The time remaining for this debate is one hour and 30 minutes.
Private Members' Business. - Closure of Messrs. J. and L. F. Goodbody, Ltd.: Motion (Resumed).
Debate resumed on the following motion:
That Dáil Éireann is of opinion that the Minister for Industry and Commerce should order an inquiry into the decision of the firm of Messrs J. & L. F. Goodbody, Ltd., Clara, County Offaly, to close jute spinning at their long-established mills at Clara; that such inquiry be conducted by a senior officer of the Department of Industry and Commerce who shall investigate all aspects of the industry having regard to the amount of public money invested in same in recent years; that papers, persons and records be made available for such inquiry; and that the trade unions involved on behalf of the workers be permitted to give evidence thereat.
—(Deputy Enright).
When last I spoke on this political gimmick put down in the name of members of the Fine Gael Party I stated——
Has the Deputy visited Clara since?
Having read the Sunday Independent, I realise it was a political gimmick.
Last Sunday's paper was very interesting.
There was a very interesting article on page five which indicated that this motion was only second thoughts with the Fine Gael Party. It was not a motion which would have got any priority from them at all. As usual, there were other gimmicks but the Sunday Independent revealed the truth of the facts within the Fine Gael Party. The article is headed: “Hunt on for Cosgrave's Spy”. This article referred to the fact that another motion was down and was to be taken but the Fine Gael Leader, who was indisposed at the time, made a hurried telephone call here and asked them for God's sake to put something on the agenda, push Flanagan or someone into the House, get somebody to talk on some motion to keep the job going until such time as he came in to discuss the motion which was already down and which would have got priority.
The article mentioned the motion in relation to Goodbody's and pointed out that Deputy Oliver Flanagan and Deputy Enright from this particular constituency, where the jute factory closure was imminent, came in to discuss the motion. They decided that this would be a good one to select as a good debating subject. Deputy Enright made a recitation about the situation in Clara. Now we have the full story of the "Hunt for Cosgrave's Spy", the man who divulged that this was not the motion to be presented to the House but another motion. This shows that the Fine Gael Party were not very concerned about the closure of the Clara factory. At the last moment they decided to put in their good friend Deputy Oliver Flanagan to keep the matter moving until such time as the Committee of Public Accounts had examined one of the people they tried to get at. It is indicated in the article in the Sunday Independent that they wanted to get at a certain Minister and for that reason they decided to put down the Goodbody motion.
I am very concerned, as I stated before, about the problems which affect the workers of this country. If I felt that this was not a political gimmick, that an inquiry was essential and that it would disclose something which was not already known, then I would be the first in the interests of the workers to say we should have an inquiry. However, I recognise this as a political gimmick. Gimmicks of this type are no substitute for jobs. The only substitute is a new industry. That is what Deputy Cowen and Deputy Connolly have been pressing for quite a considerable time. They have been pressing for new industries to replace industries which are being run down for one reason or another. The Minister for Industry and Commerce has been assisting in no small way in the replacement of industries and in the establishment of new industries throughout the country.
The workers of this country are well aware of the Minister's interest in their problems and of his desire to ensure that there will be many more jobs to absorb those who leave the technical and vocational schools and the universities. This cannot be brought about by motions of this kind. It can only be brought about by a realistic approach to the problem, by a comprehensive examination of the industrial development which is required, which will give long and lasting employment.
We are well aware of the fact that the jute industry is on the way out and has been for quite a considerable time. It has been run down in many other countries. Deputy Connolly produced some very convincing figures last week in relation to this industry. He gave quite a comprehensive list of the many thousands of redundant workers in Britain and he listed quite a number of industries there which in a short space of time have substantial redundancies. He mentioned that in March, 1969 Alex Henderson & Sons closed down completely, that in July, 1969, Jute Industries Limited had quite a considerable number of redundant workers and in September of that year they had twice as many redundant. In November, 1969, Spalding & Valentine Limited and Tay Textiles Limited had a considerable number of redundant workers. In December, 1969, Cairds of Dundee had 200 redundant workers. Those redundancies occurred in this industry and give a clear indication that this is not something which happened only in Ireland.
This is something which has happened all over the world because of the introduction of plastics and other substitutes which are replacing jute. Deputy Connolly went on to explain that in February, 1970, there were further redundancies in Tay Textiles and Jute Industries Ltd. Kennedy & Company in April of that year had 40 redundant workers and Cairds of Dundee ceased jute production altogether in June, 1970. In July, 1970 Don & Duncan Limited had redundant workers and in September and October Tay Textiles had additional redundant workers. Deputy Connolly quoted from the Jute and Synthetic Review— a London publication—of November, 1970.
None of those lost as many workers as Goodbody's.
This indicates the general trend in relation to the jute industry. Not alone does this affect England, Wales and Scotland but it also affects us, because with the intense competition throughout the industry everybody is out to buy as cheaply as possible. The alternatives to the home produced article of cheaper synthetic fabrics are making their impact on this particular industry. It is not only a question of an industry closing down in Ireland. It is a broad view of what is happening elsewhere in this industry. It must be assumed that the same trends in relation to the buying of materials will continue here.
