asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he will make arrangements to ensure that the jobs of 76 people employed by a firm (name supplied) are safeguarded.
22.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - County Cork Firm.
21.
asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce what steps he proposes to take to save a firm (name supplied) in Rushbrooke, Cobh, County Cork from closure.
With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 21 and 22 together.
I am informed that at a meeting of the creditors of the firm on 3rd March it was decided to close down the factory and pay off—as from the 4th March— the 50 workers at present with the company.
The undertaking was established with the aid of a grant from the Industrial Development Authority but I understand that, shortly after the factory was built, there was a recession in the markets abroad which the project was designed to supply. The promoters then decided to produce an alternative line on a smaller scale but this was not a success and the promoters found themselves in difficulty in regard to markets and finance.
The company sought the assistance of the various Government agencies in an effort to find a solution for their difficulties but these agencies, having thoroughly examined all the circumstances of the case, decided that addition financial assistance from the State would not be justified.
I am informed that the liquidator who has been appointed has received a number of offers for the premises and these are now being considered. At the same time, the Industrial Development Authority are making arrangements to bring to notice the facilities available in the factory.
The Minister mentioned a meeting of the creditors. Does he know this is not correct? There was only one creditor out of 104 creditors who wanted to close down the factory. The other 103 were quite willing to let it continue trading. Would the Minister like to comment on that?
My information is that, at a meeting of the creditors——
Held yesterday.
——held yesterday it was decided to close down the factory. That is my information. I am interested to hear what the Deputy has to say, but my information is that at the creditors' meeting it was decided yesterday to close down the factory.
Is it not true that the one creditor who was unwilling to allow the company to continue in operation is in competition with this company?
I am not so aware.
Did the meeting of the creditors not include representatives from the IDA who were totally in favour of the firm continuing in operation? The only dissenter from that unanimous approval was Sunbeam Wolsey in Cork who are competitors of the firm in question. The amount outstanding was only £38,000.
Is it not true that this enterprise received a grant of £77,000 last June and now, within nine months, it is faced with a situation in which it is going into liquidation because promised capital which was to be forthcoming from the chairman of the company has not been forthcoming? Is it not true that the company has the most refined and sophisticated machinery for this kind of textile enterprise and that it is geared for Common Market purposes? In those circumstances would the Minister not consider that there should be another examination of this project and that a small capital advance would tide the company over its difficulties?
I do not think it is the case that a small capital advance would tide it over its difficulties. I agree with the Deputy that the reason why it has not been able to get off the ground properly is that the money which it was originally proposed to invest in the company was not forthcoming subsequently. One of the difficulties that arise is the recession in sales, irrespective of the type of produce that was to be produced there. The fact is that there was a major difficulty in having it marketed. It must be appreciated that the grant allocated to this industry was allocated on the basis that it was geared for exports. During the past month the bulk of the marketing was on the local market which, in fact, is already pretty well overloaded. There would be no point in advancing further moneys to keep this industry open if its only purpose was to produce for the home market with resultant unemployment or disemployment affecting other firms.
Is the Minister aware that in recent months some of this produce was marketed on the home market because capital was not coming forward from abroad and the company found itself in a very tight cash situation? Since the company got into difficulties it has had offers from three people to invest a further £30,000 in it. One man made an offer to the extent of £15,000. At least these three people have faith in the future of this company. The Government are only being asked to advance twice as much as these three people together and to protect the jobs of 76 people. Does the Minister know that this company recently appointed a sales manager for England who left another firm in this country because he is confident that the new firm in Cobh will be considerably better than the one he has left?
Will the Minister re-examine the situation?
These questions were down for today and they have to be answered today. Naturally enough my information is sketchy with regard to the creditors' meeting held yesterday. This is certainly engaging my attention at present. The suggestion that an advance of money—twice that offered by those three people—was all that was being asked for is something that I would have to look into because that is not my information.
Is the Minister aware that they applied for a loan of £180,000 and they were told that a loan of £120,000 would be considered if they could get £60,000? In fact, they succeeded in getting £31,000, as Deputy Barry has said. In view of that, they now think that if they could get a loan of £140,000 they could get over their present difficulties. It is as near as that.
Could the Minister say what, if any, are the prospects for the re-employment of the workers in this factory?
As of yesterday there were some 50 people working in it. The vast majority of those were female workers. In the Cobh-Cork area there is a reasonable opportunity for alternative female employment, but I still think that is no reason why I should not press forward and ask the IDA to make every effort they can to see if this industry can be maintained.
Is the Minister aware that the alternative employment will be provided by the competitor mentioned by Deputy O'Higgins and Deputy Barry?
The Minister should surely agree that the alternative employment is not——
Might I point out to the Deputy that we cannot discuss this matter all evening? We have 70 questions to deal with.
Mr. Barry
But this firm is going out of the local area and the alternative employment is 15 miles distant. Alternative employment is not the answer.
Is the Minister aware that the recession in the textile industry is not the reason for this company going out of business at the moment? The only reason they are going out of business is that the promised capital is not forthcoming and surely the Minister has an obligation——
Question No. 23. We cannot continue discussing this particular question.
May I have a reply, please?
Question No. 23.