asked the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Energy if he will state (a) the formal written representations that have been made by him or on his behalf to the Commission of the European Communities by way of protest against the British temporary employment subsidy; (b) the dates on which such representations, if any, were made; and (c) the response, if any, which he has received.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - British Temporary Employment Subsidy.
14.
Formal written representations were made by the Government to the EEC Commission in regard to the United Kingdom temporary employment subsidy on 1 February 1978. When proposals to have this measure continued, in a modified form, for a further period of 12 months, from 1 April 1978, were discussed at a meeting in Brussels on 1 March 1978 between the Commission and the member states, Ireland's views were reiterated on that occasion. In the meantime the Commission have raised no objection to the extension for one year of the UK temporary employment subsidy, subject to certain modifications.
I might add that the Minister personally expressed concern about the subsidy orally to EEC Commissioners on other occasions in September and November 1977. These representations were referred to in the course of his reply to a Question in the Dáil on 7 December 1977.
I want to remind the Minister of State that I put down this question in the last week of January. Could it be the case that the first formal submission made by the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Energy was an attempt to mend his fences in regard to the total neglect of the Government to make any formal protest for seven months after they entered that office, although the Confederation of Irish Industry were begging them every other week to do something about it?
There were continuing negotiations between the Government and the Commission on this question. As I have already said, the Minister made oral representations to the EEC Commissioners in September and November last year.
Could the Minister of State tell the House if there is any record in the EEC of these oral representations? This is a very informal method of making representations about a matter which is costing about 3,500 jobs.
Many representations were made. The Minister made references at ministerial level.
At a meeting of the Council of Ministers?
Yes. In September and November last at EEC meetings the Minister expressed concern about the British scheme. Before that and on instructions from the Minister there had been a number of objections raised to this scheme in Brussels at civil service level.
Would I be correct in saying that so far as the EEC are concerned no formal protest was lodged by the Government or any Minister for seven months after entry into office in regard to a matter which is bleeding several sectors of Irish industry and to which attention has been drawn by the CII?
A number of representations were made to the Commission on this question. A written complaint was sent on 1 February 1978.
After this question was put down.
Is the Minister aware that within the Commission in recent months there has been considerable confusion as to the precise wishes of the Irish Government in relation to the operation of the proposed subsidy and why the Irish Government have failed, apart from lodging a formal complaint against the British subsidy, to take any other action open to them by way of lodging a formal application for the abolition of the British subsidy and therefore removing the discrimination against Irish industrial products? Is the Minister not aware of the grave misgivings within the Commission as to the Irish Government's approach?
I am fascinated to hear that Deputy B. Desmond is so familiar with the grave misgivings on any issue within the Commission or the details of any issue that is negotiated and considered within the Commission.
I did not have to look very far.
Would it be fair to say that the main burden of the running in regard to protesting at Commission level about this temporary employment subsidy has been carried not by the Government but by the CII?
I would not accept that at all.
Deputy Begley, with the last supplementary.
Could the Minister of State tell the House to which commissioners the Minister made oral representations?
Commissioners D'Avignon and Vouel.
What about Commissioner Burke?
15.
asked the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Energy (a) if, by way of defending Irish industrial employment in especially threatened sectors against the effects of the British temporary subsidy, he will adopt any or all of the following courses: (i) impose a corresponding import restriction or tariff on British products in those sectors (ii) introduce a matching Irish temporary employment subsidy (iii) institute proceedings against the United Kingdom in the Court of the European Communities in respect of the breach of Treaty obligations which the temporary employment subsidy represents; and (b) if not, the positive action he proposes to safeguard Irish industrial employment in sectors especially threatened by the British temporary employment subsidy, estimated by the Confederation of Irish Industry to have already directly caused the loss of over 3,000 Irish jobs.