I should like to see the inside of the houses of some of the Deputies who spoke on this motion to ascertain if they bought the home produced article or the foreign produced article when purchasing their carpets. I am quite sure that such an examination would reveal that they also seek some alternative if they consider it is cheaper and of comparable quality. However, this is a situation we have to face. It must be faced in a realistic way. From the workers' point of view that is very important. Crocodile tears are no use to the unemployed. What is required is another job. It is the intention of the Government, of the Minister for Industry and Commerce, of Deputy Connolly and Deputy Cowen, who represent the constituency, to ensure that workers displaced will find new and better employment.
Fianna Fáil are always concerned when workers are laid off. I can understand Deputy O.J. Flanagan and Deputy Enright making a case, very properly, because there are redundancies in the area. I would do the same if workers became redundant in my constituency. However, this motion will not provide a single job for any redundant worker. Our task is to find out what must be done to provide employment for those who become redundant. On 18th February, in reply to a question, the Minister indicated that a new factory was being established in Clara which would employ a substantial number of male workers when in full production. He said that, in addition, the IDA were negotiating for the establishment of a factory of 20,000 sq. ft. in the area. This is actually under way. This shows the anxiety to provide new jobs.
The Minister also said that the Department of Labour Manpower Training Service and AnCO visited Clara and advised the workers of vacant jobs in other parts of the country and of the retraining facilities available. A small number of workers have already been placed in other jobs or have been offered retraining. This is very important. When an industry closes down facilities should be available to enable workers to obtain greater skills. That did not happen in the past. Today workers have the benefit of redundancy compensation and retraining facilities. Every worker who requires retraining will be retrained and will have, as a result of that training, a greater potential for the future.
I do not know if there was enough consultation between the workers and management in this particular industry. I approve wholeheartedly of worker/ management co-operation. Sometimes workers are aware well in advance that redundancies will occur. Short notice is something that should be eliminated because it is very unfair to the workers. Workers, after all, have certain financial commitments which they must meet and a month's notice or two months notice is just not good enough. Indeed, some are laid off with a week's notice.
An inquiry would not reveal very much. If an industry is facing closure there should be consultation with the workers 12 months in advance of closure. That would give a better situation from the point of view of resettlement and retraining. This does not happen at the moment. Deputy Enright says the workers got short notice. I sympathise with him in this and I appeal to industrialists generally to ensure consultation with workers well in advance of closure to enable the workers to establish themselves in some other employment. I am sure the Minister and Deputy Connolly and Deputy Cowen have advised the workers of their rights. I know they have been in touch with AnCO about the retraining of the workers. Sometimes workers who are laid off are fortunate in that they are enabled to acquire more advanced skills and can then enter the labour market on more advantageous terms to themselves. That is a progressive step.
Where industrialisation is concerned, the policy should be to establish a certain number of industries in a particular area and not just one big industry. If a big industry closes down number of workers are affected. They are removed from other industrial opportunities. Their skills are limited. All these things create problems. AnCO have indicated that they are prepared to go to Clara to provide ad hoc training there. A rather gloomy picture was painted of Clara. It was described as a dead town. That sort of approach can only injure Clara because industrialists will hesitate to go there. I believe that the workers in Clara are just as efficient, intelligent and adaptable as workers elsewhere. I work in close proximity to Deputy Cowen and Deputy Connolly and I know that the workers of Clara have been well served by these Deputies and have got all the attention they deserve. I have no doubt that the Minister for Industry and Commerce who is a very effective and efficient Minister will do all he can to see that the general pattern in relation to redundancies and industry as a whole will be comprehensively examined so as to ensure that we shall not have a repetition——
On a point of order, I understood there was a time limit on speeches during Private Members' time.
Deputy Dowling, with other Deputies, is entitled to 30 minutes.
He has already spoken for 35 minutes.
He spoke for 15 minutes the last night and he has spoken for 20 minutes tonight.
No. Deputy Dowling spoke for five minutes on the previous evening and is now entitled——
It seemed an awfully long time.
He fitted in a lot.
——to 25 minutes.
If Deputy O'Donovan feels that he or somebody else has a more useful contribution to make in defence of workers or of the motion, I am quite happy to give way at this stage. I have made my points and I am sure the Deputies and the Minister will be able to deal adequately with any situation that arises in relation to Clara.
One would imagine in listening to the previous speaker that this motion was for the purpose of engaging battle between rival Deputies in the constituency. I should like to knock that idea on the head right away. In that constituency it has been for very many years the practice for all parties representing the constituency to put their heads together whenever disaster strikes or a vital or important issue arises. They forget their political affiliations and work as a team in an effort to improve conditions in whatever sphere of activity the need arises. So it is with this issue. There is no question of one Deputy endeavouring to score over another or, I am sure, of the Minister endeavouring to score over Deputies. There is a problem here: we want to talk about it, have an exchange of views on it and we want to come together in an effort to solve it by pooling our resources.
