I have allowed a Private Notice Question in the names of Deputies Colley, G. Fitzgerald and others.
Private Notice Question. - Whitegate Oil Refinery.
andFrench asked the Minister for Industry and Energy, in view of this morning's statement by the oil companies, if he will now issue a statement guaranteeing the future of the Whitegate Oil Refinery in the interests of the approximately 150 employees and in the national strategic interest.
I would refer Deputies to a press statement issued by the Minister for Energy today and copies of which are available in the Library. This statement indicates that the Government are considering whether it would be in the public interest to purchase the refinery and that the shareholders in the Irish Refining Company have agreed, at the request of the Government, that the present status of the refinery and the work-force thereat will be maintained until the end of February. During the interim period the Government will have obtained additional economic and technical information which they will take into account in making a decision. Consultants are being engaged for this purpose.
Is the Minister of State aware that when I was Minister for Energy I informed the oil companies that it was not acceptable to the then Government, from a strategic point of view, that this country should be left without any active refining capacity? If he is so aware does he agree with that stance? If he does agree with that stance can he and will he now give, on behalf of the Government, an unequivocal undertaking that the Whitegate Oil Refinery will be kept open and active and that the staff will be kept in employment?
As I stated in my reply, the Government are seeking additional economic and technical information regarding the refinery and are in the process of engaging consultants to get this information. As soon as that report comes to hand the Government will take a decision in the best interests of the people of Ireland.
The Minister of State may or may not be aware that this morning the chairman of the refining company said to the employees, amongst other things, that if the Government did not purchase the refining plant the refining company would scrap it. That would suggest that it has not very much value in the eyes of the refining company. I am sure the Minister of State will appreciate that I have no wish to interfere in any way with the Government's negotiating stance in this regard. But I am asking the Minister of State once more for a firm undertaking that, because of the strategic national interest involved, the Government will ensure that we are not left with no refining capacity in this country. Can the Minister of State give us that undertaking, from which will follow the undertaking I have sought in regard to the staff? I have no desire, nor have my party, to interfere with the Government's negotiating stance — in other words, however it is achieved is a matter for the Government — but the essential thing is that it be achieved. The House and the country want an assurance from the Government that that is the Government's stance which will ensure that we are not left without refining capacity.
A very comprehensive report is being sought from consultants regarding the technical and economic operation of the refinery. When this comes to hand — and the Government need it otherwise they cannot take a decision on the matter — it will be considered fully by the Government and a decision then taken on it.
I do not wish to prolong the matter but I must say I find the Minister of State's reply disturbing. Does the Minister of State not accept that it is essential for us, particularly as an island, to have some refining capacity within our jurisdiction? If he does, does he not accept that whatever the nature of the report the Government receive it does not alter that basic fact? If we proceed from there, then whatever other steps are necessary in regard to the refinery, in regard to the companies that own it, is a matter for the Government. But the essential feature is that we retain refining capacity. Does the Minister not accept that?
This question is being considered in the public interest and, as the former Tánaiste should know, the situation at the refinery is complex——
I know that.
——for a number of reasons of a technical and financial nature. I am sure the former Tánaiste would accept that it is important that the right decision be taken. If the consultant's report indicates that the refinery can be viable and meet the needs of the Irish economy, then I am sure the Government will take a positive decision. If different information comes from the consultant then the Government will have to consider the matter in the light of the information then available.
Surely it would be the gravest dereliction of duty if the Government came to the conclusion that we should have no refining capacity.
The Government need information and as soon as it is available we will make a decision.
I appreciate that the Government need information on various aspects of this, and that the shape of the final decision will depend on that information. Since the Minister has intervened, may I urge him to reassure the country, whatever else happens and whoever else suffers because of the decision the Government will have to make, that the Government will not leave this country without refining capacity.
All relevant factors will be taken into consideration.
Did I understand the Minister of State to say that the Minister had made a statement and that a copy of the statement is in the Library of the House?
That is correct.
When was this statement made and why was this statement not made available as a matter of courtesy to those Members who have put their names to this question?
The statement was made this morning and placed in the Library of the House.
Why was it not made here?
The Dáil was not sitting this morning when the statement was made, so the courteous thing to do was to put it in the Library.
I asked the Minister of State to state the time the statement was made and the time at which it was placed in the Library, obviously in response to the question put down by Deputy Colley and the Cork Members.
That is not correct.
The companies issued a statement——
Rather than treating the Members of this House in the manner in which they are being treated by some members of the Government, I would ask the Minister of State to read this statement and we might then be somewhat wiser.
The refining company made a statement this morning and in response the Tánaiste issued a statement.
Could the Minister of State explain how it is possible for the Members who framed the question to have a copy of the statement from the oil companies and yet be denied a statement from the Tánaiste?
Had the Members gone to the Library they would have got the statement, as they would if they had requested it from the Department.
This House is entitled to have that statement read or is it that the Tánaiste, the Leader of the once proud Labour Party, has no interest in the workers at Whitegate oil refinery?
The Deputy's imagination is working overtime but it will not hold his place on the Front Bench.
The statement is as follows:
The Government have given detailed consideration to the situation which has arisen from the decision by the companies concerned to cease refining operations at Whitegate because of the scale of the present and future dis-economies which they see in such operations as compared with the alternative of importing all their requirements in processed form.
The Government have been examining whether it would be in the public interest to purchase the refinery and have it operated on their behalf. The Government are satisfied that the economic and technical information at present available to them is not sufficient to enable the Government to make an assessment with a reasonable degree of confidence, of the implications of purchase and operation of the refinery by or on behalf of the State.
The position was discussed at meetings between the Tánaiste and Minister for Industry and Energy, Mr. Michael O'Leary, T.D., and the Minister of State, Mr. Eddie Collins, T.D., with the directors of the Irish Refining Company in Dublin, at a meeting in London between the Tánaiste and the Chairman of the Irish Refining Company, Mr. R. L. Lintott and also at a meeting attended by the Taoiseach, Dr. Garret Fitzgerald, the Tánaiste and the Directors of the Company. The Government have therefore proposed, and the companies have agreed, that the present status of the refinery should be maintained by the companies for a further period of about three months, i.e. until the end of February next.
During that period the Government will have prepared or commissioned a number of reports and studies covering economic and technical issues on which they consider that further expert, authoritative advice is necessary before a final decision can be reached on the policy they should adopt in this important matter.
When was the last of the meetings held with the oil companies concerned or with the directors of the refining company? When were the Government informed of the announcement made this morning by the oil companies? When were they told of that decision? Would the Minister of State not agree that it is not a deferment of three months but a mere two-and-a-half months, which includes the Christmas period and increases the urgency with which the Government must make a decision on this important matter?
Do I take it that it is only now that the Government are seeking a comprehensive report on the oil refinery?
In reply to Deputy Gene Fitzgerald, the last meeting was held eight days ago. In reply to Deputy Wyse, some matters of an important technical and economic nature need to be examined and for that reason the Government are commissioning a report.
Would the Minister give the name of the firm of consultants?
The consultant has not yet been appointed but even if he were appointed I would not feel obliged to give his name to anybody.
(Interruptions)