Could the Minister tell us if he has any further information regarding the question of importation of tiles for the army barracks at Monaghan?
Vote 45: Defence (Resumed).
Debate resumed on the following motion:
That a sum not exceeding £72,960,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 1976, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for Defence, including certain services administered by that Office; for the pay and expenses of the Defence Forces; and for payment of certain grants-in-aid.
—(Minister for Defence.)
No, I have indicated to the Deputy that my Department will get in touch with him in this matter as soon as we have information for him.
Would the Minister not agree that in ten days—and it is approximately that length of time since this question was tabled—he should have had an opportunity to inquire into the accurate position and as to why the regulations were not adhered to in this instance? Is he aware also that the tiles in question have been laid at present?
The Deputy is fully aware that the contractor in the case has certain legal rights, that these are very definite things and that the whole matter has to be looked at from this point of view. The Deputy knows perfectly well that the Government and I are very desirous that there should be the maximum amount of employment given in the country, that we do not desire at all to see foreign goods being used but there are difficult and involved legal matters here. I am doing my best for the Deputy and for the effort we want to make but the Deputy need not try to put the blame on to this side of the House. The Deputy is fully aware that under EEC regulations we cannot specify that Irish goods must be used. He is merely playing mischief for no other purpose except to gain votes in Monaghan.
That is ridiculous.
(Interruptions.)
That is his purpose.
Order.
Our main concern is to retain any employment left in Monaghan, that we would retain that in spite of the Government's efforts. Is the Minister not aware that heretofore tender forms were sent out to manufacturers and producers and that, in this instance, that was not done with this concern in Monaghan? They normally gave a letter of clearance if they were unable to supply those goods. They did not get an opportunity to tender for them, which is the normal procedure in such instances. I want to know why were the normal procedures not adhered to.
The Deputy is fully aware that the normal procedures were adhered to. He is fully aware also that this was not a question of Departmental tender. It was a question of a contract a firm made to build the barracks in Monaghan. That firm has its rights within that contract and that matter is being looked at. The Deputy is deliberately playing mischief for no other purpose except to suggest in Monaghan that we do not want to see Irish tiles used. That is not true. But within our requirements under the Treaty of Accession to the EEC, we were limited in what we could do. We made our contract. The matter of sending out subtenders is not one of the Department of Defence. It is for the successful tenderer.
I cannot accept the Minister's contention. I maintain that the normal procedures were not adhered to and I have evidence that they were not adhered to. That is why I am asking the Minister to tell us why they were not adhered to. He can talk until the cows come home about playing mischief or politics but the facts are that the normal procedures were not adhered to in this instance and why were they not?
Repitition should not be indulged in.
The matter of adherence or non-adherence to practice is a matter for the contractor concerned. The Department of Defence are involved in this only to the extent of the contract they made, which was done bearing in mind our position in relation to the Treaty of Accession to the EEC. As far as the Government and my Department are concerned, we make every effort to see to it that Irish goods are used. The matter is most complex and the Deputy, as I said before, is playing mischief.
Order, please. Let us have orderly debate.
(Interruptions.)
——if people get jobs in the country.
The Deputy will be in the same constituency next time.
The Minister should not be pointing the finger. What is wrong with a little mischief if it ensures that people get jobs?
The Deputy has plenty to worry about.
(Interruptions.)
I allowed Deputy Leonard to raise a number of question but the Deputy may not speak as often as he likes. This is not the Committee Stage of a Bill.
Are we to take it that in respect of concerns such as the tile factory in Clones normal procedures will not be adhered to in the future? Is this the case? They do not want anything additional. All they want is fair play, to be given an opportunity to tender, to cope in competition with other firms from abroad.
Hear, hear.
All I am seeking is fair play for them. What will be future procedure for them?
The Minister to conclude.
The Deputy wants an absolute definition of a situation in which one could define exactly how a successful tenderer would behave in relation to a contract to a Government Department. I have indicated to the Deputy that there are difficulties in relation to the Treaty of Accession to the EEC. But the question of normal tendering, or definition of how one would behave, is a matter more for the contractor than for the Department. It is a highly complex situation and we are looking at the position to see what we can do. Our every effort is to help. Deputy Leonard and Deputy Wilson—who will be in the same constituency next time—are playing mischief.
(Interruptions.)
Deputies can puff and blow as much as they like; that is what they are worried about.
Not a damned bit worried.
Order.
