asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he will give details of the general safeguard provision which will enable this country to take protective action during the transition period, with the authority of the EEC Commission, to deal with any serious difficulty which may arise in particular sectors; if he will outline the type of action which this country is likely to be able to take under this provision; if such a provision applied to the original members of the EEC during their transition periods; and, if so, if he will give examples of the type of action which they were able to take by invoking this provision.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Membership of EEC.
82.
The general safeguard provision to which the Deputy refers is contained in Article 135 of the Treaty of Accession. The text of this Article is as follows:
1. If, before 31 December 1977, difficulties arise which are serious and liable to persist in any sector of the economy or which could bring about serious deterioration in the economic situation of a given area, a new member state may apply for authorisation to take protective measures in order to rectify the situation and adjust the sector concerned to the economy of the common market.
2. On application by the state concerned, the Commission shall, by emergency procedure, determine without delay the protective measures which it considers necessary, specifying the circumstances and the manner in which they are to be put into effect.
3. The measures authorised under paragraph 2 may involve derogations from the rules of the EEC Treaty and of this Act to such an extent and for such periods as are strictly necessary in order to attain the objectives referred to in paragraph I. Priority shall be given to such measures as will least disturb the functioning of the common market.
4. In the same circumstances and according to the same procedure, any original member state may apply for authorisation to take protective measures in regard to one or more new member states.
The Deputy will note that the terms of this article are extremely wide and that the approved measures may involve derogations from the rules of the Rome Treaty and of the Treaty of Accession.
The present member states, during their transitional period, enjoyed a general safeguard provision on the same lines. The action which they were able to take by invoking this provision included the imposition of quantitative import restrictions, the imposition of protective duties and the deferment of tariff reductions.
83.
asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if firms in underdeveloped areas and local authorities have been informed that the continuance of rates remissions is incompatible with EEC regulations; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
The answer to the Deputy's question is in the negative. The continuance of rates remission in respect of premises provided for industrial undertakings in underdeveloped areas is not considered to be incompatible with Community rules.
84.
asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce what is involved in mutual recognition of companies as stated in paragraphs 95 and 96 of the document "Accession of Ireland to the European Communities"; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
85.
asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if recognition is withheld by a member state when a company's headquarters is outside the EEC; and if this refusal of recognition is binding on other members of the Community.
With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 84 and 85 together.
The object of the Convention on the Mutual Recognition of Companies and Bodies Corporate is to provide that companies and other bodies corporate which are established under the laws of a member state of the EEC will be recognised in the other member states and will enjoy in those other states the same rights and obligations to conclude contracts, to hold property and to have access to the courts, as they enjoy in their home state.
A member state is free to refuse to apply the Convention to a body which, although established under the laws of another member state, has its headquarters outside the territory covered by the Convention and which has no real economic links with the Community. Such a refusal is not binding on the other member states. The Convention does not prohibit a member state from recognising, if it so wishes, companies or other bodies established in countries outside the Community.
Can the Minister state what amendment would be required to the Companies Act, 1963, to conform with these agreements?
That is a separate question.
The Convention does not affect the provisions of the Companies Act, 1963, which require foreign companies having a place of business here to file accounts and other documents with the registrar. Under the heading of this question no change is required.
Is the Minister aware that under the EEC regulations with regard to multinational companies, it is required that there be worker representation on the board of these companies? Would the Minister not consider this might be a headline which could be followed here?
That is a separate question. I am calling Question No. 86.
86.
asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if the various trading, manufacturing, construction and employer and trade union organisations in the Republic have been informed that at the end of 1974, in the event of entry to the EEC, preference may no longer be given to Irish goods in public contracts; and if such firms have also been advised that grant conditions concerning the use of Irish materials must be abolished.
The arrangements for the elimination of measures having equivalent effect to quantitative restrictions, which are prohibited within the European Economic Community, have been published in the White Paper of January this year on the accession of Ireland to the European Communities. The statement in the White Paper at paragraph 55, page 93, is as follows:
The only measures of this kind applied by us are the preferences given to Irish goods in public contracts and the condition that in order to qualify for certain grants, mainly housing and farm improvements, Irish materials must be used. It was agreed that we could retain these measures up to the end of 1974.
I may add that, as the Deputy is no doubt aware, such preferences for Irish goods are required to be eliminated by 1975, in so far as British goods are concerned, under the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Area Agreement, and it is probable that Britain would be more of a source of competition than the other EEC countries.
Is the Minister not aware that these kinds of preferences for home-produced articles exist in every country in the world, and nowhere more strongly than in the United States? Why have we given away something that allows for special arrangements of a preferential rate of a certain percentage? Why was this given away during the negotiations on the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Area Agreement, and why has it apparently been given away in our negotiations for entry into the EEC?
I should like to tell the Deputy that our application is not for entry into the United States—it is for entry into the EEC. The Deputy was quoting a regulation with regard to qualification for entry into the United States as the 51st State.
What I was stating was the position that exists in a country which believes, more than any other, in free competition. That was the reason for my reference to the United States.
Technically, we have not given away anything. Agreement has been reached to retain the measures until the end of 1974, whereas with regard to what might be our largest competitor we had come to an arrangement whereby the measures would go by 1st July, 1975.
Surely the Minister will agree that this is a real sell-out of the utmost importance? As far as I recollect, the normal preference is 15 per cent; if an Irish tender for a contract is within 15 per cent of a competing tender from any other country the Irish firm gets the contract. The Minister now tells us that under the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Area Agreement we will have sold out this concession completely in 1975. The year 1975 is tomorrow——
The Deputy is getting mixed up if he thinks 1975 is tomorrow.
In this context 1975 is tomorrow.