Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 13 Mar 1969

Vol. 239 No. 3

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

Minister for Industry and Commerce (Mr. Colley)

I move:

That a supplementary sum not exceeding £2,822,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1969, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Minister for Industry and Commerce including certain Services administered by that Office, and for payment of sundry Grants-in-Aid.

This Supplementary Estimate is necessary to meet excess expenditure on certain subheads of the Vote which could not be foreseen when the original estimates were framed.

The total amount provided under the subhead for An Foras Tionscal in the Vote for my Department for the year 1968-69 was £8 million. Up to 31st January, 1969, a total of £7,630,000 had been expended under this subhead. A recent review by An Foras Tionscal indicates that a further expenditure of £2,600,000 on approved projects must be anticipated during the remainder of this financial year, which will involve an excess of about £2.25 million in expenditure during the full financial year over the current provision in the subhead.

The anticipated increase in expenditure under the subhead is attributable in the first place to the inherent difficulties in the framing of estimates of annual expenditure by An Foras Tionscal, to which attention has frequently been drawn. These difficulties derive from various circumstances, including the uncertainty in the timing of claims for payment of grants, and the number and size of projects which may be approved for grants in any particular period. In the present year, progress with the establishment of a number of large new industries has proceeded at an accelerated rate, resulting in an increase in the financial commitments which must now be discharged. This has added to the difficulties facing An Foras Tionscal in keeping within the provision made in the Budget for this year.

I am in agreement with the Board of An Foras Tionscal that the further sum of £2.25 million will be required by them to perform their functions during the current financial year.

The proposed supplementary provision of £460,000 for Córas Tráchtála is required partly to cover expenditure in excess of the board's grant-in-aid incurred in 1967-68 and partly to cover the additional requirements of the board in the current financial year.

The accounts of Córas Tráchtála for 1967-68 show that at 31st March, 1968, there was an excess of expenditure over income. The excess by Córas Tráchtála, on a purely cash accounting basis, was £87,000 and in the case of Kilkenny Design Workshops £30,000. The extra expenditure was in the main due to greatly increased export activity resulting in greater demand for the services and facilities provided by Córas Tráchtála and to greater capital expenditure on building and reconstruction at the workshops in Kilkenny. A total of £117,000 is, therefore, included in the Supplementary Estimate to cover this extra expenditure by Córas Tráchtála and its subsidiary Kilkenny Design Workshops Ltd.

It has been made clear to Córas Tráchtála that bodies financed from voted moneys must ensure that their net expenditure in each year does not exceed the amount voted by Dáil Éireann. A new system of budgetary control has been instituted both in Córas Tráchtála and in Kilkenny Design Workshops, so that expenditure may be kept under regular review and spending above the amount voted should not occur again.

The Grant-in-Aid provision for Córas Tráchtála for the current financial year was fixed at £800,000 on the basis of estimates, which were, of course, prepared about 15 months ago. The increased activity in 1967-68 has continued into this year and, as a result, the board's requirements for the current year are now estimated at £1,143,000, representing an increase of £343,000.

Córas Tráchtála provides a wide range of aids and services to exporters. It is estimated that 80 per cent of exporting firms call regularly on Córas Tráchtála for services of one kind or another. The number of exporting firms has grown from 600 in 1965 to 900 in the present year, and the growth in industrial exports in recent years has been equally remarkable. These increased from about £128 million in 1966 to £148 million in 1967 and to an estimated £177 million in 1968. The increased activity by exporters reflected in these figures has necessarily been accompanied by an increased demand for the services of Córas Tráchtála and hence the increased expenditure which has made it necessary to bring this Supplementary Estimate before the Dáil.

There is also provision for the additional measures recently announced to encourage market diversification. The policy of market diversification which has been pursued during the past decade has already resulted in the development of substantial exports to markets other than Britain. The measure of the progress achieved in building up our trade with Continental Europe, North America and more distant markets is that total exports to these areas reached an estimated £125 million in 1968 as compared with less than a quarter of that amount ten years ago. The object of the new measures is to accelerate this rate of expansion in third markets and to counter the possibility of over-dependence on the British market.

The proposed supplementary provision of £460,000 will put the board's finances in order and will provide the board with the necessary resources to meet its current requirements.

Under the export promotion legislation, under which Córas Tráchtála was established, there is a limit on the total amount of non-repayable grants which may be made to Córas Tráchtála. The existing statutory limit of £4.5 million will require to be raised. The balance at present uncommitted from the statutory limit is £312,115 which is not sufficient to cover the proposed suppletary provision. A Bill to raise the statutory limit was passed by the Dáil on the 20th February last.

An additional £38,200 is required by the Institute for Industrial Research and Standards to enable it to meet its commitments in the current financial year. The excess is composed of £28,300 to cover increases in salaries and wages arising from the 11th round of wage increases and a loan of £9,900 which was made by the Institute, with my approval, under section 43 of the Industrial Research and Standards Act, 1961, to enable a company to engage in the development of a promising new product for use primarily in the food processing field. These additional requirements could not have been foreseen by the Institute when their original estimate was being drawn up.

The excess of £60,000 on technical assistance is due to grants for two projects for which no provision was made in the original estimate. Grants of £102,000 were paid during the year in respect of development in the coal industry and a further sum of £3,000 will mature for payment before the close of the financial year bringing total payments to £105,000 as compared with a provision of £33,000 in the original estimate — an excess of £72,000. During the year I received a request from the Federation of Irish Industries for funds to enable its services to industry in 1968 to be maintained and the benefits of the services provided for the past three years to be realised and I approved of a grant of £17,740. These two projects account for an excess of approximately £90,000. Taking into account anticipated savings on other technical assistance projects an excess of £60,000 on subhead L will arise.

The provision of £80,000 for the Irish National Productivity Committee did not take into account any major adjustment in salaries and wages. The sum of £4,500 included in the Supplementary Estimate is to provide for the application of the nine per cent increase to the staff of the committee.

The British Temporary Charge on Imports which was imposed in October, 1964, terminated on 30th November, 1966. It will be recalled that a grant scheme was introduced to offset the effect of the levy on exporters. It has been necessary to make some payments under the scheme during the current financial year because some exporters experienced exceptional difficulty in obtaining the necessary customs and other documentation to support their application for grants.

Because it was not possible to forecast with any degree of reasonable accuracy what expenditure would be necessary during the year a token provision of £10 was made in the 1968-69 Estimate under the subhead. It has proved necessary to make grant payments amounting to £66,000 so far this year and it is estimated that a total sum of £90,000 will be necessary to clear all outstanding claims and to wind up the scheme by the end of March 1969. Accordingly, supplementary provision amounting to £89,990 is necessary in the current financial year.

As Deputies will recall I announced on 3rd May, 1968, that it had been decided that the Industrial Development Authority should establish regional offices in different parts of the country. I explained that the number and location of these offices and the form of relationship between them and local organisations would await consideration of the report of Colin Buchanan and Partners on Regional Development but that it would be practicable to advance somewhat faster in relation to the Limerick/Clare/North Tipperary region. That region had already been the subject of a report by Nathaniel Lichfield and Partners and an interim regional organisation had been established representing local bodies including the Shannon Free Airport Development Company and the IDA. It was the Government's view that it would be clearly beneficial to make use of the successful experience of the Shannon Free Airport Development Company within this region as a whole. Accordingly, it has been decided that the company would function as an organ of industrial development within this region and would be responsible to me as Minister for Industry and Commerce for industrial estate development and possibly the building of advance factories within the region.

The company's functions were accordingly extended to include the local activities of industrial promotion and development in the Limerick/Clare/ North Tipperary region in association with the IDA. This decision was taken in the light of several considerations. First, the Limerick/Clare/North Tipperary region is in a key position in the West of Ireland. Growth centred here would make a wide area in the west and south more attractive to industry and would ease the pressing problems of unemployment and emigration there. Secondly, the region is a homogeneous one which, as I have said, has already been clearly studied for the Government in the Lichfield Report. Outline planning proposals are available which will ensure that action taken in any part of the region will fit properly into a plan for overall growth. It has, therefore, been possible to commence work immediately Thirdly, there is a good industrial base, particularly at Shannon, from which to build. In the Shannon Free Airport Development Company there is the available experience which has already proved its effectiveness. We are thus working on the sound business principles of building on strength.

The decisions I have referred to required the transfer to me of the Ministerial functions under the Shannon Free Airport Development Company Acts except those relating to tourism and aviation. This transfer was effected by the Shannon Free Airport Development Company (Transfer of Departmental Administration and Ministerial Functions) Order, 1968.

Provision was made to the extent of £300,000 in subhead K.1. of the Transport and Power Vote for 1968-69 in respect of grant-in-aid for the Shannon Free Airport Development Company to meet its running expenses. This provision is in respect only of the company's operations prior to the extension of its functions and it is now necessary to make provision for the additional expenditure on running expenses which the company has to incur in respect of its new functions in the Limerick/Clare/North Tipperary region in 1968-69. The additional amount required is estimated at £23,000.

As the House will now be aware, mining activities at Castlecomer Collieries ceased on 31st January, 1969. This was an unfortunate and disappointing development, but the decision to close the mine was taken by the mining company when informed of the Government's decision that further State financial assistance for mining operations would not be forthcoming. I can assure the House that this decision by the Government was taken only after the most careful consideration of the report of an inter-Departmental Committee which had been set up to examine the future prospects for the collieries.

The State had been subsidising the operation at the collieries since 1963, and even at this stage, I would have had no hesitation in asking the House for more money if there was any hope or indication that the mining work would become self-supporting at any point. Not alone was there no indication of viable working, but in fact the position was steadily worsening and losses on the mine were of the order of £1,500/2,000 each week. The quantities of coal being extracted weekly and the percentage of good quality coal were also declining. The board of the company had expressed the opinion as far back as in 1965, that the mine had no economic future, and in fact operations ceased for some time that year. Because, however, of the social implications involved, the Government decided to accept the recommendations in a technical report which had been commissioned by the Irish Transport and General Workers Union, and mining operations were resumed later that year with State assistance. This decision by the Government was evidence of the wish on their part that the work should not be abandoned until every possible opportunity had been given to make the mine pay.

There has naturally been considerable publicity about the closure of the mine in the Press and on television, and I would like to guard against any misunderstanding about the Government's aid and about the position that had been reached. The trial work that was recommended to be done by the consultant commissioned by the trade union was, in fact, done with State financial assistance. The main recommendation of the union's consultant was for the company to undertake an exploratory new drivage, for a limited period of time and at a limited cost. Both the time and the cost were substantially exceeded, but State assistance was continued up to last January; this assistance covered the cost of the drivage work and the losses sustained while it was being done. The board of the company themselves have repeatedly said that they could see no economic future for the mine, and there can be no doubt that the State assistance provided gave every reasonable opportunity of testing the prospect of viability.

There are two points on which I would specially like to comment as they have been given prominence in the Press and were mentioned by Deputies last month in the House during question time. These are, that a very high quality coal is being lost through the closure of the mine and that financial aid was not given for better equipment to work it.

It needs to be brought home, because this is the governing factor which led to the mine's closure, that the bulk of its produce was no longer marketable. The percentage of the mine's produce that came in the form of readily saleable nuts and the like, was, by weight, a small one. More than half of the produce, by weight, came in the form of duff, and for a long time this had been of such low quality that it was purchased by the sole user only on exhortation from my Department. The market for this duff eventually ceased so that more than half of the future produce of the mine would have had to be discarded and as a result, financial losses on operations would have increased substantially. These facts are well known to those connected with the mine.

With regard to suggestions that the State money that had been provided was not properly allocated to the company to enable them to buy better equipment, I have already said that when the mine was reopened in 1965, money was provided to do the job that the trade union's consultant recommended. This was essentially a job of excavation, and the main costs which the consultant foresaw were the wages of the workers doing this job, as well as the general losses being incurred while this was taking place. There was not, to my knowledge, any specific request from the company for the advance of money, outside of what was being provided to meet the company's losses, for essential plant or machinery to carry through this trial of making the mine viable.

