Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 6 Dec 1979

Vol. 317 No. 6

Supplementary Estimates, 1979. - Vote 43: Industry, Commerce and Energy.

Minister for Industry, Commerce and Energy (Mr. O'Malley)

I move:

That a supplementary sum not exceeding £13,139,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December 1979, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Energy, including certain services administered by that Office, and for payment of certain loans, subsidies, grants and grants-in-aid.

The major factors giving rise to the Supplementary are the impact of the National Understanding on the pay elements of the expenditure by my Department and the bodies under their aegis and the additional provision for capital expenditure by the Industrial Development Authority.

The details are as follows:

On subhead A1—Salaries, Wages and Allowances—the sum of £600,000 sought is required to meet the cost of implementing the terms of the national understanding and for payment of some grade awards which have been approved by the Department of the Public Service.

On subhead A3—Consultancy Services—the additional £62,000 sought is required to meet the cost of consultancy projects which arose during the year and which had not been provided for in the original Estimate.

On subhead B1—Travelling and Incidental Expenses—the extra £30,000 sought reflects the cost which arose from increased air fares and subsistence and mileage allowances.

On subhead F1—Institute for Industrial Research and Standards—approximately £432,000 of the £532,000 sought by the Institute for Industrial Research and Standards is required to meet the cost of the national understanding and some grade claims. The remaining £100,000 will be used to finance the institute's lead role for energy conservation.

On subhead G—International Organisations, etc—the extra sum required results from Ireland's contribution to the budget of the European Coal and Steel Community. Ireland's share this year, based on our proportion of Community GNP, is 174,564 EUA or approximately £117,200 and it is proposed to pay this sum by way of grant to the funds of the European Coal and Steel Community. As there are offsetting savings elsewhere on the subhead the additional amount required is £52,200.

On subhead H1—Córas Tráchtála—the additional £380,000 sought by Córas Tráchtála is required to meet the cost of implementing the national understanding and grade claims amounting to some £230,000. The balance of the amount sought, £150,000 is required to meet increased costs of administration due to greater promotional activity, recruitment of staff and higher costs abroad arising from the Board's offices and activities in other countries.

On subhead H2—Kilkenny Design Workshops Limited—the vote for the current financial year provided £474,000 towards the Grant-in-Aid for the Kilkenny Design Workshops Ltd. An additional amount of £50,000 is now required by the company, to meet further commitments.

Of this sum £21,000 is needed to cover wage and salary costs arising mainly from the implementation of the first phase of the 1979 national understanding and the increased rates of pay-related social insurance contributions.

A further £29,000 is needed for general expenses, the principal item being £25,000 required to meet part of the loan repayments in respect of Butler House, Kilkenny, which could not be fully met out of European Social Fund grants.

On subhead I1—IDA Administration and General Expenses—in the original vote the Authority were allocated £8,500,000 for Administration and General Expenses. An additional £815,000 is required to implement the national understanding and to meet certain grade claims.

On subhead I2—IDA—Capital Expenditure—the original allocation for the capital grant-in-aid for 1979 was £109 million. An extra £10 million is necessary in respect of unforeseen significant variations in the grant payments to, and equity participation, in a small number of large projects and also in respect of the escalating rate of building cost increases.

On subhead J1—SFADCo—Administration and General Expenses—a supplementary provision of £137,000 is required to meet the Company's commitments in regard to the national understanding and grade claims.

On subhead J2—SFADCo—Grants to Industrialisation—between July and September 1979, SFADCo carried out a survey of new and established firms at Shannon who have qualified for grants. As a result of the survey the original allocation of £700,000 was found to be insufficient by £750,000.

On subhead K2—Credit Financing of certain Capital Goods Exports—provision is made for the payment of a compensatory element towards interest charged by the Associated Banks in respect of the credit-financing of exports of goods of a capital nature at concessionary rates of interest. The total amount payable this year is £663,500 but as only £350,000 was allocated in the original Estimate it is now necessary to provide an additional £283,500 for this service.

On subhead M—Irish Productivity Centre—the additional amount of £31,400 sought for the IPC is required to meet the cost of the national understanding and increased pay related social insurance and certain grade claims.

On subhead P—Irish Goods Council—the extra £5,000 is required to meet the cost of the national understanding.

On subhead T1—Grant to National Film Studios of Ireland Limited—an additional grant to the National Film Studios of Ireland Ltd. to cover unforeseen additional trading losses during 1979 is needed. The company are now experiencing serious cash flow problems and funds are urgently required to remedy the situation.

On Appropriations-in-Aid—there will be an overall deficiency of £920,000. The major part of the deficiency is due to a shortfall in receipts under the Petroleum and other Minerals Development Act, 1960, and from the EEC in respect of specific surveys. The gross deficiency has been partly offset by additional receipts from the IDA in respect of repayable grants for industrial housing; by an increase in receipts from export guarantee premiums and so on and under the Trade Marks and Patents Acts.

The total amount of the increased expenditure, together with the deficiency in Appropriations-in-Aid is £15,024,000 but there is an offset of £1,885,000 in savings mainly made up of £900,000 on Subhead I3—Industrial Development Authority—Grant for Industrial Housing, due to a procedural change in the method of payment by the IDA to the National Building Agency in respect of Industrial housing. There will, however, be no diminution in the IDA's commitments for Industrial Housing. Other savings on the voted provision include £140,000 on subhead L—Technical Assistance; £150,000 on subhead O1—Shipbuilding subsidy; £114,000 on subhead U—Energy Conservation; £180,000 on subhead DD—State support for Avoca Mines Limited and £150,000 and subhead BB, Petroleum Licences—Funds for training and so on. The net amount needed is, therefore, £13,139,000.

I have explained in the case of each subhead the reason for the increased expenditure but, if Deputies wish to raise any points in relation to them, I shall deal with them as far as possible in my reply.

I recommend this Supplementary to the House.

Mr. O'Toole

The Minister for Industry, Commerce and Energy has gone through a variety of subheads in relation to supplementary estimates. It is unfortunate that, so far this year, we have not had an opportunity to discuss the Minister's Department or the economy, despite the fact that the Fine Gael Party sought Government time in which to do so. We were told that we could discuss these matters in Private Members' time. The refusal to accede to our request could be an indication of the degree to which the Minister and his colleagues are trying to cover up the present state of the economy, knowing that a debate in Private Members' time would not suffice to give a clear picture of the position.

