficiency and competitiveness in the shortest possible time.

The technical assistance grant scheme continues to provide a valuable service for industry. While many firms have availed themselves of the scheme, a surprisingly large number of firms have not yet done so. Very encouraging reports have been received from those firms which have utilised the grant scheme whether for consultancy work, training courses or study visits abroad. A 50 per cent grant of the cost is, of course, a real inducement to firms to improve their productive efficiency. Grants are also made to the Irish National Productivity Committee and to the Irish Management Institute, for the purpose of assisting existing firms desirous of improving their efficiency.

With the aim of developing to the maximum extent its potential for assisting Irish industry, the Institute for Industrial Research and Standards continues to expand its operations over a wide field. Existing facilities are being improved and enlarged, and preparations for the provision of a whole range of new facilities are at an advanced stage. Separate Departments are being established for metallurgy and engineering research, while new activities are also being planned in the fields of bio-technology, analogue computers, metrology and the industrial use of radio-active isotopes. Developments in relation to chemical engineering, electronics and printing are also proposed. Improvements have been made by the Institute in its arrangements for the provision of Fellowships and industrial scholarships which are aimed at promoting a greater use of science and technology in industry in this country.

This expansion in the Institute's operations is seriously taxing its existing accommodation. The Institute already has plans in hand for the provision of new buildings to house the additional staff and equipment being provided.

During the past 12 months, there has been considerable activity in exploration for mineral deposits in many parts of the country. Many external companies and a number of Irish firms are anxious to carry out a thorough examination of our potential mineral resources, and these firms have been assisted by providing such facilities as prospecting licences and State mining permissions.

Development of the deposits of lead, zinc and silver discovered at Tynagh, County Galway continued during the year and I am informed that it is hoped that production will commence towards the end of the present year.

Further exploration is being undertaken at Silvermines, County Tipperary with a view to providing fuller information in regard to the deposits of lead, zinc and silver in that locality. There is now an appreciable production of barytes which finds a market in the USA.

The reports on the drilling programmes carried out in the Leinster and Connaught coalfields which were published towards the middle of last year indicate that reserves of coal in the Leinster coalfield are of the order of 7,000,000 tons of anthracite coal. It is estimated that there are about 18,000,000 tons of semi-bituminous coal in the Connaught coalfield. A considerable portion of the Connaught reserves and some of the Leinster reserves may not, however, be capable of economic development because of the thinness of the coal seams or the high ash content of the coal.

While the emphasis hitherto has been on raising productivity in agriculture and industry, it is also necessary to increase efficiency in the services sector which accounts for some 40 per cent of national income and of total employment in the country. The distributive trades form a very important part of the services sector and have a vital role to play in the development of our economy. It is essential, therefore, that the distributive trades should continue to strive to achieve the highest level of efficiency and productivity.

The Efficiency of Distribution Unit which was set up specially in my Department last year to ensure that the distributive sector makes a maximum contribution towards the aims of the Second programme has held a number of discussions with the Federation of Trade Associations with a view to arriving at the most appropriate measures designed to improve efficiency in distribution. The Unit maintains close liaison with the Distributive Trades Productivity Committee which was formed during the year under the auspices of the Irish National Productivity Committee, with joint management-labour representation. This committee has now prepared its first programme which provides for the setting up of educational, advisory, information and research services for the assistance of the distributive trades. The committee recently held seminars in a number of centres throughout the country for the purpose of spotlighting the challenges facing the distributive trades to-day and to consider what can be done to meet the changing needs and requirements of this decade.

Min Fhéir (1959) Teoranta, the State-sponsored company which was set up to produce grassmeal from bog-land in County Mayo, had successfully completed its first year of commercial production. There was an excellent growth of grass and the grassmeal produced was, I understand, of a very high quality.

The construction of the nitrogenous fertiliser factory at Arklow is substantially completed and commissioning of the plant is under way. As announced in the press recently, the first consignment of sulphuric acid made at Arklow is being supplied to Holland. It is expected that full production will be achieved by autumn, 1965.

The factory will be operated at maximum capacity to supply the requirements of the home market for sulphate of ammonia and calcium ammonium nitrate and, if the need should arise to dispose of any surplus production arising in the early stages, satisfactory arrangements have been made for placing any initial surplus in export markets. The employment afforded will be in the region of 300, and since it is a basic chemical enterprise, the skilled labour content will be exceptionally high.

The final stage of the development plans of Irish Steel Holdings Ltd. is now being reached. All the civil engineering works have been completed, and now major plant installations have been brought into commission. Difficulties have, however, been experienced by the company in achieving full commercial production, and operational consultants have been engaged to suggest measures which might resolve these problems. There remain to be completed and brought into commercial operation the wire rod mill and sheet mill. The wire rod mill is scheduled for initial operation before the end of 1965. The sheet mill is in the final stages of installation, and commercial production will be undertaken when an increased supply of fresh water is provided under the Cobh water supply scheme.

The land connection estimated to cost £300,000 between Haulbowline Island and the mainland, will reduce the company's costs. It will also provide a useful facility to many of the company's customers and should encourage the establishment on the mainland of secondary industries requiring easy access to steel. Work on the connection commenced last October, and it is expected to be completed in the middle of 1966.

Price increases and price control have featured largely in the debates in this House and in public statements by the Taoiseach, my predecessor and other Government spokesmen during the past year. This House has, from time to time, been given accounts of the measures taken—measures which used to the full the powers under the Prices Act, 1958—to probe price increases which appeared to be excessive and to eliminate them where this was recommended. The Prices Section of my Department has kept the position under constant review and has taken the initiative when this was considered desirable, in the investigation of price increases. I am satisfied that the work of that Section, when coupled with that of the Fair Trade Commission and aided by the vigilance of the consumer public, has resulted in stabilising prices to a not inconsiderable degree.