The tone of the debate has been very high because of so many issues being introduced which, in my opinion, do not come within the ambit of the motion but I am sure the learned Chair is the best judge of that. This motion was tabled some weeks ago and on the Wednesday following the tabling of it, after Questions the Taoiseach was asked by me and by Deputy Enright to give Government time for its discussion in view of the urgency and importance of the motion to 300 workers and approximately 1,500 persons who are, or may be concerned. The Taoiseach suggested that it was not a matter for him but for the Fine Gael Party to give priority to the motion. I discussed the matter with the leader of the party, Deputy Cosgrave, in relation to other Private Members' motions on the Order Paper and this motion was one that was considered urgent since it dealt with the livelihood of so many persons and, in the event of the Minister agreeing to hold the inquiry sought, it would be an advantage to the management, Messrs. Goodbody, to the trade unions concerned and to the workers who could solicit information they could not otherwise obtain.
I assure the House that I should like to deal with this motion in a very practical and commonsense way. Too often we have Deputies over-anxious to take advantage of people's misfortunes; too often, perhaps, we have political parties too anxious to take advantage of people's misfortunes but when it comes to work or to the standard of living or the livelihood of people it is too important to be placed second to other issues. When Deputy Cosgrave recommended that this motion be taken, he based his opinion on the fact that this motion dealt with the livelihood of all the people in a town in the Laois-Offaly constituency. I express my thanks and appreciation to Deputy Cosgrave and to all my colleagues in the party for agreeing to give this motion priority here.
The motion has been read over time and again and I do not propose to take up the time of the House by reading it but it has been said that it would be unusual for the Minister for Industry and Commerce to conduct an inquiry into the affairs of a privately-owned company. I agree with that but this motion does not ask for an inquiry into the affairs of Messrs. Goodbody: it asks that the Minister should order an inquiry into the decision of the firm, a completely different matter, to close jute spinning in their long-established mills at Clara. The Chair will agree that there is a difference between an inquiry into the affairs of a private industrial concern and an inquiry into one aspect of the firm, their decision to close jute spinning at Clara.
Further on in the motion we give a reason "because of the amount of public money invested in same in recent years". Again, we can underline in the motion: "so that workers involved through their trade union may be in a position to give evidence at such inquiry and to solicit information which cannot be obtained otherwise". I say in all sincerity, as the longest-sitting TD for Laois-Offaly that I have been associated with Messrs. Goodbody for almost 30 years and I have always looked upon that firm as one of the most reputable and progressive firms in the world. It is a very old and long-established family industry. The reason why so many people in Mountmellick are concerned about the future of Messrs. Goodbody is that Mr. John Goodbody came to Ireland and lived in Mountmellick in the 17th century. There have always been close and affectionate ties between the two towns. Mr. John Goodbody died in 1705. Mr. Mark Goodbody, another member of the firm, was born in 1749 and he owned a shop and a tannery in Mountmellick. In 1865, Mr. Mark Goodbody settled in Clara and established the jute spinning mills there. In 1963 the firm became a public company. This must be one of the longest and best known family businesses in Europe.
Instead of being critical of Messrs. Goodbody I want to salute the firm, its directors and all members of the family for the employment they gave in Clara and for their effort to make Clara the centre of their industrial activities. From 1936 to 1970 the company had their ups and downs but in November, 1970 there was no indication that the mills in Clara were about to be closed. At that time there were negotiations between the trade unions and the management in connection with the redundancy of 18 female workers. At no time during the course of these negotiations was there any question of closing down the jute manufacturing activities in the area.
Because of the unsteadiness of the world jute market a group of consultants were engaged to investigate and make recommendations on the Clara factory. These consultants went to Clara and prepared a report. I presume that in the course of their investigations they also visited the Waterford factory and any other works or businesses connected with the firm of Messrs. Goodbody. The consultants submitted their report to the board of directors in October and the Minister for Industry and Commerce was supplied with a copy of that report for his own information. The management and the Minister for Industry and Commerce are the only people who know the contents of the report. The report was submitted in October and during negotiations between unions and management about the redundancy of 18 female workers in November there was no question of closing down the factory. How does it come about that on the 7th December it was announced that 250 workers at least were to become redundant in Clara because of the company's decision to close the jute spinning mills there? There was a shock announcement about the closure of the mills.
A good deal of suspicion surrounds the contents of the consultants' report. I accept that the consultants' report was for the guidance and information of the firm alone but this firm has been given £150,000 of the taxpayers' money for expansion. The people of Clara and the surrounding districts are part and parcel of that industry. The trade unions sought to obtain the relevant section of the report which deals with either a reduction or expansion of employment but they were told they could not have it and this is one reason why an inquiry should be held. I venture to suggest that if Messrs. Goodbody have no reason to hide the contents of the consultants' report they will readily agree to such an inquiry.
Why should they agree to such an inquiry? They should agree to it because of the tradition of loyal service to that firm by workers both male and female in Clara. The Goodbody family are an extremely popular, highly respected family who are regarded most affectionately by all sections of the community in the area. Knowing the directors as I do I suggest that if the Minister asked them they would not have any objection to disclosing to the public the contents of the consultants' report.