There is plenty of room for us also. Would the Minister not agree that, on a number of occasions, we had to get in touch with his Department regarding local suppliers not being given an opportunity, that we had to get in touch with the Department regarding sand, gravel, concrete pipes, pre-cast concrete beams? Is it not a sad situation that this is the fifth time we have had to get in touch with his Department to seek fair play for local producers and providers of products which were freely available inside the county, which were labour-intensive and which would have provided jobs sorely needed?
Order. If there is to be debate on the Estimates, there can only be one speech. The Deputy has spoken on a number of occasions now. That is not in order.
Could we be clear on this matter? The Estimates now are being rushed through by the Government in a matter of hours. This side of the House has consented to the Government's proposals in this regard on the basis of two facts: (i) that we will be allowed to debate the major Estimates afterwards on a token Estimate and (ii) that it is necessary from the legal point of view to get these Estimates through now. I would have thought that, in those circumstances, there would be a degree of flexibility. Since we are not enabled to develop various points we would have wished to develop regarding various Estimates, I would have thought there would have been a degree of flexibility whereby questions could be asked and short speeches made. I would ask that the Chair would co-operate in that regard because I assumed that it was the intention of the Government side that there would be a degree of flexibility in dealing with these Estimates.
I fully concur with the point of view expressed by Deputy Colley. I was merely seeking to ensure that if there are to be speeches, there shall be only one.
I am sure the Chair will endeavour to ensure that, in answering, Ministers will confine themselves to giving straightforward, factual replies to questions raised and not indulge in these bullying and intimidating tactics to which the Minister for Defence has just resorted.
I have never been accused of being bullying or intimidating in this House before. I was not bullying or intimidating. I want to repeat what I have been saying, perhaps at the expense of being out of order. My Department did not invite tenders. There was a sub-contract for tiling. There is a legal document and there is the Treaty of Accession to the EEC. Those are the matters that are involved. For the Deputy to try to throw mud over on this side of the House on that basis is quite mischievous and is done for purposes not proper to the best interests of the House.
A Cheann Comhairle——
Is the Deputy going to make another speech or is he going to ask a question?
The Deputy is entitled to reject that implication.
All I asked was that the normal procedures be adhered to, that have been adhered to in every——
By whom?
By the Department.
The Department have adhered to the normal procedures.
They have not.
For the 77th time, the Department did not invite tenders.
Order. This is leading to argument and repetition.
They have always asked for a letter of clearance from producers.
No. Everything is being done that can be done.
Could the Minister indicate at what stage the Timoney APC is at present? As he is aware £80,000 of the State's money is being put into development of a prototype which has been internationally acclaimed. Could he tell us exactly what stage it is at at present and if there is an intention to produce it here?
Yes, I can help the Deputy quite a lot on that. The position is that one of the prototypes is, with our permission, in Belgium being shown to the Belgian authorities and another is still under test. Both of them are approaching the end of their period of testing and I regard the whole thing as proceeding satisfactorily and ready for conclusion quite soon.
Is it the intention to produce the Timoney Army personnel carriers here in view of the fact that they are internationally acclaimed, there is a demand for them and £178,000 has already been spent on their development?
We do not know whether or not there is a demand for them yet. We hope there will be. It would be the intention to help Professor Timoney in every possible way. The Department have so far helped to the extent of an expenditure of £178,000, subject to correction and without going to my file, on three prototypes and at the point in time when real interest will be shown in the way of purchase then we would try to help Professor Timoney in every possible way, but we do not want to intrude on his rights. We have our rights, having spent the money to produce the prototype vehicle, and he has his rights as the person who evolved the vehicle.
Is the Minister aware that this vehicle has been advertised in an international magazine as being made in a factory in Bornem in Belgium? There is in the magazine a photograph of the Timoney personnel armoured carrier in which this State has invested £178,000 and we now find these vehicles are being manufactured in Belgium for distribution on the Continent and elsewhere.
No.
Surely at a time when there is high unemployment here, every effort should be made to ensure the development of this vehicle at home to provide much needed employment.
The position with regard to Professor Timoney and the Belgian trip is that he desires that a large portion of the work on his vehicle will be done here by him and another portion done in Belgium. I would not like to give any percentages but, at this stage of the negotiations, it would appear to us that, if he succeeds, he will create very considerable employment here. The manufacture of portion of the vehicle would be done here.
But portion will be made in Belgium. Would the Minister indicate if there has been a dispute for some time between Timoney Bros, and the Department in regard to getting on with the job of producing the vehicle and that is the reason why Professor Timoney has gone to Belgium?