I do not say that a greater measure of stabilisation is not possible and indeed I am looking forward to a continued improvement in the position in the future partly because of the factors I have already mentioned and partly because I anticipate that improved industrial relations must influence for good such factors as efficiency, output and unit cost and provide a cushion against the impact of other increases in production costs. I strongly adhere to the view that, times of emergency apart, statutory price control is not in any way an acceptable alternative to free and fair competition. It should be clearly understood, however, that I intend to use my powers under the Prices Act, 1958, to the full to secure fair prices within an economy based on free and fair competition at all levels.

During the past year, the Fair Trade Commission investigated complaints regarding the operation of Fair Trading Rules relating to entry into and trade in the sale and repair of motor vehicles. The investigation revealed that, in general, the Rules, which came into force in March, 1962, continue to operate satisfactorily. The Commission reviewed the Fair Trading Rules relating to electric light bulbs and dry batteries and the Orders governing building materials, cookers and ranges and found that the Rules and Orders appear to be operating satisfactorily. The Commission intend to review the operation of the rules relating to the distribution of coal.

An agreement with the petrol companies, under which they undertook to exercise restraint in relation to the supply of new retail petrol sites and the opening of company-owned stations, also came under review. The Commission reached the conclusion that these arrangements have operated reasonably successfully, and the petrol companies have agreed that they should be continued for the present.

The Commission completed a survey begun in the previous year of the intoxicating liquor trade in certain areas to ascertain the effects on competition of price recommendations by trade associations. The Commission are satisfied that no collective action was taken to enforce enhanced prices and that a reasonable element of competition exists. They are keeping the position under continuing review.

The achievements of the past year have been important for Irish industry and for the economy as a whole. Productive industry achieved a very satisfactory rate of growth during the year which augurs well for the ultimate attainment of the objectives of the Second Programme for Economic Expansion. Industrial adaptation gathered real impetus during the year, and it is now evident that industry, in general, has a sense of urgency in regard to the problems which are bound to confront it in conditions of freer trade. I think that it can be said that the move towards general redaptation on the part of large sectors of industry is now well underway. One cannot fail to be impressed by the extent to which industry continues to avail itself also of the facilities available for the reorganisation of management and the training of staff in modern methods and techniques. The services provided by the Irish Management Institute and by the National Productivity Committee have been extremely valuable in this connection.

The promotion of industrial development continues to make very satisfactory progress, and this is evidenced by the number of new factories which commenced production during the past year and the impressive employment potential which these factories represent. As already mentioned, many of these new factories will concentrate on exports rather than on the home market, and this is bound to be reflected in a major rise in export levels in the years which lie ahead. It may be expected, therefore, that the present trend for industrial exports to play an increasingly important role in our external economy will develop on an even more impressive scale than in the past. In this connection, it ought not to be overlooked that in the past year Irish exports reached an all-time record in spite of the difficulties which arose in relation to the British market. On the assumption that world trade continues to develop satisfactorily, I think that the outlook for the Irish economy is very favourable, and we can confidently hope that the major advances achieved during the past 12 months will be continued in the years that lie ahead.

At the beginning of his speech, the Minister adverted to the fact that the targets aimed at in the Second Programme for Economic Expansion, as far as industry was concerned, were being adhered to, but the question now arises as to whether or not these targets are sufficient. These targets aim at assimilating all the young people coming forward for jobs as well as those leaving agriculture. The Government forecast a reduction in the numbers employed in agriculture. We, on this side of the House, have never agreed that that should be the position and we think measures could be taken, measures we would take if we had the opportunity, which would mean we would not have this great reduction in agricultural employment.

The Government, in their adherence to the Second Programme for Economic Expansion, indicates quite clearly that they expect this reduction. They also indicate that they expect to assimilate the agricultural workers displaced in industrial employment. From an examination of the figures, it is quite clear that that is not the evolution. It was no surprise to me to find in paragraph 2 of the report of the National Industrial Economic Council, which arrived in my post this morning, the following statement:

"Total employment, however, does not seem to be rising at the rate envisaged in the second programme, mainly because of a more rapid decline in the numbers engaged in agriculture and a slower increase in employment in the services sector. The slower rate of increase in employment is not the result of a general labour shortage (though local shortages of particular skills are occuring): unemployment remains high and annual emigration has recently been about 25,000."

This picture has not been painted by me. It has been painted by the Government. We are faced then with the situation laid down in the Progress Report for 1964. Paragraph 22 of that report, which also arrived this morning, states:

In the second half of the year the rate of expansion slowed down. This was the result mainly of repercussions on industry of building trade disputes in the Dublin area regarding the interpretation of the national agreement on wages and salaries, and of the uncertain export situation following the imposition of the British surcharge on imports of manufactures. The rise however, was still a large one of about 8 per cent. For the year as a whole, the rate of growth of output was almost 10 per cent as compared with an increase of slightly over 6 per cent in 1963.

That is a fairly inspiring paragraph but it does point to the fact that production slowed down in the second half of the year. The Government have pinned their faith on the assimilation of the redundant labour force in manufacturing industry. In the Second Programme for Economic Expansion, paragraph 51 states:

. . . If agricultural growth for any reason falls short of 2.7 per cent per annum, industry will have to step up its contribution further.

This indicates that what the Minister has just told us has been adhered to, but may be not quite enough in fact. Again, in paragraph 58 there is the statement:

The expansion of the industrial sector is a key objective, because the reduction in emigration, the improvement in productivity and the expansion in services all depend primarily on its achievement.

We have to decide then today whether or not we have gone far enough. All the indications are that, from the point of view of stemming emigration and assimilating those becoming redundant on the land, we are not doing enough, and that is accepted by the authorities I have quoted.