While most of the subheads mentioned by the Minister come up every year, there are some subheads which require a wider explanation than a mere statement of fact. For example, on subhead J2—SFADCo—there was an original estimate of £700,000 requiring a supplementary estimate of £750,000. The original estimate is only 50 per cent of the total requirement.

The next one is subhead K2, where the total amount needed is £350,000. To put it mildly that is not a very accurate estimation of what the needs might be.

The Minister's Department are responsible for running industry and a wide area of the economy. The scenario which faces us now in that area is one of a struggling economy trying to come to grips with many difficulties. Some of these difficulties are not of the Minister's or the Government's making, but some are. Industry at present, as was the case for most of this year, is struggling in the face of major difficulties. Not so many months ago there was no assurance of availability of oil supplies and no assurance of an adequate and continuous power supply. That is still the position. We spent half of this year without a postal service, something which militated very much against our industry. Another factor which has been a major problem is the poor industrial relations record we have. That was a major problem in the public sector. Other areas of difficulty included the shortage of skilled labour in the technical field, which was adverted to in other quarters recently.

Another matter which is making life difficult at present for industry is the credit squeeze. Small industries are facing a very lean time. In the past two to three weeks I have had many requests and contacts from people—many of them family concerns—who have been engaged in industries such as light engineering, fabrics, clothing and so on for many years and do not have any money. In many cases those industries did not receive any grants. Because of the financial restraints and regulations many of them are forced to have huge sums of money frozen in a bank while awaiting delivery of raw material from foreign countries. That difficulty, in conjunction with the credit squeeze, is placing an intolerable burden on many industrialists. Unless special measures are directed towards them, their survival is in grave doubt. Without sounding alarmist, many of them say they will have to let some of their employees go, something they never had to do before.

This is the kind of scenario which our economy faces. Many of the problems facing those people were created at home. Other problems were imported and the Minister and the Government had no control over them. The main imported problem was the increase in fuel costs which brought about a new difficulty which needs special attention. It is the Government's prerogative to point to this as being the source of all evil. The increase has been in the region of 50 per cent, but I should like to point out that four years ago this former Government faced an increase in fuel costs in the region of 300 per cent in a very short period. In spite of that massive increase, which brought with it consequential problems, the then Government handled the matter well. On leaving office they were able to prove that they had come to grips with the situation. Of course, that was not made clear until after the general election of 1977. That is clear now to anybody who cares to compare the record of the performance of the Government with that of the National Coalition.

Our economy is also suffering from miscalculations. We can all recall the budget earlier this year. In the run up to that budget people, including industrialists, were given to understand that things were going very well. They were told that there was confidence in the Government, who were capable of surmounting any problems that might arise, foreseen or unforeseen. The miscalculation I am referring to took place at budget time. When this country was told it was on an even keel, that inflation was on a downwards trend—as indeed it was in 1978—and we were told that it would continue to do so. Such was the confidence that the prediction was that a 5 per cent inflation rate by the end of this year was achievable.

An Ceann Comhairle

We are dealing with a Supplementary Estimate for Industry and Commerce.

Mr. O'Toole

I appreciate that.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy's remarks should be confined to the items covered in the lists circulated. The Deputy is making a speech more appropriate to the general Estimate debate.

Mr. O'Toole

Many of the subheads in the Supplementary Estimate refer to increased costs due to rising wage demands. I put it to the House that this increased wage demand syndrome we now face is due to the very thing about which I have been talking, that the prediction made in the early part of this year turned out to be way off the mark. In fact, the inflation rate predicted is one-third of what the actual inflation rate will be by the end of the year. Consequently, we are now dealing with Supplementary Estimates to meet that need caused by that miscalculation.

The other matter with which I want to deal is the prediction with regard to our gross national product.

An Ceann Comhairle

I am afraid that is rather wide of the mark on a Supplementary Estimate for Industry and Commerce.

Mr. O'Toole

Let me tie this in with the Supplementary Estimate before us. No doubt the Minister will be endeavouring to tell us, in winding up this debate, that industry is performing very well and will be able to quote certain figures giving that impression. Indeed, the resilience of industry in this country is such that, despite all the difficulties outlined, it is doing a very fine job. But it is feeling the pinch and this cannot be denied. The recent survey about the shortage of money, the credit squeeze, gives us ample evidence of the way in which our economy is going, and paints a very bleak picture for the immediate future. Of the 278 manufacturing firms recently surveyed in relation to their present position and the future, almost one-quarter stated that their existing level of output is currently constrained by lack of credit. One-third of them state that growth in output is currently constrained through lack of credit. Almost one half of them have cut back on material stock level because of lack of credit and, even where credit is available, because of exorbitantly high interest rates. Almost one half of them intend to cut back on material stock levels because of high interest rates. Nearly one-third of them in the current survey have already postponed investment projects because of the current high interest rates.

Those are some of the signs that our economy is literally being suffocated by factors over which it has no control but rather is caught up in this vicious circle of inflation, rising costs and interest rates, bringing a higher demand for wages. Yet we go on our merry train in this vicious circle.

I shall mention the subhead concerning the Institute for Industrial Research and Standards if only to put on the record what we feel on this side of the House about the recent vicious attack on that institute, an institute doing a very fine job in this country. In the past fortnight in this House we have had long discussions on an enabling Bill concerning this institute. It was unfortunate that the Minister failed to recognise the importance of amendments put down to ensure that the Minister for Finance would underwrite capital borrowed by this institute for certain purposes. In fact, in this case a precedent has been created. In a convoluted way, I suppose, it does not show in the institute the kind of confidence the Government ought to be showing. This more recent public attack on them should be refuted by Members of this House. It is an unwarranted, exaggerated and ill-informed attack on a body doing its utmost to fulfil its functions, indeed going beyond the call of duty in many instances to do so. The IIRS can be said to be doing their work in the manner expected of them. We must not tolerate this kind of attack being made on them inside or outside the country.

The Industrial Development Authority, a body set up by the Coalition Government to do a particular job, a body which at the time of its inception was frowned on as being typical of Fine Gael thinking——

Mr. Kelly

And they did not mean that as a compliment.

