Deputy Flor Crowley gave notice that he wished to raise the following matter: the recent acquisition by the Minister for Industry and Commerce of mining rights at Nevinstown, County Meath.
Committee on Finance. - Adjournment Debate: Meath Mining Rights.
I regret that I had to raise this matter on the Adjournment and cause some people to work overtime, but I considered it of such importance that it was worth putting some people to a little inconvenience. This is a case of a mining company that came to this country in good faith, brought its expertise with it, carried out quite extensive prospecting and eventually came up with a very extensive strike at Navan. This company is composed of four principals, four Irishmen who went to Canada and came back and, as a result of the incentives that we were giving to mining companies, started prospecting in Ireland. From 1955 onwards these four principals involved in the company in Navan were supervising major activities of mineral exploration and mine development in Ireland. Despite talk to the contrary these people have been living in Ireland.
It is very important that we urge the Minister to make a quick decision because the fate of the savings of many small people is involved in the decision the Minister will have to make. Over two million of the shares of this company are held by Irish people. Substantial employment is given to Irish people. Unless swift action is taken by the Minister the whole credibility of the Government in relation to its incentives in mining could be eroded. There is a great deal of illinformed comment in the daily press, and universities and at various other levels from people who think they know all the facts about mining. However, it should be recorded here this evening that over £700,000 has been spent by this company prospecting in Ireland, and it would be disastrous for the mining industry, indeed for all industries in this country, if any opportunistic business deal deprived these people of their rightful licence to mine.
Before I came in here this evening I went to the trouble of looking up some of the Acts of the Oireachtas in relation to mining and prospecting and I would like to quote from Part II, section 8 (3) of the Minerals Development Act, 1940:
Every prospecting licence shall be expressed and shall operate to authorise the licensee, during the currency of such period as is specified in such licence and subject to the provisions of this Part of this Act, to enter on such land as may be similarly specified and there do all things as the licensee considers necessary or desirable for the purpose of ascertaining the character, extent, or value of the minerals lying on or under such land, and in particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, for the purposes aforesaid to make borings, sink pits, remove water from old workings, and take and remove reasonable quantities of any such minerals for the purpose of analysis, test, trial or experiment.
The prospecting having been carried out, the natural sequence to this would be to apply to the Minister for a licence for mining. Let me quote from Part I section 13 (1) of the same Act:
On the granting or at any time during the currency of a prospecting licence, the Minister may enter into an undertaking with the licensee under such licence to the effect that if, at any time during the currency or on the expiration of such licence, the Minister is satisfied that the prospecting carried on by such licensee has been successful and that the terms and conditions of such licence have been observed and performed, the Minister will grant to such licensee a State mining lease under Part IV of this Act to take effect from such date, either before or after the expiration of such licence, as may be specified in the State mining lease.
It is pretty clear that the company that tried to oust the existing company from their rights in Navan, if I read the Act properly, have not got a leg to stand on and this should be made very clear to the public. As we all know with any company that is quoted on the Stock Exchange, one of the most important ingredients of the success of that company is the confidence of the people, the confidence of the investor in that company. Surely nothing could be more shattering or damaging to any company or to any quoted share than to have this type of carry-on we have had at Navan. That is why I think it was essential that it should be stated here clearly that this company called Bula have no right, if we are to interpret the Mineral Development Act of 1940 properly, and that the people generally need have no fear of their investment in Tara.
As I said at the outset, most of the investors are small investors. Most of the investors invested in it because it was an Irish enterprise and it was local. It was something of a miniPoseidon as far as the people of Ireland were concerned. Each year we spend a substantial amount of money in various countries in endeavouring to make industrialists aware of the advantages that this country can offer to them if they are interested in setting up here. Are we to negative completely the work of the Industrial Development Authority by allowing the type of shoddy practice that has been attempted in this particular case? Or are we to state immediately and categorically that Bula have no rights in this particular instance? We know that the Minister had to act quickly because this land happens to be fee simple but, again, this is provided for in section 14 of the Minerals Development Act, 1940, and I quote:
Whenever it appears to the Minister that there are minerals on or under any land and that such minerals are not being worked or are not being worked efficiently and the Minister is of the opinion that it is desirable in the public interest, with a view to the exploitation of such minerals, that the working of such minerals should be controlled by the State, the Minister, with the consent of the Minister for Finance, may by order (in this Act referred to as a minerals acquisition order) either, as he shall, with the consent aforesaid, think proper, compulsorily acquire such minerals or compulsorily acquire an exclusive mining right in respect of such minerals.
