The Taoiseach proposes making a statement on Fords of Cork.
Death of Mr. Seán MacEntee. - Closure of Ford Plant in Cork: Statement by Taoiseach.
Before the Taoiseach makes his statement, the Chair told me it would be in order to raise a question at any time other than Question Time——
That shows the way the Chair is misrepresented. I said it would be less out of order later on than it was at that time.
I am sorry, Sir, that is not what I understood the Chair to say. Can the Chair explain how two relevant Private Notice Questions on the closure of Fords could be disallowed? Surely I am entitled to that explanation in this House on an occasion like this?
I considered the Private Notice Question submitted by Deputy Fitzgerald; I considered carefully the advice I got on it from my experts and in accordance with Standing Orders and precedents I ruled it out of order. My private secretary conveyed that decision to the Deputy and, I understand, also conveyed to him in detail the reasons.
If that is Dáil reform——
I am calling the Taoiseach.
In the light of the ruling of the Ceann Comhairle I considered it proper to make a statement to the House.
I wish to inform this House and the people of Cork of the Government's reaction to yesterday's announcement that the Ford Motor Company will later this year close their plant in Cork.
I must first express my profound regret and surprise at the closure announcement because of the hardship this decision will create for so many families in Cork and of the damage which the loss of so much employment will cause to the economy of Cork and the nation.
I wish to say that the Ministers for Industry, Trade, Commerce and Tourism and for Foreign Affairs sought, on 29 December last, a meeting with the top management of the Ford Company.
The Government are prepared, as we have always been, to sit down with Ford management, either local or international, to see what options are open by way of State action to enable the assembly of cars to continue in Cork. My understanding is that the unions involved are similarly disposed to see what they could do to achieve this objective. If, as a result of a full examination of all feasible options, vehicle assembly is adjudged no longer to be viable in Cork, we are equally committed to sitting down with Ford management to examine all possible options for State action to assist Ford replace the vehicle assembly operation with another manufacturing facility.
I wish to inform the House that the Industrial Development Authority have established two task forces at senior management level, the first to prepare urgently a detailed presentation for and to undertake negotiations with the Ford Motor Company on how it can manufacture automotive products in Cork on a profitable basis as many other companies already do in this country, and the second to co-ordinate the entire industrial promotion campaign around the Cork area with particular attention to initiatives that can produce results in the short term.
I also wish to announce that I am establishing a small, high level expert working group — I will bring this before the Government later today — to advise the Government urgently on the impact of the measures already being taken to provide jobs in the Cork area, on the action necessary to provide additional new jobs and on all action possible to safeguard existing viable jobs in Cork. This group will, of course, liaise closely with both IDA task forces.
I can assure the House and the people of Cork that the Government will take all action open to them on receiving reports from the IDA task forces and the expert working group at the earliest possible date.
I regret that this sad and sorry occasion has arisen in this House. It is perhaps the most poignant occasion on which I have ever had to speak in very briefly discussing the announcement yesterday evening of the closure of the Ford car assembly plant in Cork. While I accept the explanation you, Sir, have offered I am at a loss to understand how any experts advising you in a democracy, such as we have, could advise you that an elected public representative could not on an occasion like this be enabled to ask two very relevant Private Notice Questions following immediately on the announcement of the closure of this car assembly plant. I am, I think, entitled to say what the content of those questions is. First, I asked if the Taoiseach would be prepared to head a delegation to meet the Ford management in the United States in an effort to have this decision reversed. The second question I asked was if the Taoiseach would immediately establish an emergency job creation task force for Cork headed by a Government Minister and representative of all interests in an effort to counter the huge job losses in the area. Obviously that second question has got some limited response in the statement the Taoiseach has just read out.
Before going further I think I should draw the attention of the Taoiseach to the fact that his statement disappoints me intensely. It does not seem to be in line with the utterances of the Minister for Industry, Trade, Commerce and Tourism yesterday afternoon and again last night when he stated that Fords would not be allowed to walk away from Cork. I welcomed that statement and promised the support of myself and my party.