My information is that the consultants' report recommended that Clara was to be the centre of the jute spinning industry in the 26 counties and that if the firm were to spend further money on development it should be spent on development in Clara. It is very strange that even though the consultants' report recommended expansion should take place in Clara a decision was taken to cease spinning there. I want to challenge—challenges are frequently taken up outside this House, although they are not frequently taken up inside it — Messrs. Goodbody to publish the relevant section of the consultants' report. If they do this it will be indicated clearly that the report recommended that Clara be the future centre for the manufacture of jute in the 26 counties.
The most serious aspect of this whole affair is that Messrs. Goodbody also have a factory in Waterford and as a result of the decision to cease manufacturing in Clara some of the machinery is to be transferred from Clara to Waterford and there is to be overtime for 100 additional men in Waterford at the expense of 250 fewer workers in the town of Clara. Surely there is nothing unreasonable in asking for a public inquiry into a firm which has got, we are told, £150,000 of taxpayers' money for developing Clara, when machinery that has been giving employment in an undeveloped area, as it has been described and designated by the Minister for Industry and Commerce, is being taken out and put into the city of Waterford to give 100 additional jobs in a city in which the construction of an industrial estate is already under way, a city which cannot be compared in prosperity to a country town like Clara?
Is it the policy of the Minister for Industry and Commerce then to permit the transfer of industries from undeveloped areas in the midlands to industrial zones like Shannon, Galway or elsewhere? This is a very serious matter for those who are depending on industrial work in rural Ireland. This in itself justifies the holding of an inquiry into this decision. The Minister, if he agrees to conduct such an inquiry, can have the terms of reference designed to safeguard other aspects of the transactions of this company and to confine it to the reasons why the decision was suddenly and unexpectedly made by Messrs. Goodbody to suspend jute spinning in Clara.
That is the case we make for this inquiry. If this inquiry does not take place, for generations to come there will be unnecessary talk, suspicion and discontent. There will be rumours and dissatisfaction. There will be allegations made against the firm of Messrs. Goodbody and against the workers and against the Government. A public inquiry would clear up the whole situation and let the public know why this decision was taken and let the workers know why there are to be 300 less jobs in Clara and 100 more jobs in Waterford. I wish Waterford the best of luck but I do not like to see any city getting additional employment at the expense of the people of my constituency. I am sure Deputy Cowen, Deputy Connolly and the Minister for Industry and Commerce are as anxious to preserve the rights of workers in that constituency as I am. If we allow a situation such as this to prevail and do not have an inquiry we can all hang our heads in shame.
Deputy Dowling said that Deputy Connolly, Deputy Cowen and the Minister for Industry and Commerce had the right solution for the whole problem. The right solution is to keep Messrs. Goodbody going as it is now and there is no other. If it is to be the centre of jute manufacturing for this country let it be but no industry that will ever be got for Clara will replace it. What type of industry can be put in the town of Clara that will give the same employment? The last Deputy who spoke said it is only a matter of putting up a factory and putting the displaced workers into it. Did anybody ever hear such lunacy? Jute spinning is a highly-skilled job and we have no guarantee that workers of 40, 50, 60, 62 or 63 years of age can walk in, without retraining, to work in a new industry. It just cannot be done. We are told the Fianna Fáil Party will set up new industries in the area. More power to them. That is what we want and that is what we want to help them to do.
Clara is now an undeveloped area. It is a depressed area. If something is not done soon the grass will grow on the centre of the streets and will be kept down only by the wheels of the hearses going through on the way to the burial ground with the corpses. That may be a gloomy picture but that is what will happen unless something is done. I am hopeful that because the Minister for Industry and Commerce represents the constituency something will be done. I should like to ask the Minister if he has seen a report published in the Westmeath Offaly Independent of 11th December, 1970? I quote:
Twelve Possible Industries for Offaly
Twelve industrialists are ready, willing and anxious to set up factories in County Offaly if they can get suitable and serviced sites. Mr. G. Connolly, TD, gave this information to the Westmeath Offaly Independent on Wednesday last.
May I congratulate most wholeheartedly the giver of the good news to Deputy Connolly of these 12 new factories. We all rejoice that these 12 factories are coming to Offaly but there seems to be no indication as to who these industrialists are, what they will produce, where the factories will be put up. It is a very poor commentary on County Offaly, which I represent, if there are 12 factories waiting to be established and there are no suitable sites; that if this press report is correct, there are 12 industrialists mad, red hot, geared up and willing to set up 12 important factories in County Offaly but that there is nowhere to put them, no serviced sites. I want to assure the Minister for Industry and Commerce that there are any amount of suitable industrial sites in County Offaly and that they are available in the area immediately convenient to the town of Clara. All I would ask is that the Minister for Industry and Commerce should, tomorrow morning, if he is not going to hold this inquiry, summon these 12 industrialists who have been in touch with Deputy Connolly and ask them where they want the serviced sites. Since there will be approximately 300 workers affected by the closure of Messrs. Goodbody and assuming that we will have 12 factories, are we greedy in asking that six of these factories should be put in Clara to replace Messrs. Goodbody? If six of these factories were established there, employing 100 people each, 600 people would be in useful employment and as there is such a variety of factories perhaps we could have one for younger people, suitable for training, and one for the older people, say, over the age of 55, who will become redundant in the jute mills. Where there is a selection of 12 factories it will not be a very big job for the Minister and the IDA. The industrialists will, I am sure, be only too happy to avail of all the Government facilities that are available so that Clara may be suitably compensated for the loss of this industry.