Mr. O'Toole

Obviously not. I am glad to be a member of the party that set up that body. I am glad also that it succeeded and that the people who saw fit to castigate it at the time are now fully behind it, as they should as good patriots and statesmen, because the IDA have proved their worth in the field in which they operate: the promotion of industry at home and the inducement of foreign industry here. In the past six to eight months I have often felt that the IDA must be suffering agony endeavouring to sell this country as the right place in which to establish industry because of the many factors I have outlined already over which they have no control and which must diminish their arguments in favour of this country. They must have felt the cold chill of the economic climate during the past few months. I am glad to say that despite that they are doing a very worthwhile, successful job as outlined by the Minister in the Limerick area.

The Irish Goods Council hide their light under a bushel and play their role in very low key fashion. The personnel of that council and their approach to their work is first class. We have many examples of their success. Their job is to promote the sale of Irish goods. This is a formidable task, given the conditions of trade which apply in a small open economy. They do not get the recognition they should get. They have a very definite role to play and I hope they will be given the means to play it. The council are composed of a very dedicated group of people who know what they are about and have a good record of success chalked up to prove that.

As a member of the Committee of Public Accounts I, with the other members, examine the Appropriation Accounts which bring us into close contact with the accounting systems in the different Departments. We commented in our recent report on one area of activity which we felt should be mentioned, that is exploration licences.

An Ceann Comhairle

I do not think exploration licences or the Public Accounts Report come into this Supplementary Estimate. This is a matter for another day.

Mr. O'Toole

I refer to it in passing.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy can understand the problem the Chair has. If everybody refers to something relating to the Public Accounts Report we could get very far away from the Estimates under discussion.

Mr. O'Toole

I appreciate the Chair's problem and I am sure you appreciate my problem. The matter to which I refer concerns the extra concessions which are given by companies above and beyond the actual contracts signed by them. The concessions given either in cash or kind——

An Ceann Comhairle

I am sorry but the Deputy is entirely off the relevant matter which comes under the many subheads relating to this Estimate under discussion.

Mr. O'Toole

It is probably the lateness of the hour which is causing me to go off the subheads. Córas Tráchtála Teoranta, another State body, are doing very fine work abroad in promoting the sale of Irish exports. The Minister, as his predecessors have done, and as part of his function, does a great deal in this area. I wonder if the announcements made after very successful tours by the Minister are not politically motivated in their timing? Nobody would be more happy than I if the Minister could announce 40 new projects on his return from a promotional tour abroad. It is the manner in which this thing is done which causes me to say that a lot of the good work done is ruined by the political bias brought into the scene at that stage. I suppose it is the way of politics which causes this type of approach. I hope the Minister will give us a full picture of what the current position of industry is and what the prospects are in the near future and in mid-term. The type of comment made by the Minister on radio a few weeks ago that the economy was booming is not worthy of a man of his calibre. It was a very generalised statement.

An Ceann Comhairle

This is not something for the Supplementary Estimate.

Mr. O'Toole

I hope the Minister will give the House and the people involved in industry some idea of what the future holds for them. Confidence and trust at the moment is in very short supply because the people are not being told what the position is. This refers not only to the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Energy but also to many of his colleagues. I hope that the Minister will be in a position to do that. Before I conclude, I hope that in the not too distant future the scenario that I have outlined for the industrial field will be changed and that we shall be in a position to look back and say that we have overcome our difficulties satisfactorily.

Mr. Kelly

I begin by protesting at the rush which has overtaken these Supplementary Estimates. It is true that, at least as far as my fairly short recollection of these things goes, the days coming up to the Christmas Recess tend to be crowded and the Estimates are shoved in at the end and whatever are outstanding are dealt with in a hurry. I remind the House that this is only 6 December, a Thursday. The House has frequently sat on a Friday and during quite long periods when I was Government Whip it sat on Friday, week in, week out, having sat on the Wednesday and Thursday up to 10.30 p.m. There are two full weeks left before anybody can start talking about the Christmas holidays. There is next week—in terms of ordinary sittings, 11, 12 and 13 December—and the week after, 18, 19 and 20 December. There can be no possible reason why the Government are short of time when we might have sat on Friday 14, or even Friday, 21 December. It would not kill anyone at all to sit on those days.

I object very much to business being done in the dark, which is what is being asked of the House this evening. We were told that the House would sit until 10.30 p.m., hours after—as everybody here knows and let us not be mealymouthed about it because this is the game we are all in on both sides of the House—the papers have gone to bed, hours after the media have ceased to pay any attention to what is happening in here. That is no way to do business. It might be all right if one were dealing with a Government such as we were, who had to put up with non-stop obstruction and filibustering from the day we took up office until the day we left office. It is fair to say that not one hour of this Dáil, since it met on whatever day it was in July 1977, has been squandered by the Opposition. Not a single unnecessary speaker has been pushed in to speak on anything since then. Any business done——

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy will come back to the Estimate.

Mr. Kelly

I am on the Estimate and on the fact that I am being asked to speak to that Estimate, or that the only opportunity I have of speaking to that Estimate is at 25 minutes to 10 on a Thursday evening.

I know it is a rather special week and sincerely understand that the Government—no matter who and what members are involved—have a serious decision ahead of them and that the Dáil will be asked to approve various things next week, which will necessarily take up a lot of time. I understand that and do not want to make little of it, or appear to want to make it look trivial because it is not trivial. However, this Dáil has not been characterised by obstruction. No one knows that better than the Minister himself. He has not had to sit here, night after night, listening to people being shoved for anything at all—people who knew absolutely nothing at all about the subject, with no reason other than to keep the House busy for the Ministers opposite, who in our day were relying on an overall majority in the first year of, at most, one. Later the position improved when we won a couple of by-elections. That was the kind of opposition we had to face.