I categorically deny there is any dispute between Professor Timoney and the Department of Defence. All the Department have done is insist that the vehicle will go through its performance and emerge from that performance without any positive fault. They are reaching a conclusion on that and, in the meantime in order to facilitate Professor Timoney, I agreed he could take Army personnel and one of the vehicles—he did not want any more—to Belgium. His intention is to do most of the work here and to have certain works done in Belgium if the vehicles are for the Belgian authorities. That is the position. All we will do here is harm Professor Timoney by going into the matter in too great detail.
The Minister is now aware that a photograph of the Timoney APC, together with a photograph of the factory where it is being produced in Belgium, has appeared in an international magazine advertising the vehicle as being manufactured in Bornem in Belgium.
I am not so aware but I am prepared to take the Deputy's word for it. Whether or not that is so, the position is there is no dispute with Professor Timoney. We have facilitated him in every way. The vehicle is in Belgium and he is happy with the volume of work he can do here, mainly on gear boxes and other important parts which he himself has designed, and the manufacture of these parts will create a large volume of employment. A certain proportion of the employment will be created in Belgium. There is as yet no definite bargain and so no conclusion. I have no knowledge of the advertisement——
I will give the Minister a photostat.
——but at this point in time I have given the House all the information I can and the wisest thing for Deputy Dowling to do now is to desist and let Professor Timoney go ahead.
It is a sad state of affairs when we are told now by the Minister for Defence that a major portion of the production of this carrier is going to Belgium.
The Deputy was not so told. Let him not put words into my mouth.
The Minister indicated he is going to do the gear boxes here and certain other parts. Tell us what is going to be made here.
That is what the Minister said a moment ago.
It is not what I said. I am not prepared to go into details of what is being made in Belgium and what is being made here but, as I understand it, all the more detailed and important parts are to do with gear boxes and so on and all that work will be done here. I leave Professor Timoney to make his bargain and come back to us. I absolutely deny I said the major portion of the work would be done in Belgium. I did not say that. At this point in time one wonders is it wise to be raising this matter in such detail here. Professor Timoney is in Belgium trying to make a deal and as I see it if he is successful with the Belgian authorities he may well make other bargains which would mean the total construction of the vehicle here. That is what he is at now and I can do no more than help him, can I?
This has excited the attention of European and American personnel from the point of view of a very substantial improvement in APCs. The State has put, according to the Minister, £178,000 into this vehicle and one would expect that the production of the vehicles—we were able to produce the prototype here—would be done here to provide much needed employment and it is rather sad to be told by the Minister that portion of the vehicle will be made in Belgium. A great number of our unemployed would be only too glad to be doing a job producing this very excellent vehicle. As I said, I will send the Minister a photostat of the factory in Belgium from the magazine in which it has been advertised as being manufactured in Belgium.
The position is Professor Timoney is in Belgium trying to make a bargain and he has not as yet put the bargain to the Department so all the codswallop we have been listening to from Deputy Dowling is set at naught because I cannot make a decision on something that has not come before me. All we can do is wait and see what Professor Timoney will produce. I will be glad to get the photostat to which the Deputy referred but all I know at this moment is that the vehicle has not yet passed all its tests. At the urgent request of Professor Timoney, we allowed him to take Army personnel and one vehicle to Belgium and the indication was that the major portion of the work would be done here. We have not yet said "Yes" to anything. All we can do at the moment is help Professor Timoney. I do not want to stress this but, to some extent, I fear Deputy Dowling is not helping Professor Timoney.
In reply to that codswallop, I repeat how sad it is to get from the Minister an indication that portion of this vehicle will be manufactured outside the country when we have so many unemployed and an excellent project, developed at the expense of the taxpayers, which could be manufactured here for the benefit of our own people, who are just as competent to do the work as the Belgians, the Italians or anybody else. The magazine to which I referred is an internationally known military magazine which advertises such things as APCs and a wide range of weapons. I will send the Minister the photostat.
The Deputy may do that but, as Minister for Defence, I have had no opportunity so far to make a decision in relation to this vehicle. It has not finally passed all its tests by our own Army. We accommodated Professor Timoney. We do not know what the proposal will be from Professor Timoney. There was an indication that a portion might be made in Belgium. I am waiting for suggestions or proposals from Professor Timoney. A sum of £178,000 of State money has been spent on it. We will make our decision when we know what Professor Timoney wants. At this point I do not think people are being helpful.