The Minister is proceeding to do that now and he should not hesitate to alleviate the fears of the shareholders of Tara Exploration because, when we come to negotiate and endeavour to attract industry into this country the most important asset we have to offer is our credibility in ensuring that there will be no sharp practice so far as the incoming company are concerned and that we will stand over the type of concession that we say we are prepared to offer. I do not wish that anybody would be left with the impression that this is an argument to the effect that Tara should pay more royalties or that mining companies in general should pay taxes or that they should be subject to more stringent measures than at present. That is not the issue. The issue tonight is that we wish to ensure that the investments of a substantial number of the Irish people are protected. We want to ensure that, so far as the future of mining in Ireland is concerned, it will be unimpaired. Even more so, we want to ensure that confidence in the setting up in Ireland of industry is not fraught with the type of dangers and pitfalls that Bula are attempting to perpetrate.
It would be remiss of me if I did not pay tribute on an occasion such as this to a company that have treated the Irish people more than fairly—a company that have always been straightforward and above board in their analysis of the situation and in their presentation of the facts of the borings. We have seen what happened in Australia in relation to the fly-by-night mining companies. We are very fortunate in having in this country a company of the calibre of Tara who have been straight and sincere with the Irish people.
I should like to conclude by urging the Minister to alleviate the fears of Tara shareholders as quickly as possible. Deputy Tully represents the constituency concerned and he has asked me if I would mind giving up some of my time to him. I am delighted to do so.
I thank Deputy Crowley for accommodating me and I shall be very brief. So far as I can see, this is the most blatant case of claim jumping that has been known in the mining world for more than one hundred years. According to old stories people who went to register mines after discovering them were often killed so that somebody else might take over the claim. However, nobody has been killed so far in relation to this operation, but it appears that there is an attempt at the snatching of the claim. I know that Deputy Crowley had very good intentions when raising this matter but possibly we are putting the Minister in an awkward situation because, as I see it, the Minister and the Government have no option but to give the mining rights to the company that discovered the ore deposits in Nevinstown. Perhaps we are pushing an open door because, being the honourable man he is, the Minister has no option, and neither would he wish to have any option, but to hand over the rights of mining to the people who have spent their own money and their shareholders' money on the project.
I should like to echo what Deputy Crowley has said in that it is not the big shareholders in foreign countries who are involved in this: anybody in the Meath area who had a few pounds to spare invested in Tara. The feeling around Navan town, in particular, is one of shock in that anybody would have the nerve to do what these people have done. Possibly at the back of their mind there is the feeling that they might be able to blackmail the Tara company into a position that they would get something out of it eventually.
I am sorry for the owner of the land, Mr. Wright, who is a decent man and who comes from a decent family. He has been conned by people who have deliberately put themselves in the position that, although Mr. Wright owns a farm of land under which minerals have been found, he will have a one-third share while the few gentlemen who have appeared as his saviours will get two-thirds. I should hate to see that happen to anybody, much less to a constituent of mine.
With Deputy Crowley I appeal to the Minister to ensure that this matter will be settled immediately, It is true that Tara shares have fallen to some extent, but the shares have been going up again. Those people who have money invested in a big way realise that this sort of thing would not be allowed happen in any civilised country. I agree also with Deputy Crowley in that, if a situation has arisen where an Irish Government would allow industrialists to take away the fruit of the labours of a firm that have worked here and have expended money for the purpose of having an industry established, it would almost certainly result in a situation where nobody else outside this country would ever be inclined to invest money here again.
I understood that I was on the Adjournment to-night in relation to the recent acquisition by me as Minister for Industry and Commerce of the mining rights at Nevinstown, County Meath. I suppose that normally one could assume that the discussion would develop on the lines taken by Deputy Crowley and Deputy Tully. I found the discussion quite interesting from the point of view of learning something about the Irish investment in Tara Ltd., as such. I am conscious of the fact that ever since the information broke about a discovery at Nevinstown away back before Christmas, there was quite a share of individual Irish financial interest in it. Deputy Crowley mentioned a figure. He said that the fate of many Irish people was involved and he mentioned that 2,000,000 of the shares were held by Irish people.
70 per cent.
I have been endeavouring to check on this officially. I am wondering how one establishes what the percentage of shares is and where one gets one's information.
You ask the company.