The statement just made by the Taoiseach appears to be much milder in tone and weaker than I would have expected. In fact it can be described as somewhat condescending. I fail to understand such expression as: "The Government are prepared, as we have always been, to sit down with Ford management, either local or international, to see what options are open, by way of State action to enable the assembly of cars to continue in Cork". Big deal!Surely that is the least that could be expected of a Government. What leadership will they give? What initiatives are they prepared to take?
In the preceding paragraph the Taoiseach said: "I wish to say that the Ministers for Industry, Trade, Commerce and Tourism and for Foreign Affairs sought, on 29 December last, a meeting with the top management of the Ford Company." Let us go into that now. This being a very limited debate, the demands of this party cannot be adequately met. We have a statement but it is a statement which does not allow my Cork colleagues and others on this side an opportunity of speaking and I suggest nothing less than a full debate in Government time is called for. When I submitted my questions, my party colleagues, Deputy Pearse Wyse, Deputy Wallace and Deputy Denis Lyons appended their names. On our arrival here four other Deputies from Cork constituencies, Joe Walsh, Daniel Moynihan, Ned O'Keeffe and Michael Ahern suggested their names should also be added.
Fords touches every home and every person in Cork because everybody had either a friend or a relative in Fords and the difference between this and the announcement of the Dunlop closure is that that announcement was made during the Dáil recess and unfortunately before the Dáil resumed it had become a reality. But the Dáil is now in session and the Taoiseach has an obligation to ensure that every step is taken to prevent this becoming a reality. I deliberately avoided and I will continue to avoid making this a political issue. We will support the Government. We will support them in every way possible in the interests of saving that plant in Cork.
A few points have to be brought to notice here. We are told 800 jobs will be lost. How many more will be affected by the loss of that 800 jobs? To their credit Fords were a good company by Irish standards. I say this in a complimentary way to them even though I do not agree with the way in which they have made this announcement or the shortness of the notice given. They purchased most of their components in the Cork area and certainly in the Republic generally. I refer to such components as paint, glass, springs and so on. The gate of Fords was a traditional stage for the sale of the Cork Examiner and the Evening Echo. The Marina, once the industrial hub of Cork business life, because of the closure of Dunlops and now the imminent closure of Fords, will be no more.
I steered away from the statement about the Ministers for Industry, Trade, Commerce and Tourism and for Foreign Affairs on 29 December, seeking, a little less than three weeks ago, a meeting with the top management of the Ford company. I am not sure whether that means Irish, European or United States management. But, whatever it means, I wonder why it took so long to seek that meeting because in April of last year the trade union movement in Cork requested a meeting between the Government, the trade unions and the management of the company. All Cork public representatives on both sides of this House pressed for that meeting. I understood the meeting had been fixed for 14 December. It did not take place. For what reason I do not know, but I assumed that that meeting would have been rearranged, not for December but certainly for a date early in the New Year. I now understand from the Taoiseach's statement that no effort was made to fix that meeting until 29 December. If that is the case someone has been remiss. All I am saying is that when you present a statement to the House it should be clear and detailed on an occasion like this and should not be one that cannot be understood. I do not know whether it refers to the meeting originally requested or to a new meeting. One could take either interpretation.
I welcome any move to help the Cork unemployment situation which now, if we take the city alone, stands at 12,600 unemployed or an increase of 25 per cent on this time last year. If we combine city and county we talk of a total unemployment figure of 23,000. That does not include the Tungsram announcement last week or Blackwater Cottons announcement last week or the Ford announcement. I do not know what the Taoiseach expects from the high level expert working group which he now proposes to appoint to advise the Government. I expect they will be appointed today and asked to meet tomorrow and I suggest to them that before the Minister for Finance announces his budget proposals next Wednesday some proposals for Cork must be brought to his notice. Never let me have to stress again the urgency of the deepwater berth project. I heard the Minister for Foreign Affairs 11 months ago saying he hoped that the next time he referred to the deepwater berth it would be in a positive way, providing funds. It has been referred to many times since without any money yet being provided.