That has not happened the present Government who have been treated reasonably and civilly for the past two-and-a-half years. There is no reason why, on 6 December, we should be kept here until this hour of the night to discuss Estimates in the dark—and I mean that from the point of view of the media. Not one word of what the Minister or anybody says, will be reported tomorrow and I am not going to be mealy-mouthed about that. We are in the business of publicity and of speaking to people and if people will not sit in the Public Gallery, the only way they will discover what is happening in the Parliament is through the media. The media are under time restraints as well as the rest of us and effectively what happens is that by 5 o'clock in the evening unless there is a very important and startling matter when a special quorum will be kept, nothing will be reported. In fact, we are lucky to be reported after lunch; that is the way it is these days. I know the media have constraints of various kinds but that is the reality. There is no reason whatever when there are two full weeks to go, why we should be here at this hour, an hour to which the Dáil has not sat, in my recollection, since 1975—fully four years, unless my memory is slipping. What is the reason for the rush now?

I want to mention another symptom of the rush—and I do not mean this personally against the Minister—the reason why we are sitting here at this hour in a situation in which, undoubtedly, the Members on the far side have things on their minds. If they were a Government of angels they would be right to be anxious about what is going to happen tomorrow and next week. I am not trying to trivialise that—it is an important thing for all of us—but that is no way to do business. This party do not mind being asked to sit extra time, or extra days, but to be asked to sit until this hour of the evening, not that any of us are tired or unwilling to do business, but to be asked to speak into the wind and in the dark is too much and for what, and with what excuse? There is absolutely no excuse. I do not intend this to be in any sense a personal attack on the Minister opposite. I have had many a brush with him in the past but, in a general way, I wish him well and cannot withold from him a certain regard for him. However, his speech here this evening was as graceless and as loveless a performance as I have ever witnessed in this House. He went through his Estimates speech—and I do not wish to be blasphemous—like a priest of 90 years of age reading the Latin Mass and hoping to get through it in 15 minutes, in the days when such a thing was possible. He did not even stop in between the subheads. He charged from one paragraph to another, from J1 and J2 to L1 and L2. He did not even bother to stop, nor did the person who wrote the script for him tell us what were the reasons for some of the things he mentioned. I would have liked to have had information, as I am sure Deputy O'Toole would have, about the background to the cash flow difficulties which our National Film Studios are having. I did not want a long speech.

Mr. O'Malley

Could I briefly interrupt the Deputy? I had a longer speech prepared for me and they took it off me a few hours ago and gave me a shorter one on the Whip's instruction, because the Opposition did not like Ministers speaking at length on Supplementary Estimates. They objected to it. I shall read out the long version for the Deputy if he wants it.

Mr. Kelly

I must tell the Minister this. He probably was over in Kildare Street, perhaps looking out the window to see could he spot that Spook of Schoolhouse Lane, the Industrial Development Consortium. He was so occupied a few hours ago when his colleague, the Minister for Education, spoke for one hour in replying to his piddling Education Estimate, having spoken, in the first instance, for a far shorter time than that. If he was all that interested in getting his business through quickly, he could have done better than speaking for one hour, so if the instructions of the Minister's Whip——

Mr. O'Malley

The Minister for Education must not have obeyed the Whip. I did.

Mr. Kelly

That is the conclusion I am driven to. The Minister for Education can have no regard for his Whip if he is capable of speaking for an hour on an evening when the Dáil is trying to pass 20 Estimates—not in opening his Estimate, but in replying to it. If the Minister for Education can see fit to waste the time of the Dáil at this hour of the evening and speak for an hour in replying to three or four Deputies who spoke from this side of the House——

Mr. O'Malley

If the Deputy started talking about the Estimate he would have more time for it.

Mr. Kelly

I do not feel it a constraint that we—all the rest of us— can weigh all that heavily. The Government, obviously, have time to burn and their Whip must be a man of no consequence among them. We can rule him out of the leadership stakes, if his word is made so little of and so light of by Zeus, the Thunderer.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy has covered that ground.

Mr. Kelly

No matter what I have said about Deputy O'Malley, and I hope to live to say many more things against him, he is not a man who is afraid to lead with his chin. I am amazed to hear him uncharacteristically shoving off on his officials the responsibility for having dropped from his speech an explanation as to why the National Film Studios are having serious cash flow problems. I would have liked to know in a couple of words what these cash flow problems were——

Mr. O'Malley

They are losing money.

Mr. Kelly

I know that, but why? Had Senator Keating, the Minister's predecessor been introducing a Supplementary Estimate and looking for money for Bula and had said that they were having cash flow problems without explaining what they were or how they had arisen, I can imagine the searing tones that we would have heard from Deputy O'Malley across the floor about it. I can appreciate that the National Film Studios are not a gold mine, they are not even a Bula mine, but I would have wished for some explanation. That is only a symptom of why I described this as as graceless and loveless a script as I have ever heard here. It could not be because anybody is short of time, when Deputy Wilson could spend one hour replying to his Estimate. This is just an unjustified attempt to clear the Estimates off the desk in the dark.

The only part of the Minister's Department for which I still carry Opposition responsibility is energy, and I have no intention of making a speech on energy at a time when anything I say will go no further than the ears of the Minister and his officials. I will make two points and will save the rest for a more propitious occasion. The Estimate contains an item for salaries, wages and allowances. It is not a saving but an increase. In this context I would like to draw attention to the very defective arrangements which the Minister has had in his Department in regard to proper advice on energy since he took office. I hope the Minister will not go up in smoke when I say this because I do not intend to reflect on anybody. I am sure that the Minister is served by a group of officials who are as dedicated and as hard working as is humanly possible, but he has not the kind of expertise necessary for an energy Minister in this day and age.

That became obvious in April this year and in the months thereafter, when we were unique in Europe in having queues at petrol stations and general panic. At that time no such thing had developed in any other European countries. The Minister's advice was so bad that he blamed the oil companies for hoarding and he accused them of keeping oil up their sleeves in Whitegate when the Department of Finance could have told him that their excise inspectors were using dipsticks on those tanks every day.

The information about the resources was available to the Minister if he had lifted the phone. The oil companies were the villians then, and when anybody spoke a word against that point of view he was accused by the Minister or by Deputy R. Burke, his man friday, of being the darlings of the oil companies. I was accused of being a darling of an oil company. I have no shares in oil companies but I have casual acquaintances who are employed in oil companies.

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy Burke is the Minister of State in the Department.