Subsequent to the closure of the mine in 1965, it was decided to increase the rate of new industry grants for the Castlecomer area from 50 per cent to 66? per cent in an effort to provide alternative employment for the mine workers. In other words, Castlecomer was put on the same footing as the undeveloped areas for industrial grants purposes, and this position still obtains. I am happy to say that as a result of this special concession for grants, and of the promotional activities of the Industrial Development Authority, five new industrial projects are scheduled for the Castlecomer area which will provide employment for about 200 men and 40 women. Apart from these industrial projects, I understand that another colliery in the area is seeking a substantial number of experienced mine workers and that housing accommodation is available at this colliery if required. The Department of Labour Resettlement Allowance Scheme could be of assistance to Castlecomer miners who would transfer to this colliery.

The total Exchequer advances made to Castlecomer Collieries in the current financial year amount to £70,000. In addition, provision will require to be made for a payment of a sum of £10,000 which was advanced by the National Bank to the company some time ago to meet a wage bill, on the understanding of recoupment from the State. This brings the total of State assistance for the collieries to £260,480.

The implementation of the programme for the expansion and modernisation of the Geological Survey is proceeding. Some additional staff has already been recruited and further staff is expected to be recruited in the near future. This recruitment is the first phase of the expansion which includes the provision of alternative office and laboratory accommodation and modern equipment. While a decision as to a final location for the reorganised survey has not yet been taken, the recruitment of the additional staff has made it necessary to order urgently laboratory and field equipment to the value of £15,400 for which provision was not made in the original Estimate for this Department for 1968-69.

The provision for travelling and incidental expenses in the original estimate was £21,000. The excess mainly arises from the continued intensification of the campaign for industrial promotion at home and abroad by officers of my Department and the Industrial Development Authority. Further, the increase in the grant approvals by An Foras Tionscal already referred to has involved a considerable increase in travelling by the board's technical advisers both architects and engineers. Provision has also to be made under this subhead for the proposed changeover to the metric system, which involves expenditure on the provision of new standards of length, weight and volume.

The total of the increased expenditure involved under all these heads amounts to £3,031,000 but this will be offset by savings of £209,000. These savings were made up of £29,000 on subhead M2 — National Productivity Year — due to the decision not to launch the campaign until November, 1968 and £180,000 on subhead P — Shipbuilding Subsidy. Accordingly, the net amount required is £2,822,000.

I recommend the Supplementary Estimate to the House.

Mr. Donegan

It is inevitable, of course, that as more of our people move from the country and go into industry we will have an expanding industrial base here and, as the involvement of the State in grants, loans and encouragement of all kinds grows bigger daily, and the volume of activity grows bigger, it is natural that the Minister should have to come back here quite often during the year and ask for more money. There is nothing wrong with that at all. In a quickly changing situation it is quite obvious that you cannot foresee on certain subheads what the expenditure for the year would be. For that reason we have no objection to the introduction of this Supplementary Estimate.

This Estimate gives one an opportunity to give one's view on the expenditure of the various extra moneys that are being provided and the main head is, of course, that for An Foras Tionscal, for industrial grants. The figure for the year is large, and this is absolutely necessary because, after all, if we are going to have, according to the Third Programme, an increase of 6.5 per cent each year in our growth rate in industry, that must be looked after. If the North of Ireland and other places are offering grants, then we must similarly offer such grants.

I would, however, point to the situation in relation to these grants. All we have to support us in relation to the new re-equipment grants, which were changed after this Party had for years asked that they should be changed from adaptation grants, which merely were available for export orientated industry to industry that was also working for home use of their product, is a Press release by the Minister. This House has failed literally for months to get the legislation through so that these grants can be paid out. I know that a letter from the Minister saying that the grant has been given is as good as money in most cases but, at the same time, it is a sad commentary that here in this House we have had long deliberations on how we are elected, and extraordinarily long deliberations on the various constituencies and who we will represent and, at the same time, there was not time to make a major change in the legislation which governs the issue of £8 million per year for industry.

One of the things that an industrialist coming from abroad, who might go to Northern Ireland or might come here, would be attracted or repelled by would be the colour of your money. In fact, if he were told by his counsellors here that this legislation had not been passed, but that there was a Press release by the Minister saying he would get certain things, changes from the old system to the new, improvements, larger grants in certain instances, he would be happier if the legislation had been passed through the House.

As I understand the Minister's new proposal in relation to the manner of disbursing this £8 million, largely it is that the re-equipment grants will be limited to 25 per cent. I want to make known the policy of this Party on this side of the House. While we accept and understand that existing industry could not possibly get a very high grant for small capital expenditures as the years went on, because the volume of money involved would be so great as to completely swamp any Government, at the same time where an existing industry made a capital expenditure which in relation to the capital employed in the first instance in that industry was very large, then that industry should get the same treatment as the man from abroad.

I want to give a simple example of an industry here employing a capital of £100,000 and if that industry made a capital expenditure for re-equipment of £10,000 it would be my view that it is quite all right to give a 25 per cent grant there, but if that industry made a capital expenditure in a year for re-equipment of £60,000 or £70,000 or, in other words, 60 or 70 per cent of the total capital employed in the industry in the first instance, then we on this side of the House have announced as our policy — and we want to make it extremely clear — that existing industry here will get the same level of grant or, in other words, 50 per cent or more under the new system proposed by the Minister if, relative to their capital employment, their expenditure is proportionately large. Not only is it necessary that existing industry should get this, but it should be known and noised abroad that existing industry here is going to get just as good an opportunity as industry from abroad.

We on this side of the House welcome industry from abroad and feel that it is absolutely necessary because the volume of advancement there must be, must include a very large proportion of industry from abroad. At the same time, we hold that the industries at home, if they expand spectacularly, have a safer appearance for the Irish taxpayer and the Irish worker because it is very easy, as we have found out in many cases to our sad surprise, for an industry from abroad, when things are going badly, to lop off the arm here in Ireland and leave us with the empty factory. If we are dealing with people who have lived here and their fathers and mothers before them, we are dealing with people who do not want to leave here. We are dealing with people who have placed within that new branch of their firm people they knew, people, perhaps, whose parents they knew, people with whom they have lived within their own industry for generations. That sort of person will fight far harder to keep that industry going than the person from abroad who can regard it as just another branch somewhere in the world.

We on this side of the House want to make it quite clear that, where the expenditure on existing industry is large in relation to its capital employed, we will see to it that the same level of grant is available for the adaptation or re-equipment of that industry as would be available for the new industrialist from abroad. That is the first major point of policy I want to make absolutely clear this morning.

There is no criticism from this side of the House of the fact that there is heavy expenditure. We feel this is absolutely necessary. We accept the fact that, if we take the figures of the numbers of people coming forward— I feel the Irish worker properly dealt with is probably the best in the world — and if we look at the numbers leaving the land, and if we want to stop emigration, then this is one of our key attacks. This is one of the cornerstones in our fight to try to keep our own people at home. For that reason the extra expenditure is welcome as far as this side of the House is concerned.

I want to deal now with the extra expenditure on Córas Tráchtála. I got from some of the phraseology of the Minister's speech almost a feeling of criticism that the affairs of Córas Tráchtála had been a bit loose and that there would be more budgetary control.

In my view, the most efficient agency operated by the Minister's Department is Córas Tráchtála, bringing in its operations the greatest return for the Irish people. I should like to point out, however, that it is industrial policy if we gain government in the near future that the activities of Córas Tráchtála will be further expanded. I am fully aware the Minister has expanded the activities of Córas Tráchtála and that more work is being done by that body. I know there is some work being done on market appraisal, but we feel there should be much more work done on this and that an appraisal of the markets abroad which are available to us is necessary at this moment.

Let us face the fact that as the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Agreement goes blithely on its way without correction — we hope there will be correction — 72 per cent of the industrial market here will be wide open to British competition by 1975. In that situation we have got to seek alternative markets abroad. We cannot now operate on the basis that automatically we will be in the Common Market, because it is quite clear we will not be, in the foreseeable future in any case, and that if we are to get into it some time, there will be a long period when we shall be moving slowly towards it.

In that context, here we are with conditions of free trade around the corner as far as Britain and Ireland are concerned. Last night I was in Radio Éireann with Deputy Seán Dunne and Deputy Crowley and during the discussion I noted comments by Deputy Dunne on the fact that in the Third Programme this situation of free trade was accepted. There were quotations from the Programme that free trade is here as far as Britain and Ireland are concerned.

Therefore, I hold that a major market appraisal drive by Córas Tráchtála is necessary in order that we may see where in the world any product we can produce as cheaply and as well as anybody else can be sold to the best advantage. Not only that, but it is necessary, apart from the services provided by Córas Tráchtála, for individual firms to make mammoth market appraisal drives on a national scale so that when the results duly have been examined by the Government they can be quickly announced to industry, trade and finance circles here so that, in turn, the people who have the power to establish industry here will be able to see which avenues there are for further advancement and expansion, with the possible help of the Industrial Credit Company and Taiscí Stáit. That is one facet of the work of the Minister in which not enough is being done.

I observe from the Minister's statement that the Castlecomer area is to receive 66? per cent grant, just as Dundalk, a town which was hard hit recently by the closing of the boot factory. In my opinion, that action has succeeded in Dundalk and I hope what the Minister has said in relation to Castlecomer will have the same effect. Of course, there is many a slip twixt the cup and the lip, but when you have got an old old-established industry closing down which for generations employed so many people, it leaves a terrible void. The whole structure of life had been built up around this place. People had become certain that it would never close down and then the dread moment arrived. It was right, therefore, to give this grant.

There is one other aspect of grants for new and existing industries to which I wish to refer. We want to be extremely careful that we orientate these grants towards the employment of male labour. I know two thriving industrial towns in my constituency, and I know many other towns in the country better than I know Dublin, and it is true that in most of those towns girls can get all the employment they require. They get married and move from industry so that there is a constant need for female labour. There is some evidence that grant money has been wasted in certain instances when it is issued to industries which employ only girls. I am not against it in certain instances but where the amount of money is spectacular it is bad value for the hard earned taxpayers' money.

In future there should be more attention to the provision of continuing male labour because I hold that the employment of one man, with a wife and children, coming down the street on a Friday night, keeping something for his pocket and giving the rest into the household to rear his family is, within the community, worth half a dozen girls in employment. They come out the gate, hop around the corner to buy a pair of nylons and a dress for Saturday night's dance and they give their mothers half what they should give them to feed them. I agree it is not general but it is prevalent, and parents are extremely lenient in this way. Very often these girls could get employment without the issue of spectacular grants to new industries employing only girl labour.

I can tell the following story because it is away from my neck of the woods. I was at a chamber of commerce dinner and was speaking to somebody who earlier had been a Member of this House and who is involved in local industry. The president of the local chamber of commerce made a speech in which he lauded the establishment of a further small industry in the town employing only girls The man sitting beside me became inflamed on the basis that he also was employing girls in the town and that he could not get them. We want to be very careful in this respect. There is a temptation, because we have got to employ our people, to bow to anybody who is honest and who is prepared to give employment. The Minister is enthusiastic in that respect and I appreciate it. At the same time, I consider that one man employed is worth six girls, and girls will get jobs anyway in the few years before 80 or 90 per cent of them go to their natural occupation within the home.

I find it a little incongruous, and the Minister will pardon me if I inject a tiny barb here, that at the bottom of the page to which I have been referring, mention is made of a 9 per cent increase in the wages and salaries of the Irish National Productivity Committee staff. More luck to them, may they get any increases they can through negotiation, but at the same time let us face the position in which industry finds itself today. I charge the Government that last summer there were, right through the spectrum of industry, contracts of service for two years. I was involved in one in the Labour Court: we had a contract of service whereby 17/6d was paid in April last, a further 17/6d on the anniversary this year, two extra days holidays the first year, three the second year, two and a half fewer days of work during the period, and an agreement on productivity.