This occurs at a time when the economic barometer was, for some years, set fair. We start off in a situation in which our industrial volume is exceptionally low. If only because of the fact that a good labour force was available, one would find industrialists coming in from abroad and people with the know-how and the money setting up industries here because the volume was so low. The encouragements given by the Government—I do not decry them—have brought a greater upsurge in industrial activity than would have occurred had things been left as they were. We have had a period now, however, in which import prices have largely remained static. At the same time our export prices have improved and been quite good. In this situation we have not really measured up to what is expected if we are to see an end to emigration and full employment for our people at home.

It is true to say that the enemy of all this is inflation. If it were possible for the industrial worker here to live as well as his counterpart in England and, at the same time, find a lesser number of pounds, shilling and pence in his wage packet, we would be on a winner because that cost, and it is only one of the costs, of our industrial products would be proportionately lower and our products would, therefore, be in a highly competitive position. All this depends principally, I suppose, on good industrial relations and an extension of the machinery for improved industrial relations. The Minister today spoke of the introduction of new legislation to amend the Industrial Relations Act of 1946. Last year, his predecessor said the same thing. I do not know if any amendment is necessary but, if it is, then we should get down to the job and do the amending. As far as industrial relations are concerned, I am a firm believer in Joint Labour Committees. I have served as an employer member on the Joint Labour Committee for the Milling industry. Deputy O'Leary serves on the same Committee. At one period our chairman was the present Minister for Education. Great work has been done on that Committee. Employers and employees sit down around the same table, argue the problems and iron out the difficulties, finishing with the best production situation and, at the same time, the best employment and remuneration situation that can be evolved in the prevailing circumstances. It the joint committee fails to reach agreement, they then make their pleadings to a chairman and two independent members in much the same way as the ordinary litigant does in the courts. It is very rarely that the decision of these independent people, nominated by the Labour Court, proves unacceptable. The decision comes from the Labour Court and it becomes the law in a matter of seven or eight weeks. I should like to see an extension of that system. It works well in the mineral water distributing trade, the milling industry, and in other spheres.

If we are to press forward in industrial relations we must have a solid approach to some form of profit sharing where the workers are concerned. There must be a norm of production and this norm must do several things. It must give a reasonable return on capital invested because one will not get capital if one does not give a reasonable return on it. As well as that, it must give the reserves that are so necessary in the changing circumstances of today to enable the industry to re-equip itself, perhaps twice within a decade. It is vitally essential then that there should be profit sharing. I operate profit sharing by means of pools in which the workers have shares, those involved more in certain operations having larger shares than those involved less in the operations. Profit sharing will have to come. It is the best way of procuring good industrial relations. Everyone in the industry has an interest in the cheque that comes in the second or third week of December, to say nothing of the interest involved in wondering why the cheque is not larger or why some one in another section has got a bigger cheque. This is something that can give us the production and the quality we need. It will mean that everybody in industry will be interested. It is the modern outlook and it is coming here.

I should like to pay tribute to the work of Coras Tráchtála, the Industrial Development Authority and Foras Tionscal. Any of us who have any contact with them realise the excellent job they are doing. If I were to single out any group for most extraordinary enthusiasm, which infects everybody, I would single out the people in Coras Tráchtála. The result of a call to Coras Tráchtála is that you have about four telephone calls inside a week giving you information, help and advice. This body is rightly being expanded by the Minister. It has already done a lot of good and will do more in the future.

The system of going to the Industrial Development Authority with a project, having it set up in a general way, and then getting down to the economic factor of whether you will get a grant or a loan from Foras Tionscal is, perhaps, unwieldy. Various Deputies, including Deputy Cosgrave, suggested there could be room for amalgamation here. I just do not know. Perhaps there is. The job is, however, being done well as it is.

I should like to say something a little bit local but yet of considerable interest. I am absolutely certain that Foras Tionscal, the Industrial Development Authority and Coras Tráchtála deal with Opposition Deputies in exactly the same manner as they deal with Government Deputies. Influence is entirely related, not to who you are, but to the validity of your request, the manner in which it is put forward and whether or not it stands up to the scrutiny that must be given to it by any Government body dispensing funds of that kind. During the last election campaign, the Government Deputies in my constituency were claiming everything. I did not enter into that race. Quite frankly, I had as much to do with the establishment of some of the industries referred to in their literature and speeches as they had, and in many cases, perhaps, more.

The people in those industries know me and know that. Jumping on the bandwagon is an operation I despise. It is not the sort of thing we want to see in this House. It is not the sort of thing that brings lasting appreciation from the people of your constituency, although it may gain you a few votes. I want to make it quite clear that in my negotiations with Córas Tráchtála, the Industrial Development Authority and Foras Tionscal I have received every help and got everything that could be humanly given once the matter was approached in a proper manner. I am satisfied nobody else got any more. I want to emphasise again that the campaign which was carried on was quite untrue. As the only Opposition Member in the constituency in the 17th Dáil, and continuing the same position in the 18th Dáil, I had as much if not more to do with these industries—some of them are referred to in the Minister's brief to-day—as the members of the Government Party.

The apprenticeship scheme is most important. I am glad to know there have been extensions to it. I agree with the Minister that there is necessity for considerable further extension. This means that the boy who goes to a technical school and later to a technological college will have a label on him saying he is not a hewer of wood or a drawer of water. All he requires is his own ability. This will bring forward a race of people who will be specialists in their own fields—better metal workers, better electricians, better garage mechanics, better operatives of all kinds. This is the age of technology and that is what we want.

I want to say categorically on behalf of my Party something we feel is of importance. In opposition, when you must be critical of something, it is easy to find yourself being criticised as opposed to a project. It is easy to find yourself, deliberately or by accident, being put on one side of the fence by the opposing politicians. In relation to industries founded by the Government which have not been as successful as they might be, we on this side of the House will endeavour in every case to help to further those industries, expand them and bring them to the state of success which is the desideratum not only of the Minister and his Party but of everybody in this House.