Mr. Kelly

Very well. I have often complimented him on his hard work but he can only do his best and say what is put into his mouth. It was put into his mouth by someone, to say that anyone who took a point of view different to that of the Minister was the darling of an oil company. That was the best his Department could do by way of reply. If anyone dared to whisper that the petrol panic which ruined the tourist season was the result of incompetence at the top and lack of expertise in the staff——

An Ceann Comhairle

What subhead is the Deputy discussing now?

Mr. Kelly

The Ceann Comhairle has suddenly woken up a good deal more than he was when Deputy O'Toole was speaking.

Mr. O'Malley

The Deputy is inclined to cover more ground than Deputy O'Toole.

Mr. Kelly

The Dáil is being asked to vote £600,000——

Mr. O'Malley

We have more words in five minutes from the Deputy, although not necessarily more sense.

Mr. Kelly

That may be so. The sum of £600,000 is being sought to meet the cost of implementing the terms of the national understanding and grade awards approved by the Department of the Public Service in this Minister's Department. I am absolutely in order in commenting on the quality of the Minister's official advice when we are being asked to vote this money. I will not apologise for staying on my feet a few minutes longer than it suits the Minister to have me here, although the Minister is in sunny form this evening, compared with other times.

Mr. O'Malley

I can return the compliment by saying that the Deputy is in his usual form.

Mr. Kelly

I have seen the Minister in a form when it was less of a pleasure to have him in the vicinity. Something must be turning up trumps for him. In some respects we may be not so far apart, but I hope——

Mr. O'Malley

God forbid.

Mr. Kelly

——I interpret the Minister's smile correctly. The quality of the advice the Minister was getting at the time of the oil shortage which was the product of the Iranian revolution at the beginning of this year, was very bad. No doubt his officials were doing their best but their best was not good enough and the quality of their advice was so awful that it left the Minister in a situation where he was able to wreck the tourist season and we were in the unique position of having petrol panic from April to July on a scale which existed nowhere else in Europe. We, out here in the Atlantic usually get the last ripple of a wave but on this occasion the tide first hit us just because of the incompetence of the energy section in the Department of Industry, Commerce and Energy and of the Minister. There was no way for us to get through that summer except with those panics. The Minister would not pay the higher price thinking he was striking a brave political posture.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is dealing with what is not covered by any subhead. The Deputy mentioned the subhead for salaries and wages but that does not allow him to make a long speech on a matter which is not covered. The Deputy is using a strategem.

Mr. Kelly

I am not using a strategem.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair will not permit it.

Mr. Kelly

It is early to be fighting with the Chair since we are going to be here all night, so I will defer to the Chair.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy has now been speaking for 20 minutes and he has only touched briefly on one subject.

Mr. Kelly

I am entitled to speak for an hour on an Estimate.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is entitled to speak for an hour but he must speak on the Estimate. The Deputy knows that very well.

Mr. Kelly

I put down questions during the year about the number of staff above the very junior level in the energy section in the Minister's Department and those questions elicited the information that there were no more people in that section than there had been three or five years ago. The section has not expanded and no experts have been seconded to it. The Department does not have what it takes to deal with the energy problem in this day and age. We saw during the year, absolutely fantastic occurrences which in any other country would have led to the Minister being laughed out of office.

The Minister for Foreign Affairs went off to Finland leading a goodwill tour. God knows what kind of goodwill we can have radiated to the Finns with their reindeers and their Christmas trees.

An Ceann Comhairle

That has nothing whatever to do with the Estimate.

Mr. Kelly

It has.

Mr. O'Malley

I object to the Finns being denigrated in this fashion.

Mr. Kelly

I am denigrating the Minister for Foreign Affairs. The Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Minister present are——

Mr. O'Malley

The Finns have more than reindeers and Christmas trees.

Mr. Kelly

One thing they have not got is oil. That is the thing that Deputy O'Kennedy did not know because when he came back to Dublin, the press conference he gave was to the effect that he had very useful talks with the Finnish National Oil Consortium and hoped for oil supplies to follow as a result. He might as well have been bringing home coconuts as oil from Finland because when Russia cut off their oil supplies in 1973 it nearly wrecked the Finnish economy. The briefing that man got from the Minister's Department was so poor he did not know it. That Minister was either too busy or too often abroad—and he spent too much of his time abroad—to warn his colleague where he was going and to brief him about it.

An Ceann Comhairle

The next Estimate deals with Foreign Affairs.

Mr. Kelly

If the House is still sitting I will be back. This Minister, I presume, is a partial beneficiary of the national pay agreement for which we are being asked to vote £600,000. Maybe I am wrong in thinking he gets his cheques from that head. Let me assume for a moment that he does. If so, let me express my opinion that he spends too much time abroad and allows his curates to look after the shop too much of the time.

I pay sincere tributes to Deputy Burke for his work as Minister of State in that awful thankless task of getting people to buy Irish. He is saddled with the political necessity of going through a series of motions which could not possibly have any other outcome than they had in countless previous "Buy Irish" campaigns, namely a very marginal outcome, even though we all wish it the best. He was saddled with the task of producing a turnaround of 3 per cent of national expenditure with an attendant growth of 10,000 new jobs, the figure mentioned in the manifesto. The wretched Deputy Ray Burke has to go from Skreen, County Sligo to Skibbereen day in and day out trying to get people to buy Irish when they cannot buy foreign goods fast enough in consequence of the lead they have been given from the top. That is an awful job and the Minister of State has done it manfully. I do not withhold that tribute from him.

He and Deputy Geoghegan-Quinn are left far too often in this House answering questions when they come here, which is not very often, and for that the Opposition must take the blame because we ask too many questions. When questions do come up the Minister is likely to be in Santiago or Sydney or anywhere but here. The whole point of having assistant Ministers is that they can go around the globe. Surely the Minister is not so vain as to suppose that in Hong Kong or Yokohama they will be able to tell the difference between himself and Deputy Ray Burke?

Mr. O'Malley

I hope even there they would.

Mr. Kelly

If an Irishman turns up they are as able to tell him from another Irishman as we are in telling two Chinese or Japanese from one another. If he says he is the Irish Minister for Industry, Commerce and Energy and if he has enough officials around him, like destroyers around a battleship to make it appear he is a person of consequence, he will be believed and what falls from his lips will be respected.