Those agreements on productivity are absolutely important. I wish those people well in receiving the nine per cent, but if the Government, instead of allowing the nine per cent to proceed and to be carried over into the Civil Service, had followed the line they had taken, which was to have a two-year contract, it would have been much better. Instead, they did this eight weeks before the referendum, and we now had the situation with the Government's own employees where no productivity was arranged and yet, on the 9th of next June, off we go again round and round the mulberry bush for more wages. The efforts which people were making by genuine and sincere methods to produce industrial peace have all been to no avail. Whom do you blame now? You can blame a lot of people and we can all take our sides on that, but included in those to be blamed are the members of the present Cabinet.

I should like to refer to the British levy under the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Agreement, which the Minister has dealt with. Of course, the moneys voted here will only continue the reliefs which have been announced already. I think that probably the best way out was found in this instance. However, I should like to say again that the action of the British Government was a deliberate breach of the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Agreement and, fully aware of the Government's difficulties and fully aware of the fact that it would be interpreted as a case of might giving right, they perpetrated this breach of the Agreement.

Mr. Colley

May I interrupt the Deputy? There seems to be some slight misunderstanding. The moneys in the Supplementary Estimate have to do with the moneys provided to meet a surcharge which was imposed by the British before the Free Trade Area Agreement.

Mr. Donegan

Sorry. I thought it was to do with the interest. In relation to Shannon Free Airport Development Company we are aware of the Government's announcement to extend the area of this operation. Of course, we are also aware that parts of the various reports of Colin Buchanan, Lichfield and Myles Wright have been made public by the Government while other parts have been kept in a dark room. We may as well face the fact that many of these reports show that there will be a drop in population in many of our towns. I have one report, which the Government have not released, containing a far more joyful message. I got it as chairman of Louth County Council. When I asked questions here a fortnight ago on certain details therein I was told the plan was confidential. The plan was lying on my desk for a year. I hold there is some criticism due to the Government on this. The fact is that the announcement of the various computations by two well-know international companies of consultants would result in people discussing whether or not populations would drop in certain areas, whether or not towns would die, and because the Government are coming up to an election they have shirked the publication of certain of those reports. It is most necessary that we have the immediate publication of those reports. It is most necessary that the Government come out and say: "Right, we are going to supply the houses for workers in that area because we are going to have an industrial estate there. We are going to supply the roads because we feel that the heavy trucks and so forth must have roads to bring goods from that industrial estate or development area. We are going to do all those various things. We hope, for instance, instead of having emigration from Leitrim to London there will be emigration from, say, Leitrim to Sligo."

I believe the Government are afraid to publish some of those reports because they might find that because there was no development in a place like Leitrim, they would lose a seat in Leitrim. Maybe they would lose three seats, because I think they have sliced that unfortunate place up into three slices. In fact, they might not get one seat in the area where they had decided to place the development area. I do not want to go any further on that except to say it seems odd to me that I have a document sitting on my desk for a year and when I ask questions here on the contents of it I am then informed that the document is confidential.

Mr. Colley

Which document?

Mr. Donegan

The Colin Buchanan Report on the north-eastern region.

Mr. Colley

I do not think the Deputy could have it for a year because I do not think it has been ready for a year.

Mr. Donegan

I can assure the Minister that we on the Louth County Council had a private lecture by a lady professor who was from Colin Buchanan and Partners and the chairman was supplied with a copy of the report. If it is not a year on my desk it is certainly more than nine months. I am only telling the Minister what the situation is.

Mr. S. Dunne

What have they against Leitrim?

Mr. Donegan

I do not know. Would it be Pat Joe Reynolds?

An Ceann Comhairle

The question of Leitrim does not arise on this Supplementary Estimate. We are restricted to the subhead dealing with Shannon.

Mr. Donegan

I agree. I am discussing the subhead dealing with Shannon. I think the development there is good. The closure of Castlecomer Colliery is extremely sad. I will say no more than that. I have mentioned it before. I am pleased to see we are pushing forward with the purchase of the necessary equipment for the geological survey. I think we have got quite a move on in mining in this country. I understand that of the two major mines one could be of short duration but that the other one might last four or five times as long. This points to the fact that, if we have those minerals underneath our soil, and we have to find out whether it is economic to remove them or not, then we surely must proceed with the survey. From what I am told about the nature of mining — and I know no more than that — the financing of mining takes place by financing ten mines all over the world, the purpose being to shed the losses and when two of them come up as highly profitable they carry the loss on the other eight. We should therefore proceed with our survey and produce all the information, so that not only will we have two major mining ventures going on in this country but five or six. One of these ventures might be extremely profitable, might be a good employer, but might be of short duration, five to ten years, while the other one might be from 20 to 30 years. However, we must press forward as quickly as possible and I am pleased to see that the money is being provided.

I do not think I have been too hard on the Minister this morning. I should like to remind him that he is charged with what probably is the most important Ministry in the Government with the exception of the Ministry of Finance. When we look at the Third Programme we see there the broad outlines which we will be following.

Mr. S. Dunne

The Third Programme is bunk.

Mr. Donegan

It is not a wonderful document but it gives broad headings in any case and as the Minister is the man who will be charged with the job of finding employment for the people——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy will appreciate that the Third Programme is not under discussion.

Mr. Donegan

I am merely ending my contribution by telling the Minister that he has what is probably the most important job in the Government. I wish him well for the few weeks that he has left. When we take over, we will do what I have outlined; we will see that sufficient grants are made available by An Foras Tionscal and we will set out on a broad marketing drive with Córas Tráchtála.

Mr. S. Dunne

This Supplementary Estimate is largely a request for money to meet the bills which have been incurred and which, of course, must be paid. However, there is little more than that to it and, naturally, such a request will be approved by Dáil Éireann. This gives an opportunity for a brief comment on the so-called industrial progress of this country. I think I am in order in referring to that.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy will appreciate that on the Supplementary Estimate the debate is confined to the subheads.

Mr. S. Dunne

Yes, of course, as, indeed, the debate on every Estimate is, but I hope the Chair will permit me to deal with one or two relevant matters as well which are not specifically mentioned in the document — for instance, the relevance of the AngloIrish Free Trade Agreement.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

This is not a token Estimate on which debate would be allowed on the various subheads. On such an Estimate as this the debate is confined to the amounts involved in the Estimate.

Mr. S. Dunne

In that case, we are strictly limited.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

It is a limited debate in that sense.

Mr. S. Dunne

I have no wish to make things difficult for the Chair but no doubt the opportunity will come to discuss these other matters — matters of consequence such as the disastrous Anglo-Irish Free Trade Area Agreement and other pieces of pretentious pomposity and unintelligible nonsense such as the Third Programme: Economic and Social Development, 1969-72.

However, I am left with little alternative. One does not wish to quarrel with the provision of moneys for the promotion of markets abroad but I have one strong complaint to make and that is that not one quarter of what should be done in this direction is, in fact, being done.

The amount provided in this regard has been increased considerably but, of course, due to inflationary trends, money has been reducing in value and to quote figures in this context is not an accurate representation of the real position. I wonder how much is being done to find and expand new markets as compared to what was done ten years ago. I see no real efforts in this direction through our State agency which lacks any sense of drive in matters of this kind. If industrial development is to have any future at all — and one doubts if it will because of the lack of sagacity of the Government in the commitment they have entered into and because of the manner in which they are jeopardising the jobs of most of the population by their commitment to Britain — it is obvious that unless we can push and push hard into new markets, the outlook will be very grim for the people and it is by no means obvious that an effort is being made in this direction.

There is a great deal of multicoloured pamphlets in circulation among Members of Dáil Éireann. There is a good deal, too, of woolly calculation of what this increased trade is said to mean to the country but in terms of what is seen and, without wishing to appear hackneyed, I might refer to what occurred in my own constituency in relation to the Potez plant and in relation to another place in Ballyfermot which closed down. The workers had to wait quite some time to get the wages due to them.

It seems to me that proper examination is not being made of the potentiality of new markets and new industrial developments. The document says that the object of the new measures is to accelerate this rate of expansion. What rate of expansion? I should like more details of that. How have we expanded during the past two years? I do not see that we have expanded in any way. The claims made by the Minister and the Government are largely not founded on any fact at all or at least there is very little evidence of fact at any rate. The object of the new measures, it is said, is to accelerate the rate of expansion in third markets and to counter the possibility of over-dependence on the British market. There is an observation. It is unfortunate that we are not allowed to discuss the Third Programme for Economic Expansion or whatever they call it. As far as we are concerned, there is no such thing as an Irish and British market from now on. We are just one big union. Castlereagh, who engineered the Act of Union, could not have put it better. It was left to Fianna Fáil to put the seal on it in the economic sense.

And met with murder on the way He wore the mask of Castlereagh.

I would say we should beware of the mask of Fianna Fáil in view of their activities and the expeditious steps taken by them for purely political interests — steps which have put the whole economy in a situation which is fearful to contemplate. Of course, when the full blast comes, the Minister will not be here to answer for his activities nor will the Government, but somebody will.

Mr. Donegan

The Deputy will have to lay a book on that.

Mr. S. Dunne

There is no need to lay any book.

Mr. Donegan

I meant a book on who would be here, and a book on who would be in the Minister's shoes.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

This is scarcely relevant to this debate.

Mr. Colley

They might as well amuse themselves this way.

Mr. S. Dunne

The Minister will possibly be wearing English-made shoes anyway.

Mr. M. O'Leary

Or Italian.

Mr. Donegan

I think the Minister would wear good Irish shoes.

Mr. S. Dunne

He is flogging that particular horse as hard as he can. It is gone a bit lame on him. The Institute for Industrial Research and Standards is an excellent establishment. If there is anything we can do to assist it, it should be done. There is not enough being done at present for it. It has never been represented to me in this fashion but it seems to me that much more could be done to, perhaps, enlarge the premises and to recruit more staff. It is a very excellent project and one without which no country could hope to make progress. Those of us who have had the opportunity of visiting it have been very impressed by the excellence of the work done there and by the competence of the men doing it. We have been very fortunate to have secured the services of many young Irishmen who are skilled in matters scientific and also the services of people from outside this country who are obviously highly qualified men in these fields. It is fair that we should commend the function of the Institute.

The matter of regional development is touched on in the statement. The development centres are the subject of speculation and, no doubt, of considerable lobby by Government Deputies at the present time particularly those who may be somewhat apprehensive as to their electoral prospects in the month of May, which is almost upon us.

Mr. Donegan

The merry, merry month of May.

Mr. S. Dunne

I am afraid that May will not be very merry for some of the Government supporters at any rate, not that I wish any of them any harm. One would only wish that every candidate of every Party would be successful but it is not in the nature of things for such to happen. The question of the industrial centres is going to be a very important one. The question springs to mind as to why, when it has been so much under discussion in the last while, the Government have not made an announcement as to where these centres are to be located. Has there not been sufficient time to consider where to locate these centres? No doubt we will hear as much about them in the next few weeks as we did during the course of the East Limerick by-election when the Government was brought very near to a Becher's Brook by Mick Lipper in Limerick. I myself heard the Minister outside a chapel speaking early one morning on the intention of the Government to do great things for the Limerick area and to embrace it in the Shannon industrial area and so on, but nothing has occurred since then.

Mr. Colley

Ask Deputy Coughlan what has been done and he will tell you.

Mr. S. Dunne

He will probably be in to verify what I am saying and to address himself with his usual assiduousness to the problems of his own constituency when nothing was done on the lines indicated by the Minister on that occasion.

Mr. Colley

That is not true.

Mr. S. Dunne

It was purely an election gimmick.

Mr. Colley

I do not make election promises about things which I do not intend to carry out. I carried that one out.

Mr. S. Dunne

George Washington?

Mr. Colley

These are just plain, simple, honest-to-God facts. This is the way things are.

Mr. S. Dunne

"I doubt it, Croker of Ballinagarde."

Mr. Colley

Ask Deputy Coughlan.

Mr. S. Dunne

I am not suggesting that the Minister is saying anything other than what he believes to be the truth. What he believes and what is the truth do not necessarily correspond. The Minister spoke of high standards in high places. Everybody shares these qualities. He has not a monopoly of them. He did not bring them in here with him as something fresh into this House. They were here before ever he saw it.