Will the Minister make a statement on the new role being played by the Army in guarding post offices because of the Government-encouraged bank strike?
That is disgraceful. The Deputy should withdraw his remark.
I am sorry if my remarks are pinching the Minister, Deputy Barry, and others who are some of the more respectable members of the Government——
He pinched the Deputy and others with the new ship in Cork the other day.
Order.
Is it too much to ask for some good manners from the opposite benches? Will the Minister tell the House where the Army personnel are being drawn from? Are they being taken from other security positions? Will he tell us the numbers it is expected will be required to guard the post offices and for how long? Will it be a charge on the State and, if so, how much will it be?
The position is that the Army are called out by a senior officer of the Garda Síochána in aid of the civil power. Each week there is a report to me on what services are provided. Whether these services are to provide guards at prisons, at Montrose or at post offices is merely a question of the Army being asked out because the police force consider that they require greater numbers of Army personnel. When the Garda Síochána want Army personnel they ask for them and the Department of Defence provide that service. I have no knowledge at the moment of what requests have been made. If they are made they will be acceded to because in aid of the civil power means that the Army comes out in aid of law and order and of the Garda Síochána.
Will it be a charge on the State?
Army personnel must be paid anyway. Incidentally, that was a good ship the Minister for Transport and Power floated in Cork recently——
Let us confine our remarks to the Estimate.
We are coming to the Estimate for the Department of Transport and Power soon and the matter can be raised then.
We will ask him about some of the other things he did not do in Cork.
I should like the Minister to tell us when work will start on the new naval ship for which he placed an order during a by-election campaign.
We have indicated to Verolme that we want work on the hull started as early as possible and I will be pressing them to see that they do this work as quickly as possible. I do not know at the moment if the hull has been laid down but if there is any malfunction on anyone's part it will be on the part of the company building the ship, not on the part of the Department.
Is the Minister saying that there has been some malfunction on the part of the company?
No.
Is he saying he knows nothing about it? What does he mean by his remark?
We asked that the hull be laid down during the second half of the year. We want this done as early as possible. It has been passed by the Government, financially and in every other way. There will be no malfunction on the part of the Department of Defence or of the Government. Any malfunction could only rest with those building the ship. We want it built at the earliest date possible.
On a contract of this kind it is not left to the earliest possible date. There are specific dates laid down for particular stages of construction. Has the Minister any information to give the House on this matter?
Speaking from memory, the final date for delivery——
What was the date of the by-election?
Nobody lost a job in Verolme no matter what people say. Subject to correction, November, 1977, is the date for final delivery in respect of completion.
That is very interesting. Will the Minister tell the House the time taken to build the vessel?
Again from memory, the time will be more than one year. It takes that long to build a vessel.
The Minister should go away and do his homework or else he should tell the House the correct time taken to build such a vessel. Obviously the Minister does not know what he is talking about.
The Deputy may be confusing two things. I am aware that the ordinary main structure of a vessel can be built in three to five months but the fitting out of a vessel is a much slower procedure. I am talking of the date the vessel will go down the slip ready for service with the Naval Service. The whole operation takes over a year.
Is it not a fact that the Minister placed the order in November, 1974, and that he held a Press conference to announce it? Yet, the work has not been started.
At the time I was fortified by a Government decision that we would build it——
Fortified by what?
By something of which he is no longer fortified.
I am assuring the House that I was fortified at that time by that Government decision. The yard has been kept going. Drawings were examined and changes were made. As a result of the cod war it has been necessary to make some expensive changes in the vessel which differ from the Le Déirdre. What was needed was greater water-tight integrity which means we must have a greater number of bulkheads. If there is any kind of collision between that ship and another, the greater number of bulkheads will mean more safety. It will mean greater safety than we have for the crew of the LE Déirdre at the moment. All of that meant planning, changes and work for Verolme and all the planning has been done. I am happy that it will be a better vessel than the LE Déirdre and that it is being delivered in the fastest possible time consonant with the need for work in Verolme.
This Government did something that Deputies opposite should remember. We availed of our right under EEC regulations not to put this ship out for contract. It was defined as a warship and, therefore, we did not have to send it to all the yards in the EEC. We could buy it at home. However, we could not just write an open cheque for it. We had to employ Irish Shipping as our agents and we had to go into every detail of cost with Verolme to ensure that we could buy a boat in Cork at the proper price. That has taken months. I was fortified by the Government decision when I said it would be built in Cork. It will be available at the earliest date possible.
Vote put and agreed to.