This Minister who carries the responsibility in government and to the people for what happens in his Department should be here minding the shop and let Deputy Geoghegan-Quinn or Deputy Ray Burke go to Yokohama for a change. I made this point in a disorderly way at Question Time——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

It is most disorderly now. This is a Supplementary Estimate.

Mr. Kelly

There are not many people in the House for whom I have a greater regard that the Leas-Cheann Comhairle but he has been in the Chair for only two minutes and now he is getting annoyed with me.

Mr. O'Malley

The Deputy is very good. He thinks the Japanese could not tell the difference between myself and Mrs. Geoghegan-Quinn.

Mr. Kelly

I did not quite say that.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

If I know the Japanese they would be well able to distinguish between the two of you.

Mr. O'Malley

The Chairman of the Diet in Tokyo would have stopped disorderly speakers long before this.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

They would have shot him.

Mr. Kelly

Only if the debate got out of hand and that has not happened here for a while. It is some time since the former Deputy James Dillon reported that in 1932 he saw an old gentleman at the change of government fitting together a machine gun in a telephone box. Those days have gone and I hope with every passing event the Civil War will draw more and more to a close. Those days have gone and we need not come to blows about these matters.

Since we are being asked to pass a Vote of £600,000 for this Department, it is fair to say that this Minister does not spend enough time in the shop. He is far too often abroad. I am not under the illusion that he is sunning himself on the beach. I know he is not, but he spends too much time abroad doing essentially representative work which could quite easily be done by one of his two subordinates. He should be here minding the shop. He must know what a difficult and vital shop it is.

The insufficient expertise on the energy section is something I criticised before. Another symptom of the inadequate advice and staffing his Department seem to have, possibly because of the structure, no doubt something inherited from the British, is visible in the fact that the Seán Lemass-type industrial development consortium, this spook of Schoolhouse Lane, not only does not have as far as I have been able to gather a single full-time member, but the Minister has to stop and think before he can tell the Dáil whether it has or not. He does not know. That is what he told the Dáil two weeks ago. I can tell him it has not, any more than it has a premises, an address, a letterhead, a telephone number or so much as an office cat. That is the Seán Lemass-type industrial development consortium that was going to get this country moving again. It is a phantom organisation.

Mr. O'Malley

If the Deputy sells a few more copies of that record it would be a best seller.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is there any money in this Supplementary Estimate for it?

Mr. Kelly

There is £600,000 for salaries, wages, allowances and travelling expenses——

Mr. O'Malley

If there is no office, employees and so on, how could money be spent on travelling expenses?

Mr. Bruton

Probably under consultancy services.

Mr. Kelly

The people who, during a notional period of the day, are attached to this consortium have to be paid. There is a curious thing about this consortium. When it was originally announced it consisted of 11 members. I understand from the Minister's reply to a question that it has divided itself into ten sub-groups. How could you divide 11 men into ten sub-groups and leave any group with anything to discuss? One would be able to have a conversation and the other nine would be silent.

The Seán Lemass-type industrial development consortium is a joke and it does not require any topping up of levity from me to maintain it in its status as one of the national jokes, and the number is growing all the time. What is not a joke is the kind of advice the Minister is getting and the fact that the structure he has behind him should be so poverty stricken that they are not able to provide a proper back-up for the tasks which the consortium might have to carry out. I am not saying there would not be a role for something like an industrial or national development consortium because there may be.

When we were in Government we were to some extent persuaded, and I was partly persuaded although with misgivings, by the Labour Party notion that there was a role here for a national development consortium or agency which would take up jobs for which private enterprise had no room or which private enterprise could not deal with. That was the idea we had. I had misgivings about it because I believed, I am sure the Minister shares this view, that if private enterprise will not touch a particular task there must be something in it which is loss-making rather than profit-making. Otherwise they would be in there quickly enough. I am suspicious about it. There may be undertakings which would be wealth-creating and employment-creating which a national development consortium or agency could do not so much from the point of view of making profit but of breaking even. It would not interest a businessman because he would not make a living out of it but on a breakeven basis it would enrich the country and provide employment. There is room for something like that. I cannot put my finger at present on particular tasks which it could do but I imagine it is not unthinkable. That is not what this industrial development consortium is about. It is not about anything, when I asked questions about it I got a lot of Kildare Street waffle about co-ordinating this and monitoring that, but it does not boil down to any concrete activity which is not already being carried on by the IDA.

I am sure the Minister will not be sorry to hear that I am coming to a close. Under the heading of savings the Minister said:

The total amount of the increased expenditure, together with the deficiency in Appropriations-in-Aid is £15,024,000 but there is an offset of £1,885,000 in savings mainly made up of £900,000 on subhead 13.... Other savings on the voted provision include £140,000 on subhead L—Technical Assistance; £150,000 on subhead O1—Shipbuilding subsidy; £114,000 on subhead U—Energy Conservation;...

The Minister generously offered to deal with points that anybody raised in his reply and I should be obliged if he would tell the House how it is possible in this year of all years to save on that vote.

Mr. O'Malley

If the Deputy reads the speech he will see that that amount is transferred to a different subhead under IIRS.

Mr. Kelly

In other words the IIRS are taking up this money——

Mr. O'Malley

And spending it on energy conservation. The full amount is spent. It is simply necessary for Government accounts purposes to put it under IIRS.

Mr. Kelly

What is wrong with spending more money on energy conservation and increasing the IIRS vote on its own account? Why this fiddling around with figures in a year in which it was possible for us to elicit, as we did earlier, that in 1978 the programme which Deputy Peter Barry, as Minister for Transport and Power had inaugurated of publicity for the purpose of energy conservation had been run down to zero? Such things make one wonder if one is living on the moon. Governments can slip on banana skins but this is incredible. This Department is not under pressure. On the contrary it enjoys a more complete consensus of public support in regard to most of its undertakings than any Department. We are all in favour of price control, consumer protection and energy conservation.

Mr. O'Malley

Unfortunately we are not.

Mr. Kelly

I know what the Minister means.

Mr. O'Malley

Few of us are in favour of it.

Mr. Kelly

What we are prepared to do is give him a cheer and a clap on the back if he makes a visible effort to get people interested in energy conservation. Although it was a dull uninspiring chapter, as the Minister mentioned, in his Green Paper published in July 1978 the impact which energy conservation has made on our energy demand is invisible. I am sure the Minister will not contest that. It is so small as not to be palpable. There is no sign in the pattern of life around one or even in official life that it has begun to bite or that there is any serious direction involved.