Mr. Colley

I never claimed to do any such thing.

Mr. S. Dunne

Indeed, you did.

Mr. Colley

I suppose it would be useless to ask the Deputy to substantiate that.

Mr. S. Dunne

Let me bring the Minister's mind back to the fact that he made a speech about low standards in high places.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair does not consider this relevant to the debate before the House.

Mr. S. Dunne

Was he not saying that he had higher standards than others in the political life of this country?

Major de Valera

He is on a higher standard than other people in this country.

Mr. S. Dunne

What does the Deputy know about it? He is seldom here. His visits are not very frequent.

Major de Valera

The Deputy is here every day when the Dáil is sitting.

Mr. S. Dunne

The less the Deputy interrupts the less I will reply to him.

Mr. Colley

We are only providing ammunition anyway for the Deputy. He is searching for it.

Mr. S. Dunne

The Deputy can make his own ammunition, as you know.

Mr. Colley

He is finding it hard at the moment.

Mr. S. Dunne

I am compassed round by the Rules of Order, and I am not going to talk nonsense in order to please the Minister. I am not going to use a lot of meaningless phrases simply to placate the Minister's self-esteem as it appears to be the policy so to do. I am here to represent the views of the people who are looking to the Minister for continuous employment and jobs for the future. I am here to represent the parents of young people seeking apprenticeships to trades who cannot get them. Some of these people have possibly voted for Fianna Fáil in the past in the belief that what the Minister and his predecessors talked about might have some integrity in it and that jobs would be available at home so that young people would not have to go to England or elsewhere. I am not participating in a mutual admiration society.

I will leave the question of Castlecomer Collieries to my colleague, Deputy Pattison, who is especially interested in that. I shall conclude by saying that I am glad the Taoiseach has announced that there will be a debate on the Third Programme for Economic Expansion. I look forward to the debate on this so-called Third Programme for Economic Expansion so that we may be able to expose it for what it is, namely, another imposition upon the credulity of the Irish nation.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): I think Deputy Dunne was rather unfair to the Department of Industry and Commerce and especially to Córas Tráchtála and Foras Tionscal. He will find that, under this Supplementary Estimate, an additional £2 million is being sought which reflects the fact that foreign investors and, indeed, many of our home investors have confidence in the national economy. If they had not such confidence, we should not be here this morning looking for an additional £2 million for the purpose of encouraging industries.

It is unfair comment to state that no remarkable progress has been made. We have had continuous progress down the years since the industrial arm was founded in this country. In no small measure, this is probably due to our good political stability. When potential investors from abroad visit this country they inquire, first, about our political stability and then about the availability of labour and labour relations. By and large, we have succeeded reasonably well in those spheres but, unfortunately, over the past two years, we seem to be failing as regards our labour relations. If the labour relations trends we have been experiencing in the past few months should continue, then I fear that industrialists will think twice about coming to this country and investing their money here.

It would be a great pity if the industrial expansion we have already achieved and our potential industrial expansion were impeded in any way. We have been making steady progress in the industrial field and that is vital to employment. We realise that if we do not expand our industries it will not be possible for us to expand industrial employment, apart altogether from maintaining our present employment level. Knowing, as we all do, that a certain falling-off is bound to take place in agricultural employment, it is imperative that we should do our utmost to promote the efficiency of our industrial arm. That is why I consider that the Department of Industry and Commerce is the most important Ministry in this Government.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We cannot have a general debate on the Department of Industry and Commerce. The debate on this occasion must be confined to the subheads of the Estimate.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Dublin South-Central): I appreciate that fact. I want to refer now to the payment of grants. A businessman recently came to me. He is starting a factory in this country. Part of the factory is completed but he is taking the plant on a hire-purchase basis. The grant is paid only in proportion to the payments made in respect of hire-purchase. If the plant is bought over a period of years then proportions of the grant are paid over that particular time. He will not receive the grant in full just because the plant is placed in his factory. Businessmen maintain that it would be a great help to them if some agreement could be made so that the full grant would be paid on the installation of the plant. Small manufacturers in particular point out that the grant could be used as working capital. When it is paid in instalments, they are deprived for a time of the use of the grant in full. Whether or not there is any merit in that suggestion, I am not sure. The businessman who approached me about the matter said it would be three or four or five years before he would have received the full grant in respect of his plant.

I agree with Deputy Donegan about the necessity to encourage small industries. We should see if we can encourage those already in existence to expand. In Dublin South Central, we have quite a number of small industries but, due to lack of finance, they have failed to expand their premises. Would it be possible to have an industrial estate where factories could be rented for this purpose? I have no doubt that, if those people had the necessary capital, they would move out of these congested districts in the city to the perimeter of the city and would, I am sure, expand their property. The trouble is a lack of capital. Maybe they do not feel like investing so many thousands of pounds just now but nevertheless progress along those lines has been retarded because of the present situation.

I consider that the additional money being given to Córas Tráchtála is money well spent especially as they have sought foreign markets and tried to get away from dependence on the British market. We shall always be in a dangerous situation, from an economic point of view, if we confine our exports to one market. By and large, 75 per cent of our exports today are going to the British market. I am delighted to note the additional moneys now being given to Córas Tráchtála, particularly in view of our having reached a figure of £125 million in respect of exports. Anything we can do to help Córas Tráchtála to find new markets in North America and in parts of Europe should be done because their success will give us stability and economic independence in years to come. We are all aware of recent British actions in the economic field and, at all costs, we must try to avoid a repetition of that experience. Our manufacturers would feel much more confident if we could find new markets which would mean that they would not be dependent on just one market. I have no doubt we can find new markets if we keep our production costs right: this is of vital importance. Our unit costs must carefully be studied in the light of present-day costings, as well as our unit costs 12 or 18 months hence. I fear that our production costs will rise substantially, thus making competition on the foreign market very difficult for us. I believe that Córas Tráchtála will help any industrialist who approaches them. It is the invariable experience that Córas Tráchtála give excellent help and every encouragement in the starting of industries here. Therefore, any extra money we give in those two directions is money well spent.

I compliment the Minister on his drive in respect of the promotion of our industrial arm. If we are to compete successfully, it will depend entirely on our unit costs and on the worker-employer relationship. It is imperative that we succeed because, if we do not, it will be too bad for this country. If our industrial arm does not expand, we shall have unemployment.

Mr. Crotty

This Supplementary Estimate has a special interest for me and for all Kilkenny Deputies because of the Kilkenny Design Workshops which fulfil a very useful role in industry in general in this country. Because we have not a large population and the consequent necessity for mass-produc-tion, we must depend on good design and top quality and the Design Workshops in Kilkenny are a great help there. I trust more people will make use of them. People oftentimes come for designs but, according to the report, when industry is going well, they do not bother their heads any further and are quite satisfied. It is only when the industry is not progressing well that they come. The time to develop and to go ahead is surely when the industry is going well.

The principal item that will interest the people of Kilkenny in this Supplementary Estimate is the reference to the closure of the Castlecomer mines by the Government. These mines had some difficulty in 1965 and at that time the Irish Transport and General Workers Union got technical advice that, with development, the mines could be made economic and continue to provide very good employment as they had been doing for well over 100 years. On that basis the mines were reopened after a short closure. We felt that we would have what might be described as capital development and that whereas money had not been put back into the mines in years previous to 1965, now with the Government assisting and the Department of Industry and Commerce putting a director on the board of the collieries, there would be new development from that on and that there would be real development of the mines rather than carrying on from day to day, boring holes for coal. To our great disappointment, that did not take place.

The Minister devotes quite an amount of his speech to the Castlecomer mines. This may be a case of a guilty conscience needing no accuser and that he feels the Government have not done their share in respect of this industry. The State have been subsidising the operation of the colliery since 1963, and "subsidising" is the word, carrying on from week to week. They had a director there and one would think he would want to see the mine put on a good economic basis, if it was possible. I think that was never done nor tried. The Minister said the company took the decision to close the mine. I think it is rather "stretching it" to say the company took the decision. I understand that a phone message was received at the company's offices on the Wednesday and that the manager had no option but to put up notices the following morning because at that time the men would have only a week's notice, according to the Government's instructions that the mine was to carry on no longer than 31st January. Therefore, he had nothing else to do. I doubt if there was any meeting of the board of directors between the time word came that the Government were not going to support the mine and the time the notices were given that the mine would close on 31st January.

The Minister says that the loss on the mine was between £1,500 and £2,000 a week. I suppose, coming near the end, it may have been running about that level. If you have an old car which you never replace and with which you never do anything except patch it here and there, and you carry it on long beyond its life, putting nothing into it, it is bound to cost money. It is no wonder the losses were accumulating when the mine was not being developed as an economic proposition. The Minister said it was suggested by the transport report that roads or drivages be made in the mine. They were, but these were not proper roads. As a matter of fact, they were a great danger. Some of these roads put down in the mines were, I understand, only about six feet wide, whereas a proper road should be 11 feet wide. I believe there were men injured and it was lucky that people were not killed and that accidents did not happen during the final time of the mine.

The Minister speaks of the quality of the coal. I think that is the first time the quality of Castlecomer coal has been challenged by anyone. It was always known to be very high quality coal, much higher quality than the Ballingarry coal. I mention Ballingarry now because there is no opposition from Castlecomer. The sulphur content, which is a big consideration, was very low in the case of the Castlecomer coal. I am also surprised that the Minister should say that the percentage of the mine's produce that came in the form of readily saleable nuts and the like was, by weight, a small one. We all know that coal never comes up from the ground in the form of Aga nuts or nuts for other types of ranges. It never comes up in this form but has to be processed. That is only natural. It is ridiculous to expect the miners to send up a high percentage of readily saleable nuts. It seems that whoever wrote this had not much actual knowledge about the matter.

Mr. J. Gibbons

It was not a coalmining man like the Deputy.

Mr. Crotty

I have a fair knowledge of it. I have used a lot of Castlecomer coal over the years. We had to depend on it during the war when we could not get oil and we were very glad to have Castlecomer coal and anthracite. In the next war we cannot depend on Castlecomer coal to help us out when we will not have oil. We were very pleased to have it there in the past, even if it did mean a little more work than was involved in using oil.

The Minister said the duff was of very low quality. It may be all right to denigrate the coal mine because the Government want to close it down and to have the attitude: we reopened it because we were forced to reopen it but we are not going to spend another shilling over and above what we cannot avoid spending on it. The Government, undoubtedly, did invite new industries or provided the way for them by the 66? per cent. We are very glad of that. These industries are very welcome and other towns such as Callan would benefit by some of them. In Callan a very able committee collected some £30,000, which is lying there simply because they cannot get an industry in Callan. I believe they had expected to get a fruit processing industry but it did not materialise. That is a pity because Callan could have done as well as Castlecomer if put on the same basis of 66? per cent. I wish something of that kind were done for Callan. We have a new spinning mill coming to Castlecomer as a result of the 66? per cent. I am sure other industries will start there and we want industries to absorb the young men coming from the vocational schools. Indeed, I wish suitable industries could be provided in every town in the county to absorb these young men. But these new industries in Castlecomer will be no replacement for the coal industry.

No real attempt was ever made by the Government to put the coal industry there on a proper basis. Indeed, I believe the mines were opened against the will of the Government in 1965. The Government were forced into opening them by Deputies here and by public opinion. Apparently they decided: "All right. We will open the mine but we will fade it out over the years." And that is exactly what they have done. No new equipment was installed. Only six foot wide roads were provided and it is a miracle that there were no accidents. Deputy Dillon recently reminded the House of the position in Ballingarry. That mine was closed for two or three years because it was alleged to be uneconomic. Fortunately maintenance continued and eventually one of our own came back from Britain and proceeded to develop Ballingarry. I believe he is now a very wealthy man as a result of his activities in Ballingarry. When the Castlecomer mines were closed down there was no attempt at maintenance. There was no effort made to get someone else interested. It is a pity to see mines treated in that way. It is a pity the Government would not help out for another six or 12 months to give someone else an opportunity of making a success of these mines. Mining is apparently very prosperous, particularly in those areas in which they have other minerals apart from coal. Houses, with water and sewerage laid on, were provided for the miners. Considering all these services are there, it is a pity to see the mines closed down. Whatever the Minister may say, the quality of the coal is firstclass.