I believe there must be a lower river crossing; the ferry must be restored, and I do not mind who runs it. Either of the State companies are welcome to it and if there are squabbles I am not interested. I also want to see an improvement of the entrance routes to Cork. The section from Watergrasshill to Cork city has been long in need of improvement. That is urgent but above all I want a better and more flexible approach by the IDA. When Ferenka fell the people opposite made a lot of noises. At that time Deputy O'Malley as Minister for Industry and Commerce increased the possible grant ceiling to industry from the IDA from 45 per cent to 60 per cent. The same thing should be done now in the case of Cork as a matter of extreme urgency. The IDA must be encouraged perhaps to take greater risks at times. I believe that ICC and Fóir Teoranta should also be involved in the working group in order to cope with the situation which is becoming alarming at this stage. Cork needs a restoration of confidence, a sort of impetus and morale boosting because it has been dealt blow upon blow upon blow and this now the most serious of them all.
Dunlops and Fords were regarded in Cork as solid bastions of employment where when once employed you could be sure of life-time work. That era has now ended and I believe the Government have an obligation — so do we all and we will all share it with them and support them — to endeavour to establish what options are left. They must exhaust every possibility of car assembly continuing. If that cannot be done what alternatives are open? How many if not all of the workforce can be retained?
The Taoiseach informed the House that the IDA had established two task forces at senior management level for different purposes. When were they appointed? Why did we not hear of this long ago particularly when last April the trade union movement asked the Minister for Industry and Energy for meetings to discuss the situation on a tripartite basis? The efforts being made now should have been made sooner. The Taoiseach explains what each task force is assigned to do but it is surprising, in view of the knowledge that is available to the Minister for Industry, Trade, Commerce and Tourism — I accept entirely that he did not know of yesterday's announcement — that nothing was done before now. It is unfortunate that we see here the cold face of a multinational taking a decision affecting the lives and livelihoods of so many people, affecting the very fabric of Cork society and undermining its structure.
We hear experts talk of the efficiency of some of the "ginks". You cannot compare a 1,300 per day plant with a 90 or 100 car a day plant. The recession worldwide is hitting the car industry but this is a major blow to an area already stricken. The Ford company owe something to Cork and Cork owes something to the Ford company also. The ethnic connection is there. I believe this is the only Ford company in the world carrying the name "Henry Ford and Son". The name goes back to an old Cork family. The original Henry Ford was a Corkman. Does his memory cut no ice now, the man that was responsible surely for the huge empire that has been built?
I understood and expected the Taoiseach to state that his Minister for Industry, Trade, Commerce and Tourism had already arranged a visit to Detroit which he said yesterday he was endeavouring to arrange. I thought it would have been arranged by now. If it is not, I suggest that it be arranged immediately and that the delegation be headed by the Taoiseach if possible. It should be small but yet representative of all the interests involved. Surely the interest most involved is that of the workers who have been loyal to that plant. I think we can all agree that this was an excellent work force. There may have been difficulties from time to time but overall this was a well managed and well organised plant but not big enough to be comparable with the giants of today's world.
I believe the old connection must be used on this occasion. To his credit Deputy Coveney last night suggested a political initiative. We on this side of the House would be prepared to support any such initiative. I am disappointed that the Taoiseach in his statement has not indicated what initiatives may be taken by the Government. It is not enough to say that they are prepared to sit down and discuss with Ford's management what might be done. They must ask Ford management to meet them at all levels. There are three — local level, European level and, above all, Detroit level. This has been a traumatic experience for so many people. I know that discussions are still taking place and believe that the approach of all concerned has been extremely responsive. I am not aware of the content of those discussions. They are being held behind closed doors, in confidence. We all await their outcome and the subsequent announcement. This Government have an obligation, on which they will have our support, to exhaust every possibility as to whether car assembly can continue in Cork and, if not, what worthwhile alternative options can be provided there.
I know that every one of my Cork colleagues, as well as others on this side of the House, would wish to contribute and cannot because this is but a statement, and I accept that entirely. Nothing less than a full scale debate on this issue will satisfy us as a party. That must take place if not today, tomorrow, and the sooner the better. It is a problem for all of us. I believe that all Deputies of all parties have taken