Therefore, a Cheann Comhairle, I recommend this motion to the House. I ask the House to support it wholeheartedly because this motion calls merely for a public inquiry into an important company decision which affects the livelihood of 1,500 people or approximately 300 families in a country town which has for generations depended on the progress and the standard of production of this firm. I appeal to the Minister to accept the motion and to allow the inquiry to be held in order that the trade unions, the management and all concerned will be given an opportunity of expressing their views. I feel that it would be welcomed by Messrs. Goodbody. The full report of the consultants should be published in the press and given to the Dáil and to the country. I understand that the report favours Clara as the centre of the jute-spinning industry.
Let me say, first, in relation to this motion that an inquiry into the affairs of any company can be ordered by me, as Minister for Industry and Commerce, only in certain limited circumstances which do not apply in this case. The circumstances indicated are that I can order an inquiry on a direction by the High Court, on a request by the company itself, on a request by a certain number or proportion of the shareholders, and on its appearing to the Minister that there are circumstances to suggest fraud, oppression of shareholders or with-holding of information from shareholders. As I see it, none of the above circumstances arises in the case of Messrs. Goodbody. The amount of State money invested in the company —a point highlighted in the motion— does not constitute a reason for holding an inquiry in accordance with this Act.
Deputy O.J. Flanagan indicated that in this particular instance if one were to read the motion carefully one could assume that all the motion demanded was an inquiry into the decision of the firm of Messrs. J. & L. F. Goodbody to close the jute-spinning section of their mills. The Deputy also goes on—though he left this out in his elaboration of the request — to demand that a Senior Inspector of the Department of Industry and Commerce should investigate all aspects of the industry. I cannot see how one could investigate a decision to close and at the same time investigate all aspects of the industry without having the inquiry set up as I indicated, and that would be under sections 165 and 166 of the Companies Act, 1963. Even if I had wider powers, I would be extremely slow to use them and I would want far stronger reasons than have been adduced in this case. I would remind the Deputies that Messrs. Goodbody are not closing down their business in Clara, though if I were one of the members of the board of Messrs. Goodbody or one of the Goodbody family and had heard what Deputy Cooney said about them in this House last week, I might be strongly tempted to do so. The firm is one which has given employment in this area for a very long time. I do not often find myself in agreement with Deputy O.J. Flanagan, but I must indicate that in my opinion it is wrong to attack a firm such as this. The attack on Messrs. Goodbody is totally uncalled for. This firm will be employing approximately 330 people at Clara. They were maligned in this House last week. Deputy Enright demanded an investigation into the amount of money allocated to this firm for the development of the polypropylene works. This must surely make any company or any proposers of an industry think twice before they come into the constituency which Deputy O'Donovan has described as a neglected constituency.
I said it was a depressed area.
Deputy Connolly said last week that the problem of getting industrialists into our country has been caused by the gloom which has been cast by remarks in this way. Here we have a situation where £150,000 was mentioned. Let me say categorically that this figure underestimates the amount of State investment which has been put into Messrs. Goodbody of Clara. A State grant of £197,000 has gone to Messrs. Goodbody as a grant towards the polypropylene manufacture in Clara. The Government and the IDA have been criticised for not giving grants for the encouragement of industries in Offaly. It is disgraceful to criticise the industries in Offaly in such a manner. I can see no justification for it.
Deputy Dr. O'Donovan subscribes to the idea of an inquiry. The fact remains that the jute operations at Clara are certainly being reduced. A substantial part of Messrs. Goodbody's operations, accounting for 50 per cent of the employment which has been given up to now, is being preserved. The non-jute operations are being expanded. Even if I had the power and adequate reasons for ordering an inquiry, it would make no useful contribution to the future of the Clara industry. It would have a contrary effect. Deputy O.J. Flanagan quoted from a newspaper report of December last, and I would like to quote from Irish Times of 8th February. The speaker was formerly a Deputy in this House. He was speaking at a meeting in Portlaoise and one can assume that he was referring to the constituency of Laois/Offaly. The speaker was Mr. Michael Mullen, General Secretary of the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union, and he mentioned that arrangements for an inquiry under the Companies Act were unsatisfactory and said:
a formal inquiry with a great deal of publicity, would excite considerable publicity and that, in itself, would cause further damage to the company and therefore to the livelihood of the workers.
That is from the General Secretary of the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union. It was a reasonable comment under the circumstances. I would draw Deputy O.J. Flanagan's attention to the fact that he said that the company, as he saw it, would agree to an inquiry. I have just indicated that an inquiry can be ordered by the Minister at the request of the company. Naturally I do not think that the company would seek such an inquiry because they are and will be in the future very much involved in Clara provided all the nasty things which have been said about them do not have an effect on their plans for the future expansion of their works in Clara.