Mr. Pattison

It is a tragedy that the Government did not consult the House before deciding to close the Castlecomer Collieries. The Minister did say in his opening remarks that the decision to close the mine was taken by the mining company. I think the Minister is splitting hairs because, when the Government decided not to advance any more money, that was, in effect, a decision to close the mine. I would refer the Minister to the notice the company posted in regard to the closure of the mine. It reads as follows:

CLOSURE OF PIT.

The Government has decided not to give further financial support to the colliery. Accordingly, the company is reluctantly compelled to close the pit on Friday, 31st January, 1969.

The directors much regret to have to take this step and wish to express their appreciation of the past efforts of all concerned.

(Signed) Managing Director.

That notice is in itself an indication of who, in effect, closed the mine.

Mr. Colley

Might I refer the Deputy to what I said: the decision to close the mine was taken by the mining company when the company was informed of the Government's decision that further assistance would not be available? I made no effort to split any hairs on this.

Mr. Pattison

I am saying that the decision to close the mine was made by the Government when they decided not to give any further financial support to the company and I say this decision should not have been taken until the House had had an opportunity of discussing this very important matter. We may tend here to localise a matter of national importance; coal is a very important industry and there is in this area a very important mining tradition. With the closing of the mine we will lose skills that can never be replaced. The seam in Castlecomer is known to be the best in the world.

Mr. J. Gibbons

It was not worked since 1925.

Mr. Pattison

I shall come to that in due course. It is still the best seam in the world. This decision to close the mine will have far-reaching effects not only locally but also on the national economy because we will have to import substitute coal of inferior quality. Coal is one of our natural resources and I believe this whole matter should have been gone into much more deeply and the views of all Parties should have been obtained before any decision to close the mines was taken. I am sure all Parties would have willingly voted any moneys necessary to keep the mines open.

The Minister also said:

Not alone was there no indication of viable working, but in fact the position was steadily worsening and losses on the mine were of the order of £1,500/£2,000 each week.

Here again, if the Minister knew the facts he would not have said that. Statements like that cause me some concern because on 13th February when the Minister was replying to a question in this House he said he regarded the views of some unknown people as more important than the views of the workers' representatives in the mine. I quote from the Official Report of 13th February, Volume 238, column 989:

Mr. Pattison: Would I be correct in saying that the member of the trade union on the board of directors and the trade union representing the men were of the opinion that the mines could be made to work economically and could be a viable proposition if the proper attitude in relation to their financing were adopted?

Mr. Colley: It is true to say that the representative of the trade union on the board of directors expressed views of that nature but, according to my information, it would not be true to say that these views were representative of the views of the workers in the colliery.

The Minister does not say where he got his information. I should like him to expand on that, because I have inquired into this from the union's committee which handled these affairs, and they are very concerned about this statement because it appears that the Minister was getting some information that was not according to the facts. I hope the Minister will clear up that point when he is replying.

This brings me back to what he said about the weekly losses in the weeks before the closure but, if the Minister examines the position, he will find that the losses over about five weeks before the closure were of the order of £1,500 to £2,000 each week. Did the Minister take the trouble of ascertaining why those losses went up in those weeks? If he did he would have discovered that there were artificial causes for the inflation of the losses, if you like to call it that, over those weeks. There were five shuttings in the mine, that is the roofs collapsing, in that period which added to the running costs of the mine. As well as that, skilled miners had to be employed at clearing those shuttings, which meant that the cost of that work was inflated. It meant that production was affected and output and, because of that, naturally the losses increased for a temporary period. Enough time was not given to get over those temporary difficulties and see if the losses could be brought back to what they were averaging over the previous year. They were not averaging anything like the figures quoted here by the Minister. Indeed, for a short period the weekly losses were almost wiped out altogether.

I want to stress that the figures quoted by the Minister as the weekly losses were of a temporary and artificial nature. I should hate to think that the final decision to close the mine was based on those very artificial figures. I should hate to think that the Minister did not take the trouble of finding out exactly why the losses increased in the weeks preceding the decision to close. I am not satisfied either that every possible attempt was made to make the mine pay.

The Minister did not refer to the proposals put forward by the mining company for a briquetting plant. These proposals were worked out and based as far as possible on the factual situation. At least as a first step the proposals should have been gone ahead with, because the original drivage which the Bathurst Report recommended was not fully developed. I understand that a figure of £19,000 would have developed this drivage fully and proved beyond doubt whether the coal could be worked economically. I also understand that a proposal was put to the Department to provide this £19,000 as a first step, to see if the drivage was successful and that, if the drivage had proved to be successful, then the chances of establishing a briquetting plant would have been very hopeful. The fact is that this was not agreed on and, therefore, a big doubt will always remain in our minds as to whether every possible attempt was made to see if the mine could be made a viable proposition.

The Minister contradicts the assertion — and I have dealt with this partially already — that very high quality coal is being lost through the closure of the mine. Here again, the work arising out of the money which was advanced over the past few years was not devoted to output or production. It was a particular factor in the mine over the past number of years that the money had to be devoted so far as possible to development and exploration and other difficulties which had to be encountered. It is not surprising under the circumstances that the output and production and quality of the coal were not as good as they should have been. This would have improved because, as I said, the best coal in the world is in Castlecomer.

The Minister stated that the bulk of the produce of Castlecomer mines was no longer marketable. I do not know what steps the Government took — I do not think they took any — to ensure that markets would be available and to ensure that the circumstances would be such that the coal would be bought. We are very good at times at copying what the British Government do and it is a pity we do not take a few pages from their book in relation to the special aid and inducements which are available in the UK for the assistance of coal production there. The OECD Observer for December last has an article on coal and I shall read a paragraph dealing with coalmining in the UK and the problems which they have because of slackening of demand for coal:

Mining installations are nevertheless constantly being improved. The percentage of power-loaded output rose from 75 per cent in 1965 to more than 88 per cent in 1967. The aim is not only the development of a highly mechanised production method but operation by remote control so that in future much of the labour force will consist of highly skilled technicians. The experimental colliery at Bevercotes has started production and the National Coal Board intend the methods used there to be applied progressively to other pits.

Mining productivity has risen by 50 per cent in the last ten years and will continue to rise. Because coal will continue for a long time to provide a large and indispensable part of the country's fuel supplies, the industry's modernisation and concentration on the most economic coalfields and collieries must go forward. Only in this way can the coal industry remain viable. The greater the industry's success in reducing costs, the higher coal demand is likely to be in the 1970s.

There we can see that they concentrate on modernising plant and on installing first-class up-to-date machinery. Also, the emphasis is on productivity of the mines and every encouragement and help is given to them. The article says later on in regard to the special assistance which the British Government give to the marketing of coal:

Already coal receives protection from the tax on oil and the virtual ban on imports of coal. In addition, special measures are being taken for the transitional period up to 1970-71. The electricity and gas industries are to take more coal — up to six million tons or more—than would be economic for them, the additional costs being paid by the Government.

Again, the Government in that country realise the importance of the coalmining industry and, in the face of difficulties, they are doing their utmost to preserve the industry and to help the marketing process in this type of scheme. I do not think any attempt was made by the Government here to assist Castlecomer in that way.

I referred to proposals put by the company last September. I do not know what became of them. Any reference to the proposals is conspicuous by its absence from the Minister's remarks here this morning. He said there was not, to his knowledge, any specific request from the company for the advance of money. I do not know what he thought the proposals put forward in September were. They referred to the briquetting plant. They were proposals for further assistance to develop the drivage and to provide the machinery for the briquetting plant, as well as to provide wages for a further period of 18 months to two years while this plant was being got going. That was the proposition put to the Department and obviously it was not acted on. I should like to know what became of it.

The worst problems surrounding the mine closure are grave. I have dealt with the loss of the skill of the coalmining tradition which will never be replaced, but there are other factors. I know the Government have designated Castlecomer an underdeveloped area and that as a result increased grants are applicable for the setting up of industry in that area. However, this is something the area should get as a right, not as a favour. People are inclined to extend that treatment to Castlecomer, particularly Government speakers, as if it were a favour. It is their right to get this type of treatment and it is not anything more, in fact it is something less, than is being done in the UK. In the UK there is a scheme of supplementary benefits for older miners now made redundant by colliery closures. I do not know if the Minister for Industry and Commerce has any direct responsibility in this direction. In England there is this supplementary scheme.

I wish now to refer to the Minister's reply to questions here on 13th February. Reported at column 990 of Volume 238 of the Official Report, I asked this supplementary question:

Mr. Pattison: Is the Minister certain that proposals for the establishment of new industry will absorb all the miners now being made redundant?

Mr. Colley: The industry will, I think, absorb all who are capable of being absorbed.

The Minister, I think, understands as well as I do that there will be some who will not be capable of being absorbed. After a hard, long life given to this work, a supplementary benefit in addition to redundancy payment should be paid to these people. In the UK the Government are to pay a greater share of the social costs of colliery closures. In the area to which I am referring there is a social problem of many workers on compensation from the mines. Their position should be clarified by the Minister. It is expected and hoped, of course, that they will continue on at least the benefits they were receiving while the mine was kept open but there will be a big social problem if there is any deviation from the payments they were receiving while the mine was working. I hope the Minister will clear up that point when he is replying.

Also in the United Kingdom, areas particularly hard hit by colliery closures are given special help by extra inducements to attract industries and special funds are provided to improve roads. There is nothing in these provisions concerning Castlecomer over and above what is the duty and right of the Government. While being thankful that the inducements offered by way of grants have met with success, it is hoped that further industries will be attracted to this area.

I also referred to the additional benefits to the older miners and the assurance that people on compensatory pay from the mines will not be adversely affected financially. If the Minister gives this assurance it will help in some way to lessen the blow of this closure.

The Minister referred to another colliery in the area that is seeking a substantial number of experienced mine workers and for whom housing accommodation will be made available if required. I assume that this colliery is at Ballingarry. This, of course, is not in the Kilkenny area; it is quite a distance for one to travel daily to and from this area and is not an ideal alternative for miners.

Deputy Crotty referred to the position regarding re-opening of the mine. It should be stated, however, that to re-open this mine which was closed some five or six weeks ago would now cost twice as much. When the Government's decision was made, the pumps of the mine were turned off with indecent haste, with the result that the mine was flooded in a very short time. I consider the Government should have another look at this whole question with a view to providing a completely new mine in this area. No private individual or company can do this; it is something only the Government can do because of the capital cost involved. I feel it would be well worth the effort to set up some group of people under the auspices of the Government to explore the possibility of opening a completely new mine in this area. I think that this should be done. It should be done soon because the coal is there. There is no doubt about the quality of it. The capital cost of having a new mine would be prohibitive to any private individual but because of its national importance I think that it is incumbent on the Government to explore this possibility fully.

There is one other question I should like to get clarified on this matter: it is a reference by the Minister to a technical assessment. He referred to it at Question Time on the 13th February, column 989. I should like to know who carried out this assessment and what was the exact nature of it, because the impression is given here by the Minister in his reply on the 13th February that it was a recent assessment. I have inquired from many of the workers and their representatives about this technical assessment referred to by the Minister and they do not seem to know anything about it. I should like to get that point clarified.

When the Minister was speaking about the special redundancy scheme he mentioned additional benefits for older miners. I should like to draw his attention to the fact that there are about 30 people there who have not the four years necessary to qualify under the Redundancy Act. They have given the best years of their lives to the mine, their formative years, but because they have not the four years done they are not entitled to any of the compensation or redundancy payments given to others. Here again I think the Minister for Labour has power under the Act to make a special scheme for redundancy in special cases. Here is one special case, if ever I saw one, where this should be done.