That does not mean, however, that we have not the obvious duty of inquiring into certain financial matters. We cannot shirk that responsibility. But it does mean that, in the case of Verolme, Irish Steel Holdings or any other industry that has not reached the position of production and commercial profit we might like, we are going to go all the way with the Government—the proof of this is in the Voting Lobby— to ensure their success. I want to tell the people in these industries that our position is this. We agree that when there is a large number of people in employment in an industry, democracy today insists that their jobs must be preserved and that the area is not denuded of its population. There is no difference between the Government and the Fine Gael Party on this question. It is quite unfair and untrue of any politician to suggest that, because we have had to inquire here about the financial position of various industries, we are opposed to them. The people in those industries now have a categorical assurance that the Fine Gael Party, whether in or out of Government, will do everything they can to maintain and expand employment and stand with the Government on this matter.

If I were to take industrial incentives most beneficial to the country in the past I would list them as follows: (1) freedom from income tax on new exports; (2) loans; and (3) grants. I think somebody coming here to establish an industry, like Becton and Dickinson in my constituency, and to manufacture an article for export to Britain are encouraged by our freedom from income tax for new exports. They are more likely to put more money, effort and top personnel into the project than if they came here because they got a highly advantageous grant and loan and had not to put in so much money of their own.

If I were in the position of suggesting to the Cabinet the changes they should make in industrial incentives in the Budget next week, I would say the best thing would be to extend the freedom from income tax incentive, which would bring people here to invest their own money. If perchance the loss cannot be met by the Exchequer, then perhaps it could be balanced up by not giving as big loans as were given heretofore. That does not mean I am opposed to loans or grants. They are most important. We must finance new industries as every country in Europe is financing new industries. Our experience has been that the Finance (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1956, introduced by Deputy Sweetman, then Minister for Finance, brought most of the new industries here. He is the man who first introduced loans and grants, too.

Those facts must not be forgotten. Those two measures introduced by him were criticised and voted against by Fianna Fáil but were adopted by them once they came back into office. His approach of freeing new exports from income tax means that these people are coming in, and putting in their money, their personnel, and their efforts. They are putting their arm into the Irish fire, and if things go against them, it is not so easy for them to lop off that arm and walk out of the country as it is if they come in because they get too attractive grants or loans.

We must, however, discuss the failure of existing native industries to avail of grants and loans. If we consider the volume of native industries portrayed by the Minister, it is quite obvious that existing industries for decades to come will certainly form the major portion of our industrial manufacturing sphere. Percentagewise they have failed to get the volume of grants and loans that has been available for new industries from abroad. There is also a political aspect to this because in the case of a grant or loan to an existing industry they will not be able to point to a factory and say: "I put that there." If there are 100 people working in the factory, that means about 700 or 800 votes. As a practising politician, I would be naive if I did not mention that.

The Committee on Industrial Organisation forecast that there will be quite heavy unemployment if we go into conditions of freer trade by co-operating with GATT or the European Economic Community. In this situation, not only must we try to expand the number of jobs in existing industry, but in many cases we must defend the jobs already there. We must accept the fact, on the Minister's figures, that all the grants and loans have not been availed of by existing industries. I do not know what is to be done about this. One reason may be that the adaptation grants have not been so long on the road. We are only now getting into the flow of the adaptation grants. However, the fact is that the existing industries have not got the percentage of grants and loans that one would expect to be necessary to defend the existing jobs and to expand production.

In my constituency there is a bakery which employs 200 people. These people applied for an adaptation grant and were told they could not get one. Why? They were told they could not get it because in conditions of free trade, they could not compete with bakeries across the border who had access to different flour and different prices. As I have said, there are 200 jobs in this industry. What are we to do in conditions of freer trade, if the Minister finds he has to allow bread from Northern Ireland to come across the Border? Is this industry peacefully and painfully to fold up? Is it a quid pro quo of an adaptation grant that an industry must be able to compete with its fellows in the same district?

It is true to say that you will find few industries would get adaptation grants, or any sort of grants, if they were in fact competing with someone up the street, but the Minister must face the fact that in conditions of freer trade, the industry up the street might also go to the wall. It is a fundamental fact, and a fact that obtrudes, itself when you think of EFTA, GATT, and the EEC, that the EEC is a tariff area and its purpose is to set up tariff walls. That was its first concept. Statements were made at the time of the Treaty of Rome about what would eventually happen, but the first concept was of a tariff area. They are now trying to get a situation of commercial and economic co-existence between America and Europe. Britain is on the outside and is obviously keen to co-operate in GATT. I think Britain is keen to have us co-operate in GATT so that we will find ourselves aligned with the general set-up when the time comes when Britain will enter the European Economic Community. It has been suggested in the past five or six months that EFTA may be considering including the agricultural range of products. If that happens, freer trade may be closer to us than we think, and we may find ourselves in the situation in which a highly technical and complicated trade position will have to be faced.

At the time of the British 15 per cent levy—it is ten per cent since 27th April—we did not make one of our reductions. The Taoiseach generally handles the question of tariff reductions. He was clear in his statement— and quite brutal about it—as to the purpose in having these tariff reductions at all. It was to sweeten the pill. The pill is there and the question is whether we can prepare ourselves by a gradual reduction of tariffs by 1970 when we will have to compete with others on almost level terms.

The last five years have been a period of takeovers, closures and purchases. We have seen a rationalisation of the flour milling industry. We observe certain changes in the rayon spinning industry and certain changes in the footwear industry. While these things are certainly bringing about a rationalisation and some preparation on the part of the larger manufacturers for this sudden cold dip we shall have to take, I think it is true to say the smaller manufacturers have not found themselves enabled, either by failure to get grants or by their failure to look for them, to make the changes so vitally necessary. That is something that has to be faced.