Deputy Flanagan went out of his way to indicate that nobody knew the contents of this report which was prepared by the consultants and submitted to Messrs. Goodbody and of which I, as Minister for Industry and Commerce, received a copy. Having stated that categorically he went on to convey the impression that he had seen a copy of that report, not in so many words, but he did indicate that the contents of the report suggested that the whole works should be moved to Clara rather than to Waterford. Yet he categorically stated that nobody got a copy of the report, that the trade unions concerned could not get a copy of the report, but he still went out of his way to quote from it. I presume the Deputy will concede that he did not have the opportunity of reading the copy of the report that the Minister obtained. The difficulty of being asked to comment on that report in any shape or form——
Surely the Minister is not suggesting that he would show me a copy of a confidential report that he had?
That is what I am trying to get across and that is why I am saying that——
I think the Minister would be the last man in the world to let me see a confidential report.
I hope that is the message I got across.
(Interruptions.)
My difficulty in this regard is to comment on the type of question which the Deputy is trying to put to me which is, in effect "When did you stop beating your wife?" There is no perfect answer to the type of question the Deputy is putting to me so I do not propose to try to answer it.
Would you tell us confidentially?
Well, I mean——
So that we will have an answer.
Order. Time is running out.
Yes, the Deputy is using up my time. The Deputy, as he said, is the senior Deputy for the constituency and the people of his constituency and of the country have a pretty fair knowledge of how they can depend on the confidentiality of any communication or correspondence they would have with Deputy Flanagan and there is no need for me to make any comment on that.
Well, I cannot disclose where I got my copy. It would not be fair for me to do that.
The Deputy in his remarks about the taking away of machinery and work from Clara and transferring it to Waterford, irrespective of what would have been in a report, made the greatest possible justification for the transfer because he conveyed the idea that with the transfer of machinery from Clara to Waterford employment would be created in Waterford for 100 extra people to the disemployment of 250 in Clara.
Has the machinery been transferred to Waterford?
This is what the Deputy has said.
I understood that it had been.
Let me say that I accept that with the phasing out of the greater portion of the jute industry in Clara it is understandable that machinery is in transit to Waterford. I fully accept this. There is no point in saying otherwise. But if 100 people can replace 250 people it seems economically a very justifiable type of operation, although I am not accepting that this is so. Deputy Flanagan went on in this sad, discouraging and depressing way to paint a picture of grass growing in the streets of Clara and indicating that no industry could ever be attracted to Clara which would adequately replace the industry which Clara is losing at present. I look forward with confidence to proving that Deputy Flanagan is wrong, and not for the first time.
In dealing with what Deputy Flanagan said I find that I am overlooking quite an amount of what Deputy Enright said. I have referred to an element of Deputy Cooney's remarks and I hope I have covered it adequately. He did mention that a company who get money from public funds, especially a public company with a Stock Exchange quotation should not be free to dismiss workers on their own decision and should be subject to a public inquiry. Let me say positively, as Minister for Industry and Commerce, taking that statement on the broad basis one would have to accept that that type of arrangement would cover most industries in the country, industries which have been developed and improved with the assistance of adaptation and re-equipment grants and all industries which have been attracted by IDA grants. To have all these subject to the restrictions proposed by Deputy Cooney would, as I see it, be an impossible proposition. In addition it would be extremely unlikely that firms would accept State aid and open new industries under such conditions and I am afraid that with the type of competition we have from other countries who are trying to attract industries and industrial development such a restriction would lead to a complete elimination of the attractiveness of this country from the point of view of bringing in any foreign industrialist to invest capital here. The overall result would be that less new employment would be created and there would be further unemployment.
Deputy Enright mentioned that the inquiry into the jute industry would be beneficial to the worsted industries in the midland area. Even if I were anxious to hold an inquiry, which I am not, I could not see any connection at all between the jute industry and the worsted industry as such. Deputy O'Donovan and Deputy Enright said that my predecessor was not in any way interested in this jute industry. Deputy Enright said that and Deputy O'Donovan said that this was a difficulty which suddenly blew up and caught the Department of Industry and Commerce napping. Let me say that the Minister for Industry and Commerce and the Government were completely aware of the situation, at all stages, with regard to the jute industry.
In recent years action to safeguard employment in Goodbodys at Clara had been taken at all stages along the line. In the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Agreement special arrangements were negotiated for the protection of jute products. Special licences were allocated to Goodbodys in order to allow them to import duty-free certain raw materials in an effort to make them as competitive as possible. Grants were made available on the jute side by the IDA towards the cost of adaptation and diversification projects carried out by Goodbodys. I have indicated already the amount of grants given towards the polypropylene project in Clara. Financial help under technical assistance schemes was provided and assistance was also given in the marketing field. Provision was made for the protection of jute in relation to our application for membership of the EEC. All these measures indicate that not alone was my predecessor but also the Government were totally aware of the situation——
Why then was something better not done? Some 700 men were employed four years ago and this number is reduced to 250 now.
The difficulty in this regard is the fact that jute, as such, is in less demand and is becoming a more depressed industry. I am speaking in terms of trying to make special arrangements under the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Agreement and we were endeavouring to make special arrangements in connection with the EEC. We had diversification — the polypropylene project — and if we had not succeeded in doing that it would not have been possible for the extra people to be kept on and the additional people who will be re-employed in Goodbodys could not have been helped. Deputy O'Donovan said that he was in the Clara area and I daresay that he had the advantage of seeing the television programme——
I did not see that programme. I have ceased to be an addict; it is only recently I can get Telefís Éireann.