I could mention a few other points on this Estimate, particularly in relation to Kilkenny Design Workshops, but I am deliberately not doing it because I want to lay particular emphasis on my remarks about Castlecomer and the method by which the final decision was taken to close it. I want again to express my concern that all Parties represented in this House were not given an opportunity of fully discussing this matter. I would again appeal to the Minister to set up some sum of money or otherwise to explore the possibility of opening a new mine at Castlecomer and giving it the type of treatment that the mines and collieries in Great Britain are getting from the Government there. It is, as I said, of national and social importance that this should be done.

Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance (Mr. J. Gibbons)

Like the other speakers who have gone before me, I should like to express my deep regret at the closure of the Castlecomer mine. The House knows well that this is an industry that has been practised in that particular area for a couple of centuries, that there has been a tradition built up over the years there in the coal mining business and that it is now at an end. Like them, I am deeply conscious also of the serious social consequences that occur when the closure of an old-established industry like that occurs. But I must say that, far from sharing their views about the general attitude of the Government to the Castlecomer Collieries and to the Castlecomer area, I, for my part, should like to congratulate the Minister and the Government on the part they have played in what I consider to be the rescue of a big community in the Castlecomer area.

I claim some special knowledge of the political and social problems that arise as a result of the problems in the mine. Very briefly, the crisis that has now culminated with the closure of the mine first showed itself in the summer of 1965 when the company declared itself to be no longer able to carry on and, on the basis of a report that had been made to the board, a decision was taken not to re-open after the summer holidays.

I remember arranging a meeting with trade unionists and with the miners themselves in the hall at Castlecomer at that time when the whole thing was discussed. Afterwards, I led a deputation to the Department of Industry and Commerce to discuss the matter with them. I recall, with great appreciation, the attitude of the coal miners themselves both at that time and since — an attitude of sound commonsense. They were conscious of the fact that no Government can thoughtlessly and endlessly continue, as one particular miner said to me, "to throw good money after bad" in the retention of any enterprise that plainly is not, to use the current word, viable.

The attitude of the workers themselves was, I think, "We want another chance to make a go of this; we think we can progress if the Government will back us; we will try our best but, if it does not come off, the Government will have done their best". At this stage, the ITGWU commissioned a man called Bathurst who, subsequently, produced a report which was more encouraging than the previous report. This report gave some prospects of a break-even operation and I had been told by the Minister of that time that, if there was any prospect of assisting the coal miners, the Government would be delighted to avail of it.

Since that time, the average employment has run on a curtailed basis at between 180 and 200 men. The mine has continued to operate but has operated at a steady loss. One of my colleagues, Deputy Crotty, spoke of the Government having a guilty conscience in this regard and he said that the Government have not done their share. He even said that the mine was closed by the Government. This is the sort of pessimistic nonsense that can do serious harm in the lowering of the morale of the people of that area without any just cause, but I am confident that there is no falling off of morale.

As I said at the outset, everybody regrets this step and nobody regrets it more than the people who have lost their employment but to suggest that the Government have been remiss is plain nonsense to anybody who has visited the Castlecomer area because since the summer of 1965 close on £300,000 has been devoted by the Government to the mines. This amount of money has been devoted to what was clearly a dying enterprise and for Deputy Pattison to refer, as he did, to temporary losses——

Mr. Pattison

Temporary increased losses.

Mr. J. Gibbons

——may be to some extent true but, if he looks at the whole picture, I am sure he will agree with me when I say that it would be unreasonable to expect this Government or any other Government, for that matter, to maintain an establishment that was losing so much money so consistently over such a long period.

Last June or July I received a deputation led by the late John Conroy with regard to this problem. Mr. Conroy was accompanied by other trade unionists, including some from the Castlecomer area. We discussed the matter in general terms. I remember having mentioned that the question was one of the maintenance of the community and the retention of several hundred families, asking Mr. Conroy if he had a million pounds, five million pounds or any given sum, the purpose of which was the maintenance of good employment in the Castlecomer area, would he spend it on a dying coalmine or, rather, would he devote it to the establishment of some new industry — an industry perhaps unrelated to coal mining — because that was the problem as I saw it at that time and as I now see it. Mr. Conroy agreed with me that the latter course would be the more beneficial. He agreed with me that it would be a better bet for the people of Castlecomer and for the taxpayers of the country, who finally must foot the bill, to devote any resources that we could get our hands on, not to the development of the mine itself but to the development of an alternative industry. That, precisely, is what the Government did.

I want to pay tribute to the Minister here beside me and to the Government of which he is a part. Deputy Pattison spoke of the favour done to Castlecomer. He objected to this and protested that it should be called a right. I do not care whether it was called a favour or a right but I know that at Castlecomer at the present time one large factory got a very substantial grant from the Government for its establishment and is almost ready. Two are in a fairly advanced stage of preparation. A fourth is beginning and a fifth is on the way and I hope it will be established before the end of the year. These are really effective countermeasures to the closing of the mine. This is visible action and action which has been brought about by the Government. It is a rather poor thing for a Deputy, regardless of what Party he belongs to, to try to denigrate the efforts made in the general area of Castlecomer. I would like to know of any other town of a similar size in Ireland which can make a similar boast that in a crisis of this kind, through the direct action of the Government, the continued employment of the people should have been rescued in such a spectacular way. Far from the wail of gloom and speaking of the end of Castlecomer as Deputy Crotty has done——

Mr. Crotty

I spoke of the end of the Castlecomer mine.

Mr. J. Gibbons

Let us not quibble about it. If the Deputy said that I will accept it.

Mr. Crotty

There is a fair difference.

Mr. J. Gibbons

The Deputy did make a fairly gloomy speech.

Mr. Crotty

Why would I not when I see the end of something that has been carried on for 200 years?

An Ceann Comhairle

The Parliamentary Secretary.

Mr. J. Gibbons

If the Deputy continues to interrupt I will let a very serious cat out of the bag about him in Castlecomer.

Mr. Donegan

I do not think there are any cats in the bag. Have a little bit of sense.

Mr. Colley

Kilkenny cats.

Mr. J. Gibbons

I want to say publicly that I am very concerned about the people in Castlecomer known as the compensation men. Coal mining is a very dangerous job and many men, particularly older men, when you meet them in the street you will notice that they have fingers missing. There are men who cannot bend their backs and who have been injured severely in many different ways. They were in receipt of compensation paid by the company. I want to urge strongly on the Government that their futures should be looked after. I am confident that the Government will do that because, as I have said already, they have shown a very lively consciousness of the serious situation that arose in Castlecomer and the efforts they have made for the correction of the situation have been very, very satisfactory. There are other men of a similar kind because mining leads to an occupational disease which miners suffer from. It is called pneumoconiosis. It is difficult to diagnose and I am always in trouble with the Department of Social Welfare in regard to the diagnosis of this disease. We have not a body of medical skill in this country with experience of it but I suspect — and I do not want to knock anybody in the Department of Social Welfare or the medical people — that since coal mining is such a very concentrated and local business in this country there are very few medical people with extensive knowledge of pneumoconiosis.

As my colleagues probably know as well as I do we run into difficulty about this. It is difficult for a medical man who has not experience of it and who is not skilled in it to diagnose it. Advanced pneumoconiosis can readily be diagnosed by anybody because sufferers from it are rendered almost incapable of any physical effort. I would remind the Minister and the Government that the community has, in my opinion, an obligation to the Castlecomer men who suffer from this disability. I am confident that their future will be borne in mind by them.

Sometimes one hears about Castlecomer that sufficient has not been done and that sufficient effort was not made to redevelop it. I think Deputy Pattison spoke on this point. It is said that had a drive been made something would have happened and that if a bricklaying plant had been established, perhaps, the mine would be viable. I have met miners — and I have great respect for the opinions of the experienced, older miners because they know the geological setup underground better than the geologists although they do not know it is geology — who said that if the area known as Darby's Drift had been worked the mine would be economic. Others would advocate the driving of a new shaft in the Loon area. The management informed me when the mine was shut that the original report of the Powell-Dufferyn company was borne out absolutely to the letter by the experience of the colliery company in the ensuing four years. This is what the management told me at any rate.

I want to dissociate myself from any wails of impending gloom in the Castlecomer area. Castlecomer is going to survive and prosper. We will have difficulties to overcome but I am perfectly confident we will overcome them. I want to pay tribute to the Minister and the Government for the encouraging development of small industries that has taken place in the constituency in the last couple of years. I ask my colleagues, both of whom are here, to come on a tour starting at Johnstown where there are about 60 to 70 new industrial jobs and to go to Freshford where there are 20 new jobs, to Ballyragget where there are 80 new jobs, to Gowran where there are 24 small industrial jobs. There are about 100 people employed in Goresbridge. There is a new small industry developing in Graiguenamanagh. The Carroll building system firm is in Ballintaggart. There is a new radiator plant in Thomastown. There is a projected new dolomite industry in Dunbell and a new marble industry in Ballyfoyle and Dunleckney. These are all within our own county. My colleagues who are present happen to be Kilkenny men. This is the type of development we want in our constituency. People may talk from time to time about rural depopulation. It is a serious problem for any Dáil. I do not think it is merely the business of a Government or a Government Party to worry about this. It is so serious a matter that we should think about it together, as a Parliament. It is vital that the line be held in the villages — villages such as the ones I have named. I think the line can be held.

The Government's Small Industries Programme has demonstrated in the past couple of years that small industries — some of them quite small employers — can tip the balance in favour of employment and can provide nearsufficient jobs for young men and women in the adjoining rural areas who cannot be absorbed on the farm. The employment content in farming is dropping all the time: this is a hard fact of life. Those who want to make political capital out of it may do so but they are not doing themselves or the country any good in so doing. It is a very serious problem. We are getting a solution to it: we are making more progress in the development of small industries in my constituency in the past three or four years than we have made all the time before it. I say this without any desire to take from the achievement of firms that have developed and prospered without any assistance from anybody but the ones I am talking about now were almost all the creation of the Small Industries Programme.

I want to make a small reference to the Kilkenny Design Workshops and to express my gratification that the Minister is aware of their immense value. A fashion has arisen in recent times of knocking the Kilkenny Design Workshops. It is a smart thing in certain circles now, I understand, to denigrate the Kilkenny Design Workshops and to criticise them in every way possible. Like every new project, they have some teething problems.

One is really looking for trouble when one starts a design workshop— but we shall need them. It is vital to our industrial future that we have a good school of design. However, in this particular field, everybody will offer an opinion. Some people will be sincere. Some people will be pedantic and stupid. Everybody will express an opinion and one will almost certainly get into trouble with somebody. It is one of these projects that one can hardly expect to win but one must get over the unfair criticism that is hurled at one from time to time. It was an imaginative concept in the beginning. The fact that it was sited in the city of Kilkenny was an imaginative and excellent thing to do, as well. Personally, I am confident it will survive. Certainly, it will survive the unfair and destructive criticism that has been hurled at it in recent times because the criticism is of no value and therefore will not do harm. It will also find its feet. The pump is being primed by Scandinavian designers, mostly — foreign designers, at any rate. However, I think, even now, we can say that, with the creation of good design, it is passing into our hands, into the hands of us Irish. I am glad the Minister has made such a favourable reference to it in his opening statement.

Like my colleagues who have spoken, our immediate concern, when we are speaking on an industrial matter, is Castlecomer. As I said before, I want to dissociate myself completely from any suggestion that the Government have been other than extremely favourable to us and extremely successful in their efforts to retain the prosperity of the people of Castlecomer and, of course, the people generally.

Mr. H. Byrne

I have a personal interest in this particular mine that has been the subject of a considerable amount of discussion by Deputies Pattison, Crotty and James Gibbons, the Parliamentary Secretary. This is a coal mine that touches upon my constituency and in which a number of people there have been employed over the years. I think Deputies Pattison, Crotty and James Gibbons have given a very comprehensive outline of the position. I did not hear the Minister's remarks in this regard but I gather they would be something similar to those of Deputy James Gibbons. The fact remains that the Castlecomer coal mine is now closed. I consider that the matter should have been discussed in this House long before now. It was worthy of a free-for-all discussion. Certainly, more alternatives might have been considered before the mine was closed down. After all, the loss of a mineral yield of this value is a national loss. Even if there is a suggestion that the yield was uneconomic, nevertheless it was bad and sad to see the gate closed after hundreds of years of work there.