From the share register.
It is a Canadian registered company. It is only available through the Canadian stock exchange.
That is not correct.
It is not.
I fully accept the fact that the directors are Irish.
It is beside the point.
I must accept Deputy Tully's summary of the situation. He said that the Minister is an honourable man and a member of an honourable Government. I am hoping that when this problem is completely resolved— and I hope that it can be resolved reasonably and within a reasonable time—this fact will be further established.
The developments in this regard over the past week have been quite alarming. I suppose that is the only way to describe it. Deputy Crowley said he was glad the Minister had acted pretty swiftly with regard to the acquisition of the mineral rights. To be quite honest let me say that coming up from the country last Monday morning when I read in the papers about this development I was a little annoyed with myself for not having acted as swiftly as I would have wished in the light of the development. In fact, I took a decision —and I was checking on this this evening—away back on 19th February.
That is not very "away back".
No, but on the 19th February, as I saw it, there was no problem. On the question of mineral rights my predecessors had taken steps previously to acquire rights in areas under this section.
The strike was published before Christmas.
Yes, but the point is that it comes under section 14 of the Act. The House will appreciate that in a great number of cases the mineral rights are held by the State in any event. There are only isolated pockets where the mineral rights are held privately rather than by the State. Having had the matter gone into fully —and this involves a good deal of research in conjunction with the Land Commission—I arrived at the conclusion at that stage that it was necessary for me to take steps under section 14 of the Act to acquire those rights. I instructed the officials of my Department to prepare the papers for this and the order was made on the 15th March.
Then there was the development whereby this other company, apparently some time in or about 18th or 19th March, entered into an arrangement with the landowner who was, it appears—I do not know if this is a positive fact—also the owner of the mineral rights. From their point of view the mineral rights were acquired by that company but by the order made on the 15th March the mineral rights had become the property of the State. That is the situation at the moment. I have seen press reports which indicate that this order is being challenged for one reason or another.
May I ask the Minister a question? Does the Minister intend to allow the licensed prospector to proceed with the mining under licence?
I have ten minutes to reply and I am trying to cover this.
This is a very important point.
The position is that the licensed prospector, Tara, very recently applied to me for an undertaking that I would give a mining lease. That is the application under Article 13.
That is the normal procedure.
It would be unfair to say that this was only a very recent application because there is an outstanding application of some few months for a lease as such for a much wider area.
From them?
From them. Deputy Tully is quite right in saying that in equity the person who already holds the prospecting licence and who operates it efficiently and effectively and properly under the conditions under which it is issued——
Should.
Should—I do not want to imply anything, but there is nothing written into the Act which says that the prospector, the man who has the licence, must or should get the subsequent lease. Unless there are good reasons—and I do not see any at the moment—for not giving the lease the original prospector is the person who, in equity, should get the lease. So many things have happened in the past week——
Only one thing happened.
——to make this situation rather unusual. Accepting the fact that on behalf of the State I hold the mineral rights, it is now my decision to issue a lease if I find that all the qualifications are met. The normal procedure is that the people who have made the strike, the people who have the prospecting licence, if I am satisfied that they have the capacity to go ahead and develop the mine, would normally be expected to get the lease. I will not say positively here tonight that it will be issued——
How soon will the Minister——
The application I have before me at the moment is an application for a lease under section 13. In relation to a lease I want to make the situation quite positive. I am satisfied that the royalties we negotiated in relation to previous leases are not sufficient for me in relation to the present development.
That is a side issue.
It has to be negotiated in the negotiating of a lease.
But have you not a better chance of getting that from a company that is in existence rather than from somebody who knows nothing whatever about mining?
I have avoided being critical of other people.
Order.
May I ask one question? The Minister has no major sin against the licensed prospector?
Oh no. Nothing at all. I have nothing but the height of respect for the licensed prospector.
That satisfies me.
A Cheann Comhairle, may I ask one other question of the Minister—I know his time has run out —the question of the continuation of the prospecting and the fact that the other people have put machinery in there? Has the Minister no say in that?
If the other people——
Bula?
Yes. If they have bought the land I take it they are entitled to go on the land. They may not prospect on the land because the minerals are State-owned but so far we have no evidence that they are prospecting or mining. They are carrying out some work there and I propose to ask the Geological Survey Office to have a look at what they are doing with a view to taking action if there is an apparent breach of the Act.
The Dáil adjourned at 11 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 25th March, 1971.