Deputy Cooney used the television programme as the basis for some of the points he made during the debate last week. I am at a disadvantage in not having seen the programme, but from the reports I received I gather there was much criticism of the programme in that it was far from factual. One of the complaints that came to me indirectly from a colleague of Deputy Enright on the Offaly County Council — in fact, he was a Fine Gael candidate in the last general election — was that it was an atrocious programme and did not reflect the position. People were depicted as being former employees of Goodbody's —they gave comments on the programme — when in fact they were not employees in Goodbodys.
I hope the Minister is not building up for another public inquiry.
I am making a statement of fact. I suggest to Deputy Enright that he would check with Councillor Frank Feary——
I do not know if the Minister realises that he has made a very serious allegation against a member of the Offaly County Council.
If the Deputy will allow me to finish. I am saying that Councillor Feary told a colleague of mine— and gave him permission to tell me——
He did not tell the Minister himself?
No, I said that. I am inviting Deputy Enright — I depend on him a little more — to check with Councillor Feary, who offered to go on the programme provided he was allowed to say what he wished himself. However, he was not called on——
(Interruptions.)
Is the Minister acception the motion?
No, I am opposing it.
So far as the team of the 7 Days programme are concerned, they made every effort to speak to a cross-section of the people in the town of Clara and those involved. They did their best to steer clear of any political motivations or political persons from any side. The programme was without political bias and the team reported the facts as they saw them. I consider that the team who carried out this inquiry provided a service to the people in Clara and the surrounding districts in that they highlighted the situation. They brought the matter to the attention of the Department of Industry and Commerce, of the IDA and of other Government Departments and semi-State bodies. By directing public notice to this matter they focused attention on the situation existing in Clara. The people who will get employment in the factory have, in no small measure, reason to thank the 7 Days team. In this matter, as in many other instances, they have highlighted a situation which otherwise would be allowed to pass by unnoticed. In this instance they brought the attention of fairminded people to the situation in Clara——
They interviewed people who were not working in Goodbodys.
What has that got to do with it? Deputy Dowling was not in Clara and he spoke about it.
Deputy Enright should be allowed to continue.
The Minister for Industry and Commerce spoke about the attack on the firm of Goodbodys by Deputy Cooney. I should like to quote from the Official Report, Vol. 251, column 1576. In speaking in the debate Deputy Connolly said:
If the Labour Party are so interested in Goodbodys of Clara why did they have people working there for £11 a week and did nothing about it for the last ten years?
Further in his speech Deputy Connolly, who apparently was speaking about gloom, said——
The Deputy is the man in the Offaly County Council who has preached nothing but gloom.
Deputy Connolly states:
They will not work for nothing either like some of the employees at J. & L. F. Goodbody who went in at very small wages and had to work by the sweat of their brow and some of them brought home only £2 and £3 per week.
That was a statement by Deputy Connolly which I consider was a complete and unwarranted attack on the firm. The Deputy cannot have it both ways; he can check in the Official Report what I have said.
They were juveniles. They have left the factory now and got good employment.
The Deputy had his opportunity of speaking but he did not.
I did speak.
Furthermore, Deputy Connolly——
If the Deputy would address the Chair there would be no personalities.
There was talk of gloom in Clara. I would like to quote some figures. Last Thursday I asked the Minister how many people from Goodbodys in Clara and become redundant. I was told that 88 workers had become redundant at Clara and that, in addition, 24 younger workers had left to seek employment. Last November I asked the Taoiseach the number of people drawing unemployment benefit at local employment offices and I was given the following figures at column 1806, Volume 249, of the Official Report of 19th November, 1970:
|
Week ending 30th October, 1970 |
|
|
Birr |
190 |
|
Edenderry |
141 |
|
Tullamore |
201 |
|
Portarlington |
184 |
|
Port Laoise |
150 |
|
Rathdowney |
45 |
These are figures which justify us in asking questions here. While I am a Member of this House I will speak on behalf of people who are unable to get work. I have a responsibility to do it and I will do it. No matter what shouting you do across the House, I will say what I have to say.
The Chair is not shouting at anybody. The Deputy should address the Chair.
Let me come back to Goodbodys now that I have had an opportunity of saying that. I would like to quote figures from the Irish Independent of Saturday, 20th February, in regard to this firm. Their trading profit for 1969-70 was £119,538.
That profit was made in Waterford.
This firm which has declared so many workers redundant has made that trading profit. There is something else which is rather peculiar. The depreciation for this firm, £139,926, seems rather high. That seems an extraordinary amount for depreciation. I have no axe to grind with Goodbodys. I never met any of them in my life. However, I know many of the workers in Clara. Some of them support other parties, but that makes no difference to me. I am interested in the welfare of everyone in the area regardless of their political viewpoint. I would like to have an investigation into this firm. Any firm that shows a trading profit of £119,000 and at the same time allows 88 people to be declared redundant requires investigation.
