Vol. 299 No. 6
andMr. Crinion asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if any State money has been paid by the Government to Messrs. Roche or Wymes, the representatives of Pat Wright or Woods, or their agents on foot of the agreement between him and the owners of Bula Mines Ltd., and, if so, when.
11.
asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if any consideration has been paid to Norfin Nominees Limited, the executors of Patrick Wright, deceased, or Bula Holdings (formerly Frolic Investments) under the Bula Limited (Acquisition of Shares) Act, 1977; if so, when; and the amount of each such payment.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 10 and 11 together. The answer to these questions is "No."
Will the Minister state when it is anticipated the payment will be made in view of the fact we were informed that under the agreement of December, 1975—an agreement we have never seen—the payment was due on 9th February, 1977?
I am not able to give the Deputy a reply to that question.
Why is the Minister not able to give a reply to that rather obvious and fundamental question? One would imagine it would be in the forefront of his mind in view of the long debate we had in the House about this whole question.
The question is when the payment will be made and I am not able to say exactly——
What is the reason for the hold up?
I do not accept that there is a hold up.
Is the Minister suggesting that payment was not due on 9th February, 1977, under the agreement and that what we were told in relation to this secret agreement was untrue?
I would refer the Deputy to the Official Report. I do not accept the inference of the question.
Is the Minister aware that I was informed by his private secretary on the telephone when he was urging me to allow the Bill to be passed very quickly that it had to be enacted into law in order to enable payment to be made by 9th February, 1977?
I am aware that the Deputy says that is so.
I am calling Deputy Crinion who is offering.
Is the Minister suggesting that I am misleading the House, that I am saying something that is untrue and that I was not told this?
No. I am aware that the Deputy has said this is so.
Is it not so?
I am aware of what the Deputy has just said.
What hook is the Minister on?
There are a number of points in Deputy O'Malley's supplementary question. I would have to get the report of my private secretary as to what exactly transpired in that telephone conversation. I can neither confirm nor deny it.
Leaving aside the telephone conversation, is it not a fact that under the secret agreement of 12th December, 1975, this payment was to be made not later than the 80th or 90th day after the report of the arbitrator and that that day was 9th February, 1977?
I can only refer the Deputy to the Official Report of the debate.
I am asking the Minister a question which I am entitled to do.
This question cannot go on interminably. Other Deputies are seeking to get in also and I wish to facilitate them. We cannot dwell all day on this question.
I am amazed at the incredible refusal of the Minister to answer a simple question. Is it now the position that possibly payment will not be made at all?
That is not my understanding of the situation. It is not the position that payment will not be made.
Deputy Crinion wishes to speak.
What is the Minister's understanding of the position?
I have called Deputy Crinion who indicated a willingness to speak. Does he wish to offer?
Will the Government be paying interest on this money from 12th February?
I should like to refer the Deputy to the Order Paper. He will see that question is coming up.
Will the Minister answer the question I asked him? What is his understanding of the position in relation to the payment of this money?
My understanding is exactly as was set out when the Bill was passed, that the money will be paid.
When?
Obviously, I cannot give an exact answer to that question.
Why not?
As a practising solicitor the Deputy knows better than I that the matter of closure is in the hands of legal people. I cannot give an exact date of how long it will take.
12.
asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he has given or approved the giving of any guarantee on behalf of Bula Limited; if so, when; and, if not, whether the giving of such guarantee is under consideration.
A State guarantee in favour of Bula Limited has not been given or approved. The question of such a guarantee would be a matter for consideration by the Government in the context of finalisation of the senior financing arrangements for the development of the mine.
Will the Minister tell the House if there is any provision in the secret agreement of 12th December, 1975, that would envisage the possibility that the Minister or the Government might be called on to give such a guarantee?
I was asked if an agreement had been given or approved and I answered that question. The question of the guarantee can, of course, arise in relation to any commercial undertaking in the country. It will be considered by the appropriate mechanism and decided on by the Government in due course if it arises.
The Minister agrees that the possibility exists that the Government on behalf of taxpayers may be called on in the future to give a guarantee of taxpayers' money which will possibly amount to several million pounds in addition to the money we understood was to be paid but about which there seems to be some delay on which the Minister cannot or will not expand. No comment?
13.
asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if any interest is or could be payable in respect of late payment for the acquisition of shares in Bula Limited; and, if so, the rate thereof.
I have been advised that interest is not payable on the payment to be made in respect of the acquisition of the shares.
14.
asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce the present position regarding the planning application by Bula Limited for an open-cast lead/zinc mine at Navan, County Meath.
I am informed by the company that certain matters arising out of the company's application for a partly open-cast mine are the subject of correspondence at present between the company and the planning authority.
Can the Minister say why some of the questions put by Meath County Council last October have not been replied to? Why have the company not replied to the letter written to them in February last?
I indicated that I understand that correspondence is going on between the company and the planning authority. The question of planning was extensively debated and I made it clear that I want the proper authorities to discharge their functions in a proper manner. That is my concern and I expressed it on a number of occasions.
The Minister's information is not correct because the county manager informed Meath County Council that he had not received any answer from Bula Limited since he wrote to them in February this year with regard to their planning application. The manager sought replies from the company to a number of questions in the course of that letter. In view of the fact that the State have taken a 49 per cent share in the company, will the Minister see to it that the company reply to the council in regard to their application for planning permission? Is the situation that the company does not want to get planning permission?
I can only reply that I understand correspondence between the company and the planning authority is taking place.
When did Bula Limited last write to Meath County Council?
I do not have that information here but I can get it for the Deputy although I suspect the Deputy can find the information easier than I.
I suggest that the Minister is misleading the House. The Minister has told us that correspondence has been going on between the company and the council but he cannot tell us when the last letter was sent by the company to the council. The Minister should do something to get the company to reply to the council.
Does the Minister not consider, in view of the fact that the taxpayer is committed to the payment of £9.54 million at least for a 24 per cent interest in this company, that he, as the trustee or custodian of that large amount of taxpayers' money, should force this company to pursue with vigour their planning application to Meath County Council? Does the Minister not concede that he has a strict duty in that regard? Why does he not fulfil that duty?
The matter of the application is being processed vigorously.
Why is the Minister not able to tell Deputy Crinion when Bula Limited last wrote to the council?
The Minister should be permitted to reply to the supplementary question.
The question of correspondence between various companies in which the State has an interest and other people is a matter of fine detail. I have no way of knowing what the most recent date was. I can find that out but one does not have an itemised list of the dates when correspondence was exchanged between companies and planning authorities.
Why did the Minister say that this was being vigorously pursued if he does not know the details?
Arising further out of the Minister's reply——
I am moving to the next question.
The Minister does not like any questions about Bula Limited and he will appreciate the efforts of the Chair to get on to Question No. 15.
The Chair has given every latitude in that regard.