I would refer the Deputy to the announcement made by the Minister for Finance in his budget statement on 1 February. A sum of £5 million is being provided in the current year to enable payments of £5 per week to be made in respect of each worker on the payroll to firms in the labour intensive sectors of industry most affected by the UK temporary employment subsidy scheme. It is intended that payments under the new scheme, which at present is being examined by the EEC Commission, will commence in July 1978 to operate retrospectively from 3 April 1978. The scheme will be reviewed when the fully pay-related social insurance contribution scheme comes into operation and will end, in any case, as soon as the special measures adopted by the British Government to maintain employment in competing sectors of UK industry are terminated.
Would the Minister accept in regard to the measure announced by the Minister for Finance in his budget that six weeks after the Irish budget the British Department of Employment announced a fresh set of schemes, including one which was intended to take up the slack which they are being obliged to drop by the modification of their existing temporary employment subsidy scheme? Would he also accept that the British themselves in their "Employment News", the official bulletin of the Employment Department, predicted that the number of persons in British industry supported by this exceptional and——
The Deputy is making a statement. I will not allow that. I am calling the next question.
(Interruptions.)
Will the Deputy please resume his seat? I want to make very definite reference to a habit that is growing and very much practised by the Deputy now speaking where a speech is being made under the guise of a Supplementary Question. This practice if allowed to develop will completely change Question Time. If that is the way it is to be, let it be decided but I must interpret Standing Orders as I find them and that I will do until they change.
With respect, Sir, I would have said that that tendency has been there since——
The Deputy is adept at making a speech under the guise of a supplementary question.
This is not a telephone kiosk question. This involves a matter——
(Interruptions.)
The Chair has allowed me only one supplementary question on this matter.
The Deputy has been on his feet for four-and-a-half minutes.
You are not going by the clock. Questions Nos. 14 and 15 are of the most intense importance.
We are on Question No. 15.
Will you allow me a couple more supplementary questions?
Yes.
Have the Government any fresh proposals to make in regard to any of the matters I have detailed in my Question or are they making more vigorous efforts towards having the British subsidy removed? Are there any further plans to counter this fresh set of British incentives which will cost more Irish jobs?
The British scheme which was modified following pressure from this Government through the Commission——
(Interruptions.)
The total budget for this scheme will be reduced from £222 million to £135 million next year, the total amount going to textile clothing for new applications will be reduced from £106 million to £55 million. I do not see how these reductions can tally. Also, the conservatory character of the aid will be diminished by the fact that firms which receive the subsidy for more than six months are required to submit restructuring plans. Aid for new applicants is limited to 12 months and in key sectors certain payments are being introduced. All in all through pressure from this Government on the Commission the scheme has been altered considerably.
Would the Minister accept that the Department are not keeping up to date inasmuch as the British Employment Secretary said six weeks ago that his programme of job saving measures operating from 1 April this year would cost not what the Minister of State told us but £300 million and, he said, that in particular the——
Are quotations in order at Question Time?
(Interruptions.)
The Deputy is doing exactly what I have forbidden him to do. He must not give quotations at Question Time. I will have to take sterner action in this matter.
(Interruptions.)
May I ask a question?
I do not want this to be interpreted as my taking the Minister's part. I am not taking any Deputy's part in this House. I am following Standing Orders. Every Deputy should subscribe to the decorum and prestige of this House.
Further to the Minister of State's statement that the Commission were examining the Irish scheme, is it likely at this stage that the Commission will demand very substantial modifications of the Irish schemes in line with the modifications introduced with the British scheme? Have the Government done their homework on the proposition to the Commission?
As in any scheme introduced by a national government, the Commission asked for modifications. That request is being examined at the moment.
That is news.
If the Deputy had asked me the question before, I would have told him. They have asked for modifications and this is being examined at the moment. There will be a report to the Commission later.
Is it the case that the scheme is in serious difficulty?
No, it is not in any difficulty. It is coming in in July and it will be retrospective to the beginning of April.
Is it a case that the Department have no response to or are not aware of the further British measures?
Of course we have responded to them. In the modified scheme which has been accepted by the Commission and the member states, the figures are reducing from £222 million to £135 million and in the textile, clothing and footwear sectors they are going down from £106 million to £55 million and there are other modifications also. This is as a result of the pressure from our Government.