Deputy Mitchell has received permission to raise on the adjournment the subject matter of question No. 14 on to-day's Order Paper dealing with the building of railway passenger carriages at the Inchicore Works, Dublin. The Deputy has not more than 20 minutes.
Adjournment Debate. - Building of Railway Passenger Carriages.
First of all, I should like to express my thanks to the Chair for allowing me the opportunity of raising on the adjournment this urgent, important very grave matter. I note that the Minister for Transport is not present. I understand he is absent abroad. I accept that. I note also that the Minister of State at the Department of Transport is not present. I understand he has an engagement in his constituency, which I can understand also. I hope their absence will not in any way diminish the seriousness or importance the Government attach to this question. I am grateful to the Minister for Labour and his Minister of State for standing in on the subject. I hope they will see to it that this question receives the serious and sympathetic attention it deserves.
The question to which I am referring is that of the future of the CIE Works in Inchicore, Dublin. The Minister of State at the Department of Transport answered questions in this House to-day in what I would have to consider a most unsatisfactory manner. That is why I sought permission to raise this matter on the adjournment this evening.
Major issues are involved in this question. The proposal by CIE is to dispose of at least one-third of their Inchicore Works to a German company known as Linke, Hoffman Busche. At a glance that might sound a very reasonable proposition but it is a very serious one because of what went before it. It would seem—and I hope I am wrong in this—that semi-State bodies are empowered, without reference to parliament, to dispose of some of their assets and to make basic policy decisions of that nature, to sell from public to private enterprise without any apparent political or parliamentary decision. The reason this proposal is being viewed with such seriousness and alarm at Inchicore Works is because of what went before it. As somebody born and reared in Inchicore, whose parents were born and reared there, I suppose I am emotionally involved to some extent; not alone that, I speak also as one who has four brothers all of whom worked in CIE in Inchicore. Every family in Inchicore has some connection with CIE Works in one way or another. In fact Inchicore was built around the CIE Works over the past 150 years. There was nothing in Inchicore except farmland until the CIE railworks was built there and subsequenly the bus works about 150 years ago.
In 1973 CIE disposed of the bus-building enterprise at Spa Road, Inchicore, to a company known as Van Hool McArdle. I raised this question in the House this afternoon and, lo and behold, what are the headlines in the evening papers—the Evening Herald:“CIE is sued for £2½ million” and the Evening Press:“CIE sued for £2.6 million by Van Hool McArdle”.
I would suggest to the Deputy that it might not be wise to get into a debate on something that appears to be before the courts somewhere or other.
I shall not dwell on it. It is in the Belgian courts, because Van Hool McArdle were principally a Belgian concern.
If it is before any court it would not be wise to discuss the court aspect of it; that is all the Chair is saying.
I shall not; I shall accept the Chair's ruling.
In 1973 the unions at Spa Road, Inchicore, came to an agreement with CIE, following negotiations, to dispose of the bus-building enterprise there to this Belgian private enterprise company called Van Hool McArdle. From beginning to end that relationship was a disaster. It lasted for a few years and the end result was as follows: hundreds of skilled men were thrown out of work, incidentally, after continuous bad labour relations from the moment Van Hool McArdle took over. CIE, as part of the guarantees they gave at the time of the take-over by Van Hool McArdle, offered employment to all those Van Hool McArdle employees who had previously been in the employment of CIE and, to be fair, CIE lived up to that commitment, to this extent, that they reemployed all the craftsmen in Inchicore Works at their new bus maintenance depot, which used to be in Spa Road. I understand there are now about three times as many men in the bus maintenance depot as are needed. Therefore, they are carrying, as a result of this fiasco, three times as many craftsmen as are needed. Secondly, some of those craftsmen who were employed by Van Hool McArdle, subsequent to the disposal by CIE, were offered unskilled work. Many of these skilled men are now carrying out unskilled work, in CIE and elsewhere, and some are still unemployed. In brief that is what happened to Van Hool McArdle.
Now CIE propose doing the same with the railway works. For some years now no new rail coaches have been built at Inchicore Works, mainly because of lack of capital from their political masters; perhaps there are other reasons. Those coaches were always built at Inchicore and built very well indeed. It is proposed now that the same thing happen with the railway works as happened with the bus works, that it be disposed of to another continental private enterprise company, with more guarantees. Deputies may have read in the paper that strike notice has been given. Strike notice has been deferred twice. Thankfully talks are going on between congress and the board of CIE in an endeavour to reach some sort of settlement. But I can tell the House that there is widespread fear and alarm in Inchicore that another Van Hool McArdle will be perpetrated on them. It affects more than just those craftsmen, the latest in generations of craftsmen; it affects the entire population of Inchicore, some 15,000 people.
