asked the Minister for Labour if there is any committee attached to his Department to provide him with early information about the proposed closing down of an industry; the number of cases in which such information has been made available to him; and the action he has taken as a result of this information in each case.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Factory Closures.
8.
There is no such committee. It is a function of the Department of Industry and Commerce to keep industry under continuous review, to identify sectors or firms which may be encountering difficulties, and to arrange assistance where possible. They are discharging this function with the co-operation of the IDA and Fóir Teoranta.
Am I correct in thinking that, if appointed, such a subcommittee or unit would have this obligation? Did the Minister not succeed in appointing one he had in his mind?
No. What the Deputy may have been thinking of is that there is a monitoring unit attached to the Department of Labour, and there is another question relating to the functions of that unit, but it does not have the function referred to in this question in regard to actual close-downs. That is not within its terms of reference. The matter of close-downs is one for the Department of Industry and Commerce and the agencies attached to that Department.
9.
asked the Minister for Labour if he had received any warning through agencies attached to his Department that a firm (name supplied) was about to close down; the action he took on this information and why he did not meet the senior executives of the firm until 16th June, 1976.
The first intimation my Department received of the decision to close down the factory in question was on the afternoon of 14th June, 1976. I immediately arranged to see the management of the company and met them on the following morning, the 15th inst.
Would the Minister not agree that he should have some such unit for this purpose?
For the purpose mentioned in the last question, that is a function for another Department. I am contemplating legislation which would give forward notice where managements intend to close down firms, but we do not have any such function as yet.
Had Fóir Teoranta or the IDA an investment in this company?
I do not know the background of State participation in the Fitzwilton Group. My identification with this matter is based on my meeting with the management after their announcement regarding the close-down of the firm. The management, in their discussions with me, related their plans of close-down to the state of the international market. I can tell the Deputy that on Friday I will, in company with the Minister for Industry and Commerce, be meeting a deputation from the unions concerned in this matter.
Can the Minister appreciate how difficult we find it to understand why he does not know, having met these people, whether there is State investment? I think these questions raised by Deputy Gibbons are valid, and I want to ask the Minister if he would approach the Minister for Industry and Commerce with a view to reviewing Fóir Teoranta involvement in companies generally, so that——
The Deputy is entering into an area which is the responsibility of another Minister.
While it may be the responsibility of another Minister, may I submit it also involves the question of employment? There have been too many close-downs already.
This is Question Time, Deputy.
Could I ask the Minister to approach the Minister for Industry and Commerce with a view to ensuring that Fóir Teoranta, when they do invest, will participate more meaningfully in a company so that the Department of Industry and Commerce or the Department of Labour will be aware of a threatened close-down?
Questions appertaining to Fóir Teoranta ought to be put down to the appropriate Minister.
A large part of the factual material in regard to the threatened close-down of this company relates to another Department with whom I am sure these questions will be raised.
10.
asked the Minister for Labour the exact terms of reference of the new monitoring unit in his Department to provide early warning on industrial disputes; and if he will make a statement outlining the activities and progress of this unit to date.
I have already supplied details of the terms of reference of the monitoring unit in my reply on 4th February to a similar question from the Deputy. The main functions of the monitoring unit are to gather information and to keep in touch with developments in the area of industrial relations with particular reference to the fixing of pay and other conditions of employment and negotiation procedures and to provide, in particular, immediate information on the issues involved in major industrial disputes.
Could I ask the Minister how many such disputes were investigated by this monitoring unit since it was set up, and, furthermore, what pattern these investigation followed and what groups of people they met?
There may be some confusion in the Deputy's mind. The unit does not investigate; it just keeps in touch with developments and informs me. As I explained to the Deputy yesterday, I meet with the unit on a weekly basis to ensure that I keep in full contact, but the unit itself is not engaged in investigation.
If it is not engaged in investigation or finding out what may be happening or about to happen in crucial industries, would he explain what useful service it is providing for him and how, without some kind of investigation it would achieve any result?
I say deliberately it is not involved in investigation, because that is the term usually used of Labour Court activity. The Labour Court investigates a case. The unit does not investigate in that sense. It keeps in touch with developments and informs me of possible difficulties arising in important sectors of the economy. I meet the unit weekly, and that is how it operates.
Would the Minister agree that the closing down of an industry is a very serious industrial dispute, and would it not be more important that information should be available to him on this matter?
I agree, but all I am saying is that Departments are divided according to particular functions, and that does not happen to be as function of the Department of Labour. I might like that it should have that function, but it does not have such a function.
Could the Minister be more specific about how this unit can operate without meeting the parties connected with the dispute? Could he further inform me whether they ever met the representatives of any union? Could he say what is the attitude of trade unions to this unit generally, and would he like to comment on the feeling abroad that this unit has been completely ineffective to date and has made no worthwhile progress whatever?
I am sorry Deputy Fitzgerald should feel it necessary, in making an Opposition case here, to criticise civil servants who are carrying out a job to the best of their ability. I can assure the Deputy the unit has been doing solid work and is in daily contact with union officials and managements in relation to disputes around the country. I want to disabuse the Deputy of any illusions he may have that the unit does not have the best relations with both sides in our industrial situation and with all the other agencies working in this area.
Are they engaged in undercover operations and it cannot be spelt out to us what they do?
No. This is the second time I have stated clearly to the Deputy what the functions of the unit area.
I asked the Minister earlier, and he did not reply to me, how many disputes did the unit report on to the Minister since its formation?
I have explained that the function of the unit is involved in keeping in touch with all developments of industry each week.
(Interruptions.)
How many disputes did they report on?
Order.
The Deputy asked a question yesterday just to explain that you cannot really oversimplify this question in relation to Bórd na Móna and I explained to him that there was a dispute situation there potentially since January 1. We are now at the brink of that dispute breaking out, but the unit was informing me of developments in that industry.
That is one.
Order. If Deputies wish to debate this matter they must find another time, I am calling another question. No. 11.
(Interruptions.)
That is one. On how many more have they informed the Minister?
Order. I have called the next question, and the Chair will be obeyed on both sides of the House.