The Deputy must consider the Waterford factory.
I have no axe to grind with Deputy Kenneally. I am pleased that they are 100 more jobs in Waterford and that they are doing so well. I represent an area——
(Interruptions.)
Deputy Enright.
I am only quoting the figures given at the annual general meeting of Goodbodys. Last week I asked the Minister to indicate what amount of money this firm had got by way of grants and he said that £197,000 had been paid to this firm. I specificially asked him for a breakdown of these figures to show what amount went to Clara or to Waterford, but he gave us nothing but the bald figure of £197,000.
For the propylene.
Yes, fair enough, the Minister has gone that far.
The Minister said all of that went to Clara.
All of it went to the new factory in Clara.
(Interruptions.)
Deputy Flanagan says they are decent people while Deputy Enright says they are not.
I said they came from Mountmellick and they could not be anything else but decent people.
The Minister can consult the record and indicate where I said Goodbodys were not decent people.
He never said they were not decent people.
I never said any such thing.
He wants them investigated.
So do I, but I still say they are decent people.
(Interruptions.)
There is no point in all of the Deputies talking together.
I also asked if any other money by way of grant was given to this firm or whether this £197,000 was the sum total of the money paid to them. I would like that to come out at the inquiry. The Minister says the giving of a State grant does not constitute a reason for an inquiry. He said that unless foreign firms were given such money they would not be willing to come here. I am quite certain that is the reason why so many firms are prepared to chance their arm. Any firm that would be able to stand on its own feet and show a profit should not be afraid of an inquiry. Furthermore any firm that gets State money should be subject to inquiry if it closes down. There is a responsibility on the firm to carry on business.
Deputy Enright might not know we intend to have a vote on this motion. It is coming up to 7.30.
The Deputy appreciates that if there is to be a division it must take place before half-past seven.
Yes. Finally, let me say that the people of Clara want to know what has happened in regard to this firm which has shown a profit of £119,000. While Deputy Flanagan and I represent Laois-Offaly we will do our utmost to bring industries to that area and we shall be only too pleased to do everything possible on behalf of the people there.
Question put.
The Dáil divided: Tá, 36; Níl, 61.
Tá
- Barry, Richard.
- Belton, Luke.
- Belton, Paddy.
- Bruton, John.
- Burke, Joan.
- Byrne, Hugh.
- Cluskey, Frank.
- Coogan, Fintan.
- Corish, Brendan.
- Cosgrave, Liam.
- Coughlan, Stephen.
- Creed, Donal.
- Crotty, Kieran.
- Desmond, Barry.
- Donegan, Patrick S.
- Donnellan, John.
- O'Reilly, Paddy.
- Ryan, Richie.
- Enright, Thomas W.
- Esmonde, Sir Anthony C.
- Fitzpatrick, Tom (Cavan).
- Flanagan, Oliver J.
- Governey, Desmond.
- Jones, Denis F.
- Kavanagh, Liam.
- L'Estrange, Gerald.
- Lynch, Gerard.
- Murphy, Michael P.
- O'Connell, John F.
- O'Donnell, Tom.
- O'Donovan, John.
- O'Hara, Thomas.
- O'Higgins, Thomas F.
- O'Leary, Michael.
- Thornley, David.
- Tully, James.
Níl
- Aiken, Frank.
- Allen, Lorcan.
- Andrews, David.
- Blaney, Neil.
- Boylan, Terence.
- Brady, Philip A.
- Brennan, Joseph.
- Brennan, Paudge.
- Brosnan, Seán.
- Browne, Patrick.
- Browne, Seán.
- Burke, Patrick J.
- Carter, Frank.
- Childers, Erskine.
- Colley, George.
- Collins, Gerard.
- Connolly, Gerard C.
- Cowen, Bernard.
- Cronin, Jerry.
- Crowley, Flor.
- Cunningham, Liam.
- Delap, Patrick.
- de Valera, Vivion.
- Dowling, Joe.
- Fahey, Jackie.
- Faulkner, Pádraig.
- Fitzpatrick, Tom (Dublin Central).
- Flanagan, Seán.
- Forde, Paddy.
- French, Seán.
- Gallagher, James.
- Geoghegan, John.
- Gibbons, James.
- Gogan, Richard P.
- Healy, Augustine A.
- Herbert Michael.
- Hillery, Patrick J.
- Hilliard, Michael.
- Hussey, Thomas.
- Kenneally, William.
- Kitt, Michael F.
- Lalor, Patrick J.
- Lemass, Noel T.
- Lenihan, Brian.
- Lynch, Celia.
- Lynch, John.
- McEllistrim, Thomas.
- Meaney, Thomas.
- Molloy, Robert.
- Moore, Seán.
- Moran, Michael.
- Noonan, Michael.
- O'Connor, Timothy.
- O'Kennedy, Michael.
- O'Leary, John.
- O'Malley, Des.
- Power, Patrick.
- Sherwin, Seán.
- Smith, Patrick.
- Timmons, Eugene.
- Wyse, Pearse.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies H. Byrne and Cluskey; Níl, Deputies Andrews and Meaney.
Question declared lost.