I wonder if we would have been acting right as a Government and as a Parliament if we had gone a little further and tried in every possible way to keep this pit open for some time longer. This area of Castlecomer has a particular tradition of its own. Everybody in the area is traditionally a miner. The difficulty now arises, with the closing of this mine, that there will be men redundant who are aged between 50 and 60 years and who will not and cannot adapt themselves to any other form of employment — not at the age at which they are now. That is why I wonder if, even at this stage, something could not be done to rescue this mine or whether another mine in that area could be opened in view of the fact that mining is the traditional work of the people of Castlecomer.

It is all very fine to try to lay the blame on the trade unions or on the Government or on anybody else — to pass the buck — as to who is responsible, ultimately, for the closing of the Castlecomer mines. I say, in no tone of bitterness, that I consider that the mine was closed at the behest of our own Government. That has been contradicted. It has been stated by the Government that the company closed the mine whereas, in fact, the company was left with no option but to close it because the Government refused to come to the assistance of the mine and to have some money advanced for it that would, in its own way, prolong the life of the mine perhaps even to the extent that it might eventually become an economic unit. I am not all that much acquainted with the pits as one might think. In the light of the position which exists in Castlecomer, I did not like to hear Deputy James Gibbons wandering all over the county of Kilkenny and recounting the wonders that the Government have worked from one end of that county to the other. I do not think he was relevant in those remarks especially, as I say, in view of the present position of the Castlecomer coal mine and the unemployment resultant upon its closure. I think that was irrelevant so far as Castlecomer mines were concerned.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Parliamentary Secretary was relevant in as much as he was discussing Industry and Commerce.

Mr. H. Byrne

I understood the discussion was based on the Castlecomer mines only. From the time I entered the House nothing else had been discussed.

Mr. Colley

That was coincidental. There are other items.

Mr. H. Byrne

Was Castlecomer the main item?

Mr. Colley

To the Deputies from Kilkenny, it probably was.

Mr. H. Byrne

To the Deputies from Kilkenny, but not to their neighbours.

Mr. Pattison

Small industries are not included. Therefore the Parliamentary Secretary was not in order.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Parliamentary Secretary was in order. The Chair would have pointed it out if his remarks were not relevant.

Mr. H. Byrne

I accept the ruling of the Chair but I have a personal view that he was allowed to wander too far. I wonder, at this stage, what is the decision of the Government. I understand it is to close the mines, but I should like to explore the possibility of a new mine being opened in that area which might prove more economic and show a profit. What has brought about this considerable loss per week in the case of Castlecomer pit that had paid its way for 200 years? Something must have happened; something must have gone wrong. Perhaps the coal had to be conveyed too far. Have the Government sent experts to the area to see if anything could be done to make Castlecomer an economic productive unit? I do not know the actual position. I have not been closely associated with it but I have been in touch with men who have lost their employment, men who have pointed out to me that they are not at an age to adapt themselves to any other kind of work. That is a bad situation. Castlecomer had a traditional way of life which has been disrupted, destroyed and probably lost forever. Even at this eleventh hour I appeal to the Minister and the Government to have another look at the position to see if the mining tradition of Castlecomer can be restored and respected.

Mr. T. O'Donnell

I was particularly interested in that part of the Minister's speech where he referred to the Shannon Free Airport Development Company. I want to take this opportunity to say that I welcome, and everybody in the Limerick region welcomes, the decision to give the Shannon Free Airport Development Company authority to promote industrial development not merely in the Shannon region but also in counties Limerick, Clare and North Tipperary. As one who, for the past seven years since I became a Member of the House, has consistently advocated this step, I welcome the reality now. There is no doubt that the expertise and knowledge of industrial development acquired by the Shannon company will be a tremendous advantage to the areas over which they have been given jurisdiction — Limerick city and county, Clare and North Tipperary. I sincerely hope that the Shannon Development Company will be given adequate financial assistance to enable them to discharge efficiently the extra responsibility which has now been given to them.

Speaking for my own constituency of Limerick city, already in the short time since the Shannon company have become involved in industrial development there we can see the evidence of their work in that two advance factories are about to be built in the Galvone site. We also saw a recent announcement that the company have taken a lease of land from Limerick Harbour Board for the purpose of building advance factories. It is my firm conviction, based on negotiations and discussions I have had with foreign and Irish industrialists, that any region hoping to attract industry in future must provide advance factory buildings. This is being done in the industrial estates in Galway and Waterford and it was pioneered in Shannon. It is vitally important that the building of advance factories should be encouraged. While I agree with the observations made by the Minister that whatever development takes place in different parts of a region it should fit in logically with the overall development, it occurs to me to ask, taking the Limerick-Clare-North Tipperary region and the new function which the Shannon company have of promoting industrial development there, and the fact that the company have already taken steps to acquire land to build advance factories, would it be feasible to devise some scheme whereby private enterprise and local authorities could be encouraged to provide serviced sites for industries and erect advance factories?

As the Minister probably knows, I happen to have been in contact with the company which has purchased an eight-acre site at Limerick to provide a location for two industries which the company propose to establish there and which have been approved by the Industrial Development Authority. Due to the difficulty of getting a suitable site, when an eight-acre site came on the market it was purchased by this company with the intention of building two factories for themselves — this would probably occupy about two acres — and building advance factories on the other six acres. Certain delays have occurred, as is inevitable, but the people concerned in this case intend to go ahead with their plans.

There are no grants available from the IDA to private enterprise to establish an industrial estate or build advance factories. I am quoting this case in the Limerick area where you have, on the one hand, the semi-State body building advance factories and, on the other hand, you have private enterprise intending to do the same thing. There is need to examine this whole situation. I agree with the State providing services and facilities where private enterprise fails to do so but there is, in my opinion, a definite need for closer co-operation and co-ordination where industrial estates are concerned. Could private enterprise, I wonder, be encouraged to do more to provide industrial sites and build factories? I do not want to be misinterpreted: I welcome the fact that the Shannon Development Company has responsibility now for promoting industrial development in my constituency. I should like to put on record here my appreciation of the Minister and of the manner in which he has been prepared to assist in every possible way in furthering proposals for the establishment of industries. What I am anxious for the Minister to do is to avoid any overlapping or any clash of interests. The building of advance factories is vitally essential to the promotion of industry, irrespective of whether it is the IDA, private enterprise or the local authority who provides them. The concept underlies the provision of industrial estates and the machinery available to encourage the establishment of such estates may need overhauling and streamlining.

I am, as I said, delighted that the Shannon Development Company is now responsible for promoting industry in my constituency. There is already evidence of their work and of the way in which that work can help the people of Limerick and contiguous areas. I agree with the Minister that local initiative, local investment and local enterprise are still a vital and integral part of industrial promotion. We must never lose sight of the fact that private enterprise and local initiative have still a vital role to play. There is a tendency to look to the State and to wait for the State to do everything, not only in the sphere of industrial development but in other spheres as well, such as tourism and so on. In fact local initiative and local enterprise can go a lot of the way. Community participation is vitally important. Limerick city has had practically no industrial development in recent years and, therefore, the fact that the Shannon Development Company has now moved in and is building advance factories in Limerick will, I hope, open up a new era of industrial expansion in my constituency.

There is a change in administration which is very welcome indeed. The Minister has told us that certain functions of the Shannon Development Company which were administered by the Department of Transport and Power have now been transferred to the Department of Industry and Commerce. That is a good thing. Without reflecting on the Minister for Transport and Power and his Department, I have often said that there were too many organisations, too many agencies and too many people dealing with industrial development and that industrial development everywhere should be under the control of the Minister for Industry and Commerce. From that point of view I am glad that these functions are now under the control of the Minister for Industry and Commerce.

The Minister said that, because the Buchanan Report is not yet available, it was decided to go ahead with the establishment of a regional authority to cover Limerick/Clare/North Tipperary. This is a key region, as the Minister said. It is the gateway to the south and west. It is a very important growth centre. It will be even more important now because it has been given a much broader base. The Lichfield Report has given us very valuable information and has provided a guideline for overall economic development in this region.

There is a certain amount of confusion in that we now have the Shannon Development Company and this new regional organisation. A regional office has been established in Limerick and a temporary regional officer has been appointed. Confusion could arise in regard to the precise functions of the Shannon Development Company, this regional organisation and the Industrial Development Authority. In other words, to put it quite simply, if an industrialist makes inquiries and is interested in setting up a plant in Limerick, what is the correct procedure and what is the best approach?

Should he go to the IDA? Should he go to the Shannon Development Company? Should he start off with the Regional Development Organisation? I say this because a certain amount of confusion could arise. I presume the intention is that each of the three will have a specific function in relation to the whole question of promoting industry. I should like to see the situation clarified so that an industrialist will not be starting off on the wrong foot by going to the IDA or by going to the Shannon Development Company.

There is another point I want to make and I have reason for saying this. It is vitally essential that the closest co-operation should exist between the Shannon Development Company, the Regional Development Organisation and the parent body, the IDA. There should be proper communication between them. I have come across cases, not merely one case, where proposals were going through the IDA for the establishment of industry in the region which is now under the control of the Shannon Development Company, and the Shannon Development Company knew nothing about them. That should not happen. There should be close coordination and close communication between them and there should be no breakdown in communication. Similarly the regional development officer should know what is happening.

I am not making this point in any critical manner. I am absolutely fully behind the idea of regional development. I am fully in favour of the creation of this new Limerick-Clare-North Tipperary region. I welcome the fact that the Shannon Development Company have been given the precise job of promoting industry within that region. From my experience of the Shannon Development Company I have the greatest confidence in their ability to promote and expand industry, particularly in Limerick city which has such a high unemployment figure.

I have had the experience of having had to consult the Shannon Development Company, the IDA, the Regional Development Officers, the Minister and his Department, and I got the fullest co-operation. This is one of the things which industrialists coming in here have commented upon. It has been the experience of industrialists who made inquiries, whether they decided not to go ahead with the project, whether they went ahead with the project, or are in the process of doing so, that the fullest co-operation and every assistance were made available to them.

The Minister seeks an additional subvention in this Supplementary Estimate for the Shannon Development Company. If I remember correctly, there was a problem last year or the year before, and the money allocated to the Shannon Development Company for industrial promotion was cut considerably and, as a result, the promotional work of the company and their publicity campaign abroad were affected very severely. There is no use in giving this company additional jurisdiction and a considerably wider area of work unless they are given adequate finance. I have recently seen a copy of the advertisement which was inserted in newspapers abroad by the Shannon Development Company for the Limerick-Clare-North Tipperary region and I was very impressed by the content of that advertisement. I hope the new set-up will be successful, and I certainly, and I think everyone in the Limerick area irrespective of Party, will be prepared to assist in every possible way.

Mr. Colley

A number of points have been raised in the debate on which I think I should comment. Deputy Donegan complained about the delay in bringing in the legislation for the re-equipment grants. I freely admit this is not a very satisfactory position from anyone's point of view, including mine. I would point out that once the decision was made to have these re-equipment grants — and this decision was made following very shortly on the legal conclusion of the adaptation grants scheme — it was right I think that industrialists should know that these grants would be available so that they could plan ahead, and once they have got provisional approval for the grants I do think most of them do not have too much trouble in getting hold of the corresponding amount of money.

Incidentally I may say that the level of the grant is not only 25 per cent. That is correct, but it is also 35 per cent in the designated areas, as we call them.

Mr. Donegan

I agree.

Mr. Colley

The position is that the legislation for this is also the legislation dealing with the whole re-organisation of the IDA, An Foras Tionscal and other matters referred to by Deputy O'Donnell: the setting up of the regional organisations, the relationship between one and the other, and particularly the relationship of the Shannon Free Airport Development Company with the IDA, and various matters of that kind. The legislation is being drafted at present. It is very complicated, but it will be brought before the House just as fast as we can get the drafts completed.

