Vol. 270 No. 4
I move:
That it is expedient to authorise such charges on and payments out of the Central Fund or the growing produce thereof and such payments out of moneys provided by the Oireachtas as are necessary to give effect to any Act of the present session to increase the limit on advances and guarantees under the National Building Agency Limited Acts, 1963 and 1969.
On Second Stage I referred to the question of the manner in which the NBA would procure their resources. I pointed out that so far they have resorted only to the Exchequer and suggested that the agency should consider going outside the Exchequer. I repeat that suggestion now. In his reply the Minister indicated that the Exchequer is the best vehicle for borrowing and that it was best that the Exchequer should borrow the money and give it to the agency. That is a rather simplistic approach. I know it prevails to some extent through the financial establishment of the public service but the Minister could have another look at it. I do not for a moment suggest that any credence should be given to, or any time spent on, these people who come along with fabulous offers — usually it is sheik or oil money. On the other hand, there has been an attempt for some years to build up an Irish money market. It is possible there is money around, either in private or semi-public institutions, which might not go into the Exchequer through the normal sources of national loans but which might be available. It might suit the different institutions to provide it for the agency if certain types of bonds were provided by the agency.
The Agricultural Credit Corporation have been very successful in getting in funds from the general field outside the Exchequer. I put these suggestions forward as something that might be examined. If there is pressure on the Exchequer for money for housing, perhaps the agency could devise a certain type of bond that would ensure that money could be channelled into it for a longer or shorter term and, to that extent, relieve the Exchequer of the burden.
I take the Deputy's point. I would point out to him — he might consider it unfair — that from 1963 until last year the previous Government apparently were satisfied with the situation. I go along with what Deputy Haughey said. It may be possible to raise money outside but I do not think the ACC are a fair comparison because they would generally appeal to people involved in agriculture. If these people had money to invest they would put it into agriculture but I do not think all the builders would rush to put their spare money into the NBA. They would find other ways of investing it from which they might get a better return. However, the matter is at present under consideration and if it is thought there may be another way in which the money can be raised we will take advantage of it. In any event, we have the authority. I thank Deputy Haughey for his suggestion.