The question of undeveloped areas is one that has vexed politicians and everyone else for a long time. When you go into undeveloped areas, you have to think of services—harbours, railways, and roads. The political snag is that if somebody in one end of a constituency sees all the industries going to the other end, or if people in one constituency see everything going to the constituency next door, there is a hell of a row. This is a natural situation; there is nothing wrong in it. But I feel you must have centres of industrial development. The truth is that every industrialist who comes here would, if he were let, and space was available, build his factory within a mile of Nelson Pillar. It is, however, our right to keep our country on an even keel. If you want to attract people to the West of Ireland, you have to think of places like Sligo. This may mean that you will see people migrating from Leitrim to Sligo or from Mayo to Sligo to take up industrial jobs. I would prefer to see them do that than see them going to Birmingham. Far too many of them have gone in the last decade.

As far as the undeveloped areas are concerned, I think, whatever incentives we give by way of grant and loan and whatever information we give, we must also have a planned approach to this question. In relation to the question of the small industries, I should like to say that the experience in France, when they borrowed a vast sum from the World Bank in order to bring their industries up-to-date, and so that they would not have a change of Government every three months, was that the inducements offered were geared to the situation. If a small industrialist did not take these inducements, he could not compete, so an inducement to him, as well as being a carrot, became a stick.

This situation developed favourably in France. Anyone who studies the position will find that the small industries did not go to the wall in France. There was a place for them and you might find a small industry amalgamated with a large one, or perhaps there was an arrangement with the large one to produce the same product in both industries. Perhaps a very expensive machine was installed, to be paid for over, say, 15 years, and was producing a new product in a small industry.

I wonder whether the prognostications for 1965-66 will be fulfilled. Let us face the fact that the British Budget has removed a purchasing power from the British people of £10 a head per annum. That is £600 million. It seems to me also that Britain's withdrawal of lending money from the ordinary commercial borrowing market would indicate that we will not have a very good trade with Britain for the next 12 months, particularly for those items that can be dispensed with, such things as can be done without for another year.

The British budget is a restrictive one and we may have to make more strenuous efforts to keep abreast. I believe there is a great future for the expansion of Irish export industry. The old argument that the raw materials were not here will go in conditions of freer trade. The forerunner of the EEC was the Coal and Steel Community in Europe. The price of steel in France became the price in Italy and in Belgium. At the same time they rationalised their coal, and so these two major raw materials will, if the concept of the EEC is followed, become rationalised in price. At the present time many of our industries—in my own constituency there is the Dundalk Engineering Works—have been hamstrung by prices paid for raw material. These are not real prices. Anybody who studies this will find that you could not ascertain the price of steel if you tried, as far as Britain is concerned. But, if we go into conditions of freer trade, surely this material will be available to us, plus the costs of the extra transport. I know we are going to produce steel in Cork and I want to see that industry expanded. It is true to say that in freer trade conditions there is also the fact that things have a target price and an intervention price and any sort of rigging up of the market would completely defeat the purpose of the operation. Just as in America, where there are anticartel laws and people can go to jail for getting together and putting up prices 20 per cent, in a freer trade in Europe there will be discipline in pricing: prices will be the same for all.

I believe Irish industry has a future and the old dictum that we had not the raw materials is dead. I think we have something nobody else has: a wonderful labour force. People do not realise the great qualities of our Irish boys and girls. I was involved in an industry in Louth some years ago and I was standing outside with the managing director and he told me that a small product could be produced more cheaply in Castlebelling-ham than in Stockport. He said to me to stand there for five minutes and I would see the standard of girls and boys who would be coming out at one o'clock. The standard here is far superior to standards in Britain. The obvious reasons are that the British employees had for five, six or seven generations bad housing conditions and as well as that, they had five, six or seven generations working under bad conditions in industry before things like Factories Acts came along. Physically and mentally they are not within miles of the labour force we have here. That is the thing we must sell and that is the thing the Minister has got to try to sell.

I have seen those people coming out from the GEC factory at Dunleer, a few miles from where I live. The standard of labour here, the effort which the workers are prepared to put into their day's work and the effort they are prepared to put into learning a new trade is such that that is the reason this particular factory has raised itself up—to quote my opposite number in the county—from 211 in 1956 to something over 1,000 now. I do not claim any credit for that. He does. I can tell you who should claim credit for that. The managing director, his able staff, and the best labour force, not only in Ireland, but probably in Europe.

I should be quite naïve if I did not mention the dreadful news which faced my constituency this morning as a result of the announcement yesterday that the new GEC factory in Dundalk is to close. I am sure the Minister is as stunned as I am by this news. This is something we must all face and try to do something about by every means in our power. We are all in the dark about what has happened to make this factory close down. We just know the bald statement that it is closing down and that 350 of my constituents will be unemployed. I live beside Dunleer and I hope the factory there will be able to continue. I understand and believe it will.

I am a Deputy for Louth and as far as I am concerned the fact that 350 people lost their employment last night in Dundalk in a factory on which £750,000 was paid, and for which the Government gave a £300,000 grant is completely inexplicable to me. I want to be quite clear on this. I am an employer myself in the area and I am very friendly with the managing director. I am, however, completely on the outside and I know nothing about the particular details of this matter. I know nothing more than the announcement which was made in the papers and on television last night, but I find myself completely unable to explain away a situation whereby inside eight months of a grant of £300,000 being given to that factory, it has closed up. I do not know the reason why. All I can say, having said I do not know why this factory has closed down, is that any effort which we from this side of the House can make in joining with the Government to try to change this situation, will be freely and enthusiastically given. It will be given with the intention of saving those people from the emigration ship.