Deputy Donegan also said something which he has said before and he wanted to make it clear that he was enunciating an important aspect of Fine Gael policy when he said it. I think I am quoting him correctly. He said that Irish firms should get the same treatment as firms from abroad and in particular any existing Irish firm which had a substantial expansion scheme should get an industrial grant at the same level as if they were starting a new industry. I have news for Deputy Donegan. That is what happens, and has been happening for quite a while.

Mr. Donegan

It has not been happening.

Mr. Colley

Yes it has, even if the Deputy was not aware of it.

Mr. Donegan

I am fully aware of where it happened. I will not go any further.

Mr. Colley

First of all, where there is a substantial expansion of an existing industry — and by this I mean a really substantial expansion — this has been and will continue to be treated as a new industrial grant.

Mr. Donegan

It has not.

Mr. Colley

There is no question but that Irish firms are treated exactly the same as foreign firms. The reasons many people think they are not is that almost invariably when an Irish firm is looking for a grant it is an existing Irish firm. New Irish firms are treated the same as new foreign firms but, where an existing Irish firm comes along with a proposal for expansion and are offered a grant of 25 per cent, people may say: "If they were foreigners coming in and starting off they would be given 40 per cent or even more." The difference is that one is an expansion and the other is a new industry. Anybody starting a new industry or embarking on a major expansion programme, whether Irish or foreign, gets exactly the same grant and anybody doing an expansion, whether Irish or foreign, gets the same.

Mr. Donegan

I am writing a question for next week that will disprove that.

Mr. Colley

If the Deputy is to refer to the one in his constituency I advise him to be careful.

Mr. Donegan

I am not.

Mr. Colley

He can put down the question and we shall see.

Mr. Donegan

Certainly, I will.

Mr. Colley

Incidentally, on the question of the same treatment being available for Irish firms as for foreign firms, I think Deputy Donegan made the point that though we need foreign participation and we will need it for quite a while to come, if we are to achieve our goal of full employment, we would prefer to see, if we had a choice, Irish firms developing because they have their roots here. Of course, Deputy Donegan is probably right in that. That is something which is very important in my mind in dealing with this whole problem.

I wish to point out that the IDA under the new rearrangement are pursuing an active policy of encouraging existing Irish firms, particularly those which have shown success and potential for growth. The IDA are actively following them up and encouraging them to expand. The basic thing behind this is the point I have already made: if we had the choice we would rather see Irish firms expand and we would depend more on Irish firms than on foreign firms. That is one of the reasons involved in the thinking behind the small industries programme also. Having said that, I wish to repeat that we do need and will continue to need firms from abroad if we are to develop our industry. We welcome them and we are intensifying our efforts to encourage them to come in.

In regard to Córas Tráchtála, Deputy Donegan detected a certain note of criticism in what I had to say. I must say in truth that he is right to some extent but lest there might be misunderstanding I wish to remind the House that as I have said frequently —I have said it in the House—in my view there is no other country in the world which has a body giving the same quality of service to its exporters as we have in Córas Tráchtála. In other words, I think they are the best of that kind of body doing that kind of work in the world. I wish to make that quite clear. I think they are doing a great job.

Mr. Donegan

So do I.

Mr. Colley

What I was referring to when introducing the Supplementary Estimate was that they exceeded the money voted to them at certain stages in the past. I indicated earlier where they exceeded it for reasons over which they had no control, and they did so in other areas because the method of budgetary control was not sufficiently satisfactory to bring it to light in time to do something about it. I have told the House that this has been remedied and it should not, I believe, happen again. Nevertheless, it is a matter that it is only right I should bring to the notice of the House because, after all, if the House votes a certain amount to any State body, that State body cannot be allowed to exceed the amount without sufficient cause, which would include reasons over which they had no control. That is the only extent to which there has been any criticism of Córas Tráchtála. Otherwise, I am more than pleased with their operations and activities.

A further point made by Deputy Donegan was that we should ensure by the grants we give that we treat more favourably male-employing industries. In fact, we do it. A different kind of approach is used in different places. I may have mentioned in this House before that there are certain kinds of female-employing industry which will not get any grants whatever, particularly in the Dublin area. They would get fairly low grants in some other areas of the country but in areas of the country where the employment situation is acute they might get a reasonably substantial grant. There is no doubt about it that the amount of male employment involved in a project is a factor which determines the level of the grant offered. Having said that, I also want to point out that the problem is not just to give more for male employment in industry. It is not quite as simple as that. In Deputy Donegan's constituency, as he indicated, there is a shortage of women workers, by and large.

Mr. Donegan

I deliberately made sure I did not say that.

Mr. Colley

He did not put it that way but I think it is true. Anyway I am putting it that way.

Mr. Donegan

It is true.

Mr. Colley

It is certainly true in Dublin and I think it is true in Cork but there are some parts of the country where the position is different. Deputy Dr. Gibbons is here and he knows that in his own constituency there is an area where the employment is all male and there is virtually no female employment and where this creates almost as big a social problem as the reverse. What we have really to try to achieve is a balance between the two. In my view the balance of employment in an area should be, and I believe is, a factor to be taken into account by those determining the level of grants offered by An Foras Tionscal to a project.

Incidentally, Deputy Donegan made a criticism about the nine per cent increase. I do not propose to follow him over that ground except for the record to say that the nine per cent increase agreed to by the Government was agreed to only when this pattern and the length of time for which it was to operate had clearly emerged from negotiations with private industry.

Mr. Donegan

That is quite untrue.

Mr. Colley

For the record I am saying the opposite because it is my belief and knowledge that the position is as I am saying.

Mr. Donegan

For the record, I am saying it is quite untrue.

Mr. Colley

Deputy Seán Dunne made a contribution on which I am tempted to say perhaps more than I should. I will try to resist the temptation, except to say that I think he displayed his usual arrogance in his approach to matters of this kind. He made some very bland statements, quite unfounded, in which he was towering above everyone else, telling us all where we were wrong, the fools we were, the mistakes we were making and when he purported to come down to any bit of concrete reality he just could not substantiate what he was saying. To illustrate the point I am trying to make, I shall mention two things. He said in introducing this Supplementary Estimate I had referred to the expansion which had taken place in industrial exports to places other than Britain and he added that there was no evidence whatever for this. Just for the record I would refer him to my introductory remarks in which he will see the following sentence:

The measure of the progress achieved in building up our trade with Continental Europe, North America and more distant markets is that total exports to these areas reached an estimated £125 million in 1968 as compared with less than a quarter of that amount ten years ago.

The other point I want to mention was, in fact, made for me by Deputy Tom O'Donnell. He probably did not know he was doing this at all, because I do not think he was here when Deputy Seán Dunne spoke and he probably was not aware of what Deputy Dunne said.

Deputy Seán Dunne said correctly he overheard me speaking at a by-election in East Limerick and talking about the proposals to give those additional powers to the Shannon Free Airport Development Company in the region and about what they were going to do. It is correct he did hear me talking about this. He went on to say that, of course, those were more of those promises and nothing was done. I said this was not true and suggested he refer to Deputy Coughlan. Deputy O'Donnell came in here, without as far as I know knowing anything about this, and not alone did he say he welcomed that but he said: "We have already seen the evidence of the work they are doing." This is the point I was endeavouring to make. However, I do not propose to waste any more time on what Deputy Seán Dunne had to say except simply to point out that on the few occasions he came anywhere down to earth he was wrong.

Mr. Donegan

Be gentle.

Mr. Colley

I do not like the arrogance that is sometimes displayed in this House and it is not displayed on this side only, as is alleged in the House sometimes.

Mr. Donegan

As long as the Minister puts in the "only" he is all right.

Mr. Colley

I assume Deputy O'Donnell was not aware of the fact that this point had been made at all.

Mr. T. O'Donnell

The point I was making is that I attributed it to the Shannon Development Company.

Mr. Colley

I appreciate this. Deputy Tom Fitzpatrick of Dublin made a suggestion about the question of the way grants are paid towards plant on hire purchase. I will have to look into this suggestion and see if it is feasible. I am not sure at the moment whether it would be or not.

We had a number of contributions here mainly devoted to the unfortunate problem of the Castlecomer mine. I think, by and large, from what was said we had most of the relevant points brought out and I do not propose to go back over the ground again or back over what I said when introducing this Estimate. I want to say in regard to the point made by Deputy Pattison that no doubt many people concerned may have wanted the Government to continue making payments to keep the mines in existence but this is not the same thing as saying that those people were of opinion that the mine was, or could be, a viable proposition. I do not know whether he appreciates the distinction I am making. This is in relation to the query he raised.

Mr. James Tully

He is a very intelligent young man.

Mr. Colley

I am referring to my own ability to express it, not to Deputy Pattison's ability to understand it. I am referring to a point he raised in regard to what was said in the House at Question Time last week or the week before. With regard to the point he made about the weekly losses I want to assure him that the fact that the level of the losses to which he referred had increased was not a factor in the decision of the Government to cease making further payments. This was mentioned merely as an illustration. When we come in here with an Estimate each year and there is something in it for, say, Castlecomer Collieries, I do not know if it strikes everybody quite as clearly as if you tell them: "Look, this means that every year the taxpayer is paying out so much money". It may well be true—I do not actually know—that there were temporary factors which led to an increase in those weekly losses. The essential point is that there were losses all the time. Since 1965, when the company closed the mine, it has been operating solely because the Government have been putting money into it.

The whole operation was designed to explore whether there was any possibility of making this an economic proposition. All the evidence available to me and assessed by the inter-Departmental Committee I referred to, and indeed by the board of the company, is to the effect that this just could not be made viable. I regret this as much as anybody but I think there comes a time when in a situation like this we have got to face reality. We are not really doing much for the people involved if we lead them to believe there are long-term prospects of employment for them when in fact there are not.

Mr. Pattison

This was part of the present problem, the uncertainty.

Mr. Colley

I am aware of this. Obviously, young men were not going in to get training when there was so much uncertainty. We should not get the idea that this was really the root of the problem. The root of the problem was that there was not available coal which could be economically mined and marketed in sufficient quantities to make the whole operation pay. Even on the basis of putting money into it for another five years, if I could have seen a prospect of that I would have been prepared certainly to urge the Government to keep on those payments for another five years, or more if necessary, if one could see at the end viability, but this was not the position.

Mr. Pattison

Another £19,000 would have proved if this was right.

Mr. Colley

I am afraid not.

Mr. J. Gibbons

It is how you spend your money best. In what you are talking about it is a gamble, but it is not a gamble in a new industry. The final choice is between a new industry and a chancy old one. Is that not right?

Mr. Pattison

It is a gamble at the moment because one is not conclusively sure whether it would or would not be viable.

Mr. J. Gibbons

The Deputy is not reasonably sure, but we are.

Mr. Colley

The question of drivage and briquetting plant was gone into in considerable detail and in neither case was the evidence available to show that it would be a proposition. The board of the company were very definite in regard to both propositions that they just had not a prospect of success. I think one can only assume that they would have prolonged the agony. That is the best you could say for it. We do have as a Government, as a Parliament, some responsibility to the taxpayers. We have a responsibility to the people concerned in Castlecomer. I think we have tried and tried successfully to meet that responsibility but we also have a responsibility to the taxpayer. I feel in this connection the Government have met their responsibilities on both sides just as fairly and as fully as they could do.

To conclude on this, there are one or two points raised by Deputy Tom O'Donnell I want to refer to—I have already referred to one of them. Deputy O'Donnell says there is some confusion, particularly in Limerick at the moment, as between the role of the IDA, SFADCO and the Regional Development Organisation.

Mr. T. O'Donnell

The position could lead to confusion.

Mr. Colley

I know. I do not want to go into the details of the relations between those bodies at the moment because this is more appropriate to the legislation which is being brought in, and this will be spelt out. Lest there should be any confusion at present I want to make it clear that if anybody has an industrial proposition, he ought to approach the Shannon Free Airport Development Company. The liaison between the company and the other groups mentioned by Deputy O'Donnell is pretty good. I am saying this lest there should be any confusion. These are all the points raised in this debate that I can comment on.

Vote put and agreed to.