I asked the Minister a question last month which was taken by Deputy Burke in the Minister's absence about the programme of energy conservation. It is by no means negligible because the State owns a positive empire of buildings all of which have to be heated and lighted, apart from their fleets of vehicles. I got a lot of flummery from Deputy Burke about this and that. I asked for concrete instances of how any Department had made a worthwhile saving by following guidelines about temperature control and so on. He was not able to provide a single instance. He just said they are all doing it. That is as good as saying that none of them are doing it.

This Minister talks about energy conservation a lot and I know he realises the importance of it and how a unit saved is one which we need not import and how vital it is to get ahead with this. How is it possible to run down to zero an energy conservation publicity programme which Deputy Peter Barry, when Minister, had inaugurated? It does not make sense and it is a sign of muddled leadership from the Minister and his Department, insufficient expertise—I cannot blame the people for that because perhaps it found them unawares in 1973—and insufficient constant monitoring, to use the favourite Civil Service word, of what is going on in the regions of his Department subordinate to him. That is all I wish to say except to observe to the House that this is St. Nicholas's day, the feastday of Santa Claus and I hope it is not——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That has nothing to do with the Supplementary Estimate.

Mr. Kelly

I wish the Minister and his Department a happy and peaceful recess when the time comes.

An Ceann Comhairle

I am sure everyone will reciprocate that.

Mr. O'Malley

Be sure to send Irish-made Christmas cards.

Mr. Bruton

I echo what Deputy Kelly said about a saving on energy conservation. I note that it has been transferred to the IIRS which has received an additional sum of money. What was originally planned when that money was allocated to a separate subhead? When this money was voted to that purpose one would expect that it would have been spent in that way. The fact that it was moved to another subhead suggests that there was a change of plan. One should be told what the reasons were for the change. How was the remaining £300,000 which stays in the vote for energy conservation, subhead U, spent? Was the programme that was undertaken under that subhead unsuccessful to the extent that it was decided to cut it and hand the money over to the IIRS to spend instead? If so we should be told why this happened. The Minister sought to convey that it was purely an administrative or technical change. That I might accept if the entire vote for energy conservation was transferred to the IIRS vote. The fact that a considerable amount of money was spent under subhead U, and a slice of it was taken and transferred somewhere else suggests that there was some change of policy which we should have explained to us.

The vote for subhead 1.3 for industrial housing was one on which there was a significant saving. Of £1,000,000 voted little more than £350,000 was spent. If my recollection is correct there was a saving of a similar magnitude last year. I am speaking entirely from memory on this. It is odd that, if that was so, savings of that size should occur. There should be some explanation as to what is happening in the field of industrial housing. Is there some change of policy? What is the idea of having IDA grants for industrial housing when the National Building Agency are also involved, as well as the normal local authority programme and the programme of private house building supported by the State through the system of housing grants?

We have four means by which State moneys are put into housing. It seems strange, and essentially discriminatory, that because a person works in one particular industry he is offered housing under this subhead whereas if he works in another type of industry, even though he may have to make an equally large displacement of his family arrangements in order to be employed there, he does not qualify. Is this policy being questioned? Is that why there is such large underspending under industrial housing? We should have a further explanation than has been given in the Minister's introductory statement.

There has also been a saving in subsidies on ship building. Is that because fewer ships are being built or are ships being built more competitively so that less subsidy is necessary?

We should draw attention to the fact that in the early part of this year when the Estimate was introduced, £50,000 was provided for the expenses of the Film Board. Not a penny of that will be spent, because there is no Film Board. We heard from the present Minister—I heard it loud and clear when I was sitting where he is now—complaints about delays in the introduction of legislation. He is now hoist on his own petard in that he went to the extent of producing a subhead in an Estimate and obtaining money from the Minister for Finance for a Film Board which should be in existence but which because he has been either less industrious or less successful in getting legislation introduced, does not exist and the money must be handed back. He owes the House an explanation for that also.

Of all the Votes this year it is worth noting that the Vote for Industry, Commerce and Energy has had the largest increase—approximately 37 per cent over last year compared with an increase overall in Government expenditure of about 14 per cent, almost three times as much of an increase. One wonders if we are getting the value for which one would have hoped. We should look seriously at the comparative cost of creating jobs in industry. The cost of creating jobs through the IDA is quite high. I would think that the cost of preserving jobs in other sectors—agriculture for instance—would be considerably less. It is instructive to compare what has happened to the Industry, Commerce and Energy Vote this year with what occurred in regard to the Vote for Agriculture which has actually been cut—of all the Votes the only one that has been cut in the entire gamut of Government expenditure. We are basically an agricultural country. It is certainly true that expansion in agriculture stopped the flight from the land and there is an obvious necessity to create jobs in the industry. It seems there is something of a misallocation where there is such a large increase in the Vote for Industry, Commerce and Energy and a cut in the Agriculture Vote in the same year when one would have thought that basically they are both horses in harness pulling the cart in the same direction. That one should be so well fed and the other so undernourished seems to be a misallocation of resources which deserves comment.

Would the Minister give some indication of the work of the Irish Productivity Centre, which has an additional sum voted to it of £31,000. Would the Minister give a report on the work of this body? It is one which does not impinge very largely on one's consciousness in this House. I understand it is available to do consultancy work for firms in relation to problems of increasing productivity. I know that such services are also available from private sources and I should like to hear what distinguishes the work of the Irish Productivity Centre and warrants the considerable expenditure of almost £500,000 on its activities.

My final point relates to Córas Tráchtála, a very specific point as I am referring to personal experience in the matter. It concerns the possibility that Córas Tráchtála might consider locating an office in Hong Kong. I was there early this year and had discussions with people in the Hong Kong Government involved with external trade. Their market is expanding very rapidly, a market of approximately five million people, but what is more important is that it is a trading crossroads in Asia, where many goods are brought in in raw form and exported in complete form. It has the headquarters of many firms extending throughout the whole of east Asia. It would seem to be a very sensible arrangement if Córas Tráchtála were to open an office in Hong Kong. It would provide access to one of the most dynamic and fast-growing markets in Asia and a place also where they could make contact with other nations which are accustomed to deal with Hong Kong on a broad basis.