It is fortuitous that the general belief, and I subscribe to it, in regard to this matter, is that the factory in Dunleer will go on and will probably be expanded. I want to say that I believe in the ability of the management of this factory. I have seen it grow over the past ten years. It has grown from a small factory, 15 years ago, where a local man often paid the wages of the staff on Friday if money was scarce, and took shares in the company for the value. He was a good Fine Gael man. It has reached a stage where they employ this large labour force. I am sure, even though they have had to close down the factory at Dundalk, they will start next Monday morning as one unit at Dunleer again and proceed with every success. I am sure we will have a situation in which things will not be as bad as they look today.

With regard to the management and the quality of labour, I want to say there is nowhere one can get such a fine quality of labour. There are questions which will have to be asked and again every politician who asks these questions can be labelled as against the factory and against the present unfortunate situation. I want to ask: Was there a watching brief by the Department of Industry and Commerce or An Foras Tionscal operating during the period of the production of this factory? I understand these grants are subject to a return to the Government if the factory is closed. Surely a grant of £300,000 must have been the subject of a most exhaustive market survey? This market survey surely must have taken into account a potential market that is now mentioned as having gone? This exhaustive survey would be carried out not only by a Government Department that was going to give £300,000 to this industry but also by GEC. I want to know why this survey finds itself after eight months so completely wrong that 350 people have lost their employment.

I feel perhaps the best thing would be for the Minister to make a public statement, when replying. Again, I want to assure him of two things. The first thing is that I claim no credit for the establishment of the GEC factory at Dunleer or Dundalk. Every credit lies with the businessmen who started the factory. I will claim credit for any success I have in my own business but not for any political messages I did or did not. I want to say that this entire Party are behind any effort that can be made in regard to this matter. We are behind any effort that can be made to get GEC or anybody else back into that factory and to employ my constituents, who have been knocked out of employment. I want to see that there is no redundancy that can be humanly avoided, in either Dundalk or Dunleer.

Mr. O'Leary

The report, which we had from the Minister for Industry and Commerce, indicates the importance of this Department in our day. Up to quite recently the report of this Department was a very slim volume and affected only a little area in our national life. The report before us to-day shows how important the Department of Industry and Commerce is in the national life and the progress of the economy of the country today. The most important example of this is shown in the manpower authority which the Minister intends setting up. We in the Labour Party are very glad to see what we have been looking for in this direction about to materialise. Deputies from the other two Parties may not be aware that the trade union movement have been working for the setting up of such an authority for some time past. Successive Labour Party policies have called for the setting up of this authority. In fact, although we are not the Government we are glad to see the Labour Party's policy adopted in matters of this sort and it will be our role in this Dáil to make sure that such policies when adopted, will be fully implemented.

We would be very glad to hear of your support.

Mr. O'Leary

We will even lend you the documents referred to. We have often noticed that Fianna Fáil planning statements have lacked any content. We expect in the future that we will be able to provide them with this content until we are in a position to do the job ourselves.

You want to know the ballyhoo.

Mr. O'Leary

With regard to the manpower authority, we feel workers seeking employment want to get information without delay. The forecasting authorities should be able to give them this without delay and schemes should be available for training these workers in new skills.

Increasingly, it becomes evident that the pattern of industry to be set up in the future will be such that some new skills will be called for, while others will become obsolete. We shall have to train our workers to these newer skills. We cannot get the confidence of trade union members concerned unless we have some scheme of national redundancy compensation. I do not think we can ask for the confidence of individual workers unless this operates.

We should also, in such an authority, see that the demands of certain localities are looked into and that where variations occur in unemployment locally this is fully catered for under the new authority. What we have looked for in the past and what we hope this new authority will achieve is that it will bring about more than a mere improvement in employment services. It should provide for a stimulation of regional economic development and, where necessary, provide for the conversion of those industries which do not have good prospects of survival in freer trade to schemes of protection that do.

There should be an allocation of the manpower surplus to certain areas. We might look at the situation that presently obtains and consider what the manpower authority will be up against. The vocational schools are unable to implement the terms of the Apprenticeship Act: all of us here know that. In 1959, the Vocational Teachers' Association made a submission to the Department pointing out all that would be necessary in this area of training people for new skills and, really, giving us the educational groundwork necessary to set up an eventual manpower authority. Nothing was done on that submission and it was treated, like other submissions from interested groups in the past, as something to be acknowledged and passed on to history. The very problems referred to in this submission— the shortage of skilled teachers for the training needs, the shortage of suitable vocational schools—are now being realised.

In my constituency of Dublin North Central, Bolton Street Technical Schools cannot deal with the number of applicants for training. What is true in Dublin is even more true of places in other parts of our country. At the moment, there is a complete breakdown between the planning estimate before us and the actual reality of an apprenticeship training for young people in the vocational schools. There are not enough schools or teachers and this is a real problem for the Minister. However, he and his Department and the different people who have been in authority over the years must now realise that the problem of training for labour is not one that can be solved by the appearance of a beautifully produced plan here and now. It should have been anticipated years ago when others from less publicised positions were advocating this very thing—as the trade union movement was doing through the Irish Congress of Trade Unions and we in the Labour Party were doing.

Reference is made in the report to the help to the economy that has come about from the establishment of foreign concerns here. The Labour Party would like to issue a warning today against the over-enthusiastic welcome given to certain types of foreign concerns coming into this country. We accept that foreign investment can help our country but we welcome it only on the basis that such foreign help can give us technical know-how and access to markets that we would not otherwise have. We do not see the qualification for their entry as being purely one of the provision of capital. There is no shortage of Irish capital.