I want to ask the Minister for Labour to spell out categorically in the House this evening—on behalf of his colleague, the Minister for Transport —whether or not CIE are empowered to make this decision about Inchicore Works, or whether it will be a political decision; whether or not the Government will decide on the disposal of public enterprise assets. That is the first thing I want made clear by the Minister this evening: will the Government—as indicated in the uncertain replies of the Minister of State in the House this afternoon—make the final decision in this regard and, if so, will they agree to meet a deputation from the workers and unions at Inchicore Works to discuss the full ins and outs of this question? While the proposal is that approximately one-third of Inchicore Works be disposed of, there is widespread fear that the very disposal of that one-third will threaten another one-third dependent on the first, thereby threatening virtually the whole existence of Inchicore Works. The population of Inchicore, and I who represent them, are not prepared to sit idly by and see this work force being destroyed. We want a guarantee from the Government that the interests of the work force at Inchicore will be safeguarded and given more consideration than the work force at Spa Road.
I should like to mention one other aspect and I am reluctant to drag it in now. In his reply to the question today the Minister, Deputy Killilea, stated that CIE feel they have not the capacity themselves in regard to the type of new modern coaches that would be required for this sophisticated equipment. He spoke about CIE not having at their disposal the skills and the capacity required. Where did Linke Hoffman Busche get the skills? Where did Van Hool McArdle get them? In Inchicore there is a trained work force. The CIE proposal is to provide the coaches in Shannon—good luck to Shannon—where the workers will have to start from scratch and be trained. I do not accept that Linke Hoffman Busche are able to get the skills required and that CIE are not.
I do not accept the argument in regard to the propriety of transferring public enterprise assets to private enterprise. I am a believer in a mixed economy and allowing private enterprise to have its say, but it is well known that private enterprise will not go into loss makers where public enterprise must operate if a social service, such as CIE provide, is to be given. Naturally, Linke Hoffman Busche will not take over the losing part. They will take over the bit that is potentially profit-making.
This does not make sense particularly in view of the willingness at all times of the Inchicore work force to adapt, to accept change, to learn new skills as they have done in the past 150 years. Therefore, I ask the Minister for Labour to convey to his colleague, the Minister for Transport, and to the Government the great distress this has given rise to in Inchicore and in surrounding districts. I want the Minister to see that this will be raised at Cabinet level and that the interests of the Inchicore work force will be taken into account.
Ballyfermot is nearby and many of the Inchicore work force come from there. Newspapers in the past few weeks have been stating that Ballyfermot has the highest unemployment rate in the country. Are the Government to add further to this deprivation? Will they treat it as Spa Road was treated? I want a statement from the Minister that this will be raised at Cabinet level so that the Government can meet a deputation of the Inchicore workers and their unions to discuss the matter.
First of all, I wish to express regret at the unavoidable absence of the Minister for Transport. The Minister of State has a commitment, not a constituency one as has been stated, to meet a group with much wider interests than his constituents. I can assure the Deputy that their absence does not mean lack of Government concern in this respect.
CIE in drawing up their proposals for mainline and suburban rolling stock requirements over the next decade developed a proposal for the establishment of a rail coach building industry at Inchicore. While CIE in the past had manufactured railway carriages, they considered that the technology and design of present-day carriages was such that it would not be practical for CIE to manufacture them efficiently and economically. In the light of this situation and to ensure the maximum employment content of the project CIE consulted a number of manufacturers with a view to having the carriages constructed in Ireland and they chose a German firm as being the most suitable.
The setting up of a coach building industry in Ireland would be dependent on the level of orders for rolling stock from CIE. While a decision has been taken by the Government, at a cost of £46 million, on the electrification of the Howth-Bray line, including the provision of new rolling stock, no decision has been taken yet on CIE's proposals for mainline coaches or for a Rail Rapid Transit System for the Dublin area.
A decision in these matters will depend on the outcome of the report of the Transport Consultative Commission on passenger transport in the Dublin area, which is expected shortly, and on the study of CIE which is being carried out with the aid of a firm of management consultants.
At this stage, therefore, it is not possible to say how CIE's rolling stock requirements will be met, whether by the establishment of the proposed coach building industry or otherwise. However, the Minister is taking steps to ensure that these inter-related matters will be dealt with as quickly as possible. I have taken note of the observations made by the Deputy and these will be fully considered.
The Minister is on record as having said:
The Commission will shortly be presenting its report to me. As soon as I receive this report I will be determining my strategy for action in this area. At this stage, I have an open mind on the issues involved and I am not excluding any options.
I should like to emphasise that a decision has not been made on the CIE proposal and, therefore, no commitment has been given.
The Dáil adjourned at 8.50 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 25 March 1980.