When I spoke to the trade personnel in the Hong Kong Government about their concern with getting goods into the European market they were at pains to say that, while they believe in free trade into Europe for Hong Kong goods, they also believe in free trade into Hong Kong for European and specifically Irish goods. They expressed some surprise that Ireland did not have a trade office there. That was said to me by a member of the Hong Kong Government civil service whom one would not expect to express an opinion of that nature. Considerable benefit would be derived by this country from the opening of such an office. It would be a facility to us also in relation to our new Embassy in Peking. It would liaise effectively with Peking. Many of the goods imported to service the Peking Embassy must come through Hong Kong, and if there was some Irish contact in Hong Kong in the form for instance of a Córas Tráchtála delegation it would facilitate the work of the Embassy in Peking which at the moment is quite isolated. I would hope that the opportunity will present itself for a wider discussion and that the Minister will bear in mind the last part of my speech.

Dr. O'Connell

There is very little I want to say in regard to the Minister's Department. However, there is one point to which I would like to advert. It is in connection with information which I have been seeking from the Department for quite a while. I had sought information about import licences which had been granted.

Mr. O'Malley

There is no subhead to cover this in the Supplementary Estimate and the Deputy knows the situation.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We can deal only with the subheads that are in the Supplementary Estimates. The Deputy will have to wait for the general Estimate to raise matters like that.

Dr. O'Connell

May I talk about the IDA?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Yes. There is money in the Supplementary Estimate for the IDA.

Dr. O'Connell

I am sorry the Minister has been rather testy in not letting me speak about this other subject because it is very important. However, I will get an opportunity, in a short time I hope, to discuss it and I will discuss it at length.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy knows the Minister has no authority to stop anyone from speaking. The Chair decides that.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan-Monaghan): The Adjournment Debate would afford an opportunity to discuss that.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy O'Connell, on the Supplementary.

Dr. O'Connell

I will mention briefly the IDA and the problems that can arise with regard to small industries. I have had occasion to make representations on behalf of people seeking grants from the IDA for small industries and I feel that the IDA, far from helping some people who are seeking help to set up small industries, are hindering them in every way.

I will give the example of one specific case to try to explain the situation that can develop. There is a lady who is making very nice traditional dolls here. They are expertly done. She sought a grant from the IDA to set up a small industry because she had done some investigations here and had found that these dolls were being made abroad and sold here. I sought advice from the IDA about it. They made it very difficult for her application to be considered. I say this because the IDA have great pride in their grants for small industries but they put every obstacle possible in this lady's way. They wanted to know projections for ten years. If one is talking about a small industry one is not in a position to talk about projections for ten years. They said she would have to show evidence of considerable orders for such goods. One cannot show evidence of orders if one cannot supply them.

This lady had some money; she had an accountant to provide some information. The IDA said they were keeping the situation under observation. I asked them when they would be able to come forward with some conclusions as to what happened and they said that they were keeping the situation under observation. I could not get that clarified; I could not get them to elaborate on it and the matter went on for almost two years. I consulted the Minister for Economic Planning and Development who took a specific interest in it and looked at every aspect of it and said it had great potential.

Mr. Bruton

That was the wrong thing to do.

Dr. O'Connell

Yes, it was the wrong thing to do. He showed great interest and said it had great potential. It went again to the IDA and again came back the remark that the matter was being kept under observation. I said that this lady wanted some help with premises, some grant towards setting it up. The matter went on for over two years without any conclusions being reached.

In the circumstances I wonder if the IDA and their small industries branch are serious about setting up small industries. This was a traditional industry. It could have expanded considerably. The craftsmanship was there and I feel that we should be talking about the craft industries here. In Denmark they have succeeded in establishing very successful small craft industries. Unless the IDA show more sympathy and concern for small industries like this they could demoralise many people who have the necessary expertise to set them up.

Will the Minister discuss matters like these with the IDA and say that it should be the IDA's intention to foster these and encourage and promote them in every way possible? In this way we can do a lot. We are lacking in small craft industries here that could be viable, that could be of great interest and concern to the country and they could have a good export market because they would be peculiar to this country. Denmark has built up a number of these small craft industries and they are very successful. We should be aiming to do the same.

Sometimes we are inclined to talk about bringing in multi-national companies and spending millions of pounds by way of grants. But we are all the time at the mercy of these multi-nationals and if anything happens on the world market, any recession in industry abroad, the industry in Ireland is very vulnerable and that is a dangerous situation to be in. I recognise the Minister has done trojan work in bringing industry here particularly in the chemical and pharmaceutical industries where there are major projects operating successfully but they are multi-national companies subject to the whims of executives abroad and if anything happens the market internationally we are very vulnerable; it could leave us in a very dangerous situation with the workforce here. I would be more concerned to talk about the indigenous industries, the ones suited to Ireland. This small craft industry is one to which the IDA could pay a lot more attention. I admit that it is very nice to talk in terms of a £10 million industry with perhaps 3,000 workers but many of these are heavily costed; what we are spending per worker can be enormous. I hope the Minister will give a little more attention to this.

I do not think we finish at 10.30. I suppose we do not.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We do finish at 10.30. Does the Deputy want to adjourn the debate?

Dr. O'Connell

I was holding on for Health and Social Welfare because I was told the Dáil was not ending at 10.30 p.m.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

It is, of course. Is the Deputy moving the adjournment of the Debate?

Dr. O'Connell

No. It is not 10.30.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister, to reply.

Minister for Industry, Commerce and Energy (Mr. O'Malley)

I am delighted to have the opportunity to reply to all the questions I was asked but I am afraid it is just not possible to do so in one minute. From my point of view it is very unfortunate. Do I complete this tonight or can I go on with it some other day?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Let the Minister move the adjournment of the debate.

(Interruptions.)

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister may move the adjournment of the debate. There is no need to finish it tonight.

Mr. O'Malley

I move the adjournment. I move also that, by agreement, the Dáil adjourn until 11 a.m. on Tuesday, 11 December 1979.

Debate adjourned.

The Dáil adjourned at 10.30 p.m. until 11 a.m. on Tuesday, 11 December 1979.