The Labour Party are not aware of any shortage of Irish capital for setting up new industries in this country. We accept that there may be a shortage of know-how and of access to foreign markets and, on that basis, foreign investment here would be acceptable to us. In many cases, foreign investment that came here nominally to set up specialised industry found its way into areas which Irish capital and Irish businessmen and Irish industry should have been able to tackle. I do not have to mention any instances: they are well known to all of us.

Take one area where the appearance of foreign investment is assuming very dangerous proportions. I refer to the number of supermarkets up and down the country in the distributive trade. Just last week, in the Phibsborough area of my constituency, a supermarket started operating which will put a couple of hundred traders there into very serious difficulties. We must ask ourselves, if we are conscientious in our obligations as public representatives, whether the appearance of these supermarkets, subject to no check, will have the effect of putting small businessmen out of business, of putting Irish families on the streets, so to speak in business terms. What effect will these supermarkets have, if the distributive trade, which is extremely important to Irish business and to the whole country, goes to foreign ownership? The retail trade, falling to foreign ownership, provides a ready market for foreign products.

Speaking from a trade union point of view I would say that many of these supermarkets do not provide adequate wages or in fact employ trade union personnel—many of them are nonunion shops. They provide employment merely for young females at very low wages. We would need to consider this matter a bit more closely before we discover too late that, from a national point of view, we have made a sad mistake in respect of the unchecked spread of supermarkets to the detriment of our small business people.

In another part of the report, reference was made to the work of the Committee on Industrial Organisation. There is no doubt that all of us must be extremely grateful for the work and the amount of material now open to us in the different reports on industry in this country. For the first time since the foundation of the State, we have a pretty comprehensive account of Irish industry, its problems and how to meet these problems in the future. Up to now, the great disadvantage has been that if you wished to speak about Irish industry one man's opinion was as good as another's. Now, we have ready material to comment on. We all recognise that some speed in the preparation of these reports was necessary. A probable lack of technical information in the questionnaire sent to employers may have had an adverse effect on some of the reports before us. All in all, however, a tremendously good job was done by a very small number of officials and our thanks are due to them.

One thing the report has made clear is just how shaky is the position of Irish industry. However shaky the basis of our foundation is now, if we had gone into Europe some few years ago, as the Government then wanted, our position now would indeed be very serious. The reports expose the position that Irish industry in many areas is extremely deficient in management training and in actual resources. Deputies will recall that, when the last attempt was made to get us into Europe, the alternatives were given in black and white. We were told that a great challenge lay before us. At that time, the Government had no compunction in telling us that a great market lay before Irish industrialists and that great employment opportunites lay before Irish trade unionists.

As we can see from the accounts of the CIO reports, the actual position as it faced every industry was far from being as pretty as Government spokesmen would have us believe at the time. One of the points brought out in the reports is that one of our gravest deficiencies is the lack of management training and of proper management know-how in Irish industry. Several agencies are attempting to right the position, but all the reports bear out that Irish management generally is far from being in a fit position to bring us into a European community, but is not equipped to plan expansion for the future.

I hope the Minister and his Department will concentrate a great deal of attention in this area in the years ahead because we all realise now that proper management in our industry is extremely important. Lacking material resources as we do, it is all the more important that the quality of our personnel must be second to none if we are to prosper industrially, and any great expansion in employment must come from industry. It is all important, therefore, that the personnel in industry, the people in key positions in it, must be people capable of giving decisions, people properly qualified to do so.

The industrial re-organisation branch —the branch which will implement the actual measures recommended in the different reports — are a very hard working group of officials, doing an extremely good job. The adaptation councils set up to implement the proposals in some cases are working quite well. The Trade Union Advisory Bodies set up to consult with the adaptation councils should not have any obstacles put in their way in the matter of receiving full information in respect of each industry. At every dinner graced by every Government Minister we hear practically every day in the week about the need for more co-operation between the trade unions and the employers, about the desirability of taking the trade unions into consultation with the employers.

Surely, in this area we can show best how earnest we are about the theoretical need for consultation and co-operation between the trade unions and employers. That is the area where there should be a real interchange of information, where real collective responsibility should be undertaken. There is reference to industrial relations in part of the reports and I should like now to make one or two remarks on the subject.

Since the kind of society we find increasingly in this country is one in which Jack is all right and every interest group looks after its own affairs, we cannot look for any form of control on trade union bargaining rights unless the Government are prepared to say to all interests that they will have to conform with the national economic plan. There appears to be on the part of Fianna Fáil only one desire when it comes to incomes and that is a desire to control wages and incomes when they come through the trade unions with a complete lack of interest in controlling any other form of income.

That is not so.

Mr. O'Leary

The facts speak for themselves. We shall never understand the position of the trade unions in this area of relations unless we understand that the trade unions will never accept compulsory arbitration, and if there are any industrial wizards who think otherwise let them get rid of that idea right away. In a free democratic society, the right of the employee to withdraw his labour must be unquestioned. Many of us make the mistake of keeping the continental system of trade unionism in our minds when considering the movement here. We must become aware of one great difference between us and the continent: the full employment economy has been accepted there for a number of years. Unemployment still weighs very heavily in trade unionists' minds in this country. Lack of confidence between employees and employers is something that will not be solved as long as we have pockets of anti-union employers in this country. As long as we have anti-union employers we cannot expect the full confidence of trade unionists and there are still, unfortunately, despite all the lip service to the full consultative ideal, some such employers in this country who adopt anti-union positions.

Only last year in Cavan an employer locked out 16 men, sacked them, because they joined a trade union. They were guilty of nothing except the exercise of the right enshrined in the Constitution—freedom of association. They were sacked and the strike went on for a year, the employer standing for his Christian belief that these men were not entitled to the right of freedom of association. As long as you have these things occurring you cannot expect the full confidence of trade unionists in any scheme for improving productivity. Every Dunleer that occurs, every door that closes without notice to employees, without a scheme for redundancy payments where men are laid off, will serve to retard the introduction of good relations in industry.

As I have said, all along in the trade union movement and in the Labour Party we have encouraged by every means possible the efforts being made to build the National Industrial Economic Council into a real planning body. We have felt that our economy cannot really get off the ground unless there is real planning of how our resources can best be utilised, unless there is consultation between interested groups in trade unions and management. We know that our industry must give us the necessary expansion in employment in the years ahead and we know also, as the CIO reports prove, that there are certain employers who do not live up to these obligations spelled out today with the purpose of expanding industry.

We in the Labour movement do not attempt to deprive any employer of his God-given right to a profit from his industry. We in the Labour Party see nothing wrong in profits so long as the person making them is a conscientious employer, committed to the expansion of his industry. On the other hand, we feel that the national resources should not be channelled to people who run inefficient firms. One of the characteristics of an inefficient firm, as proved in the CIO reports, is that management is not doing its job. No more taxpayers' money should go to them. We should adopt the policy of other European countries: inefficiency, wherever it occurs, either in the State enterprise section or private enterprise, should be weeded out. Our policy from the beginning has been one of full utilisation of all the resources in the country, full employment leading to higher living standards. You might say that all Parties in Dáil Éireann have similar aims but we in the Labour Party feel that the best means of achieving increased economic expansion—and it is not on any doctrinaire basis that we believe this, but purely from our experience as a separate State—is to base it on expanded State enterprise. We are not nervous of being labelled for believing this. We state it as a fact which we believe, that this is the most rational form of economic organisation, and one that experience has proved has given the best service to the people.

This does not mean that we are not uncritical of some forms of State enterprise. We feel they must be made more accountable to Dáil Éireann and we feel this could be applied to other areas of our economy also and that Dáil Éireann could be made more a body that would make a real contribution on how these industries should develop in the future. We believe that the State enterprises section of our economy should be expanded and should actually go into industrial production like, say Erin Foods did last year. By this means we could play a conscious planning part in the improvement of our economy. We are not satisfied that Fianna Fáil or Fine Gael are really conscious of the great contribution State enterprises can make to our economic well being in the future. We have the impression that both of these Parties merely accept State enterprise on a basis that there is nothing better there. Every so often we hear speeches from Deputies of either Party suggesting that this or that State enterprise should be handed back to private enterprise.

That is one difference we see— there are many others—in the planning concepts which we in the Labour Party have, and which the other Parties have. We have advocated that the NIEC should be engaged in planning in agriculture as well as in industry, that it should have its own secretariat and should bring in reports to be part of an annual economic budget, and that Budget time should become not a mere exercise of balancing payments but should be a real discussion on the economic outlook in the period ahead.

One point referred to in the Minister's speech is in regard to external trading relations either with Britain or Europe. The Taoiseach mentioned within the last few days that it is his intention to make a fuller statement about our application to the EEC during the budget debate. I look forward with interest to his contribution on this because it does strike me that very soon we will have to have a very full debate on this whole question of external trading relations. Too much is occurring at official level which this House does not hear about. For example, the Minister's speech mentions meetings held with British officials aimed at developing trade relations between the two countries. I would urge the Ministers concerned to bring these matters before the House as soon as possible so that they can be discussed fully. I wish them well in their expectations but I am beginning to think that this idea of being in the EEC by 1970 is becoming a pious hope of the Fianna Fáil Party. We will have alternative courses to discuss in the future but the sooner we banish this certainty from Fianna Fáil's mind, that this country will be in the EEC before 1970, the better. If the prospects are not as good as they think they are, the sooner we discuss the whole question of external trade relations, the better.

Deputy O'Leary spoke about supermarkets and the rate of wages paid to employees, to whom he referred as child labour. If he was speaking for the Labour Party on that score, he would want to start weeding out supermarkets in his own town. While I do not agree with them, I think they have a very important and indeed vital role to play in our economy by offering all products to the public at very competitive prices.

I should like to compliment the Minister on his speech and also on the way his Department are dealing with the needs of our economy. I am especially pleased with the modern and dynamic approach which the Industrial Development Authority are displaying in going after new business in various countries. This type of approach cannot but have a good effect on the economy. I am in complete agreement with Deputy O'Leary when he says that we are more interested in know-how and market outlets than finance, although finance is a very important factor. When we are bringing industries into this country, we should aim primarily at getting industries which will give us access to markets which we would not normally have, and also to obtain training in the basic skills where there has been no tradition in these skills.

I would appeal to the Minister to ensure that Verolme Dockyard, despite what some of the Opposition speakers say about it, is kept going because it is giving very full employment in my constituency. It would cause tremendous hardship to a lot of people if some of the Fine Gael proposals were implemented. Deputy Donegan spoke about Coras Tráchtála and I agree with what he said. Anybody who has gone into Coras Tráchtála and discussed his problems in regard to exporting could not but be pleased by his reception by some of these dynamic individuals. I agree also with Deputy Donegan when he says that no prejudice is shown to either party. Coras Tráchtála, under the Minister for Industry and Commerce, is a dynamic organisation and that is the way we should look at it. We should encourage every industrialist in our own areas to go along to them for a talk and find out how and where their produce can be marketed abroad.

I should also like to compliment the Minister on the quick and efficient way he stepped in when the 15 per cent levy was imposed by Britain. There was no red tape; he just went straight ahead as he realised that this was something about which quick and decisive action had to be taken, and this is what he did. He cushioned the blow for the Irish industrialist as much as possible. One thing that always astounds me is the number of industrialists who are not availing of the various grants offered by the Department of Industry and Commerce. I wonder are we advertising them sufficiently. In my own business as a business consultant, I have been appalled in this regard.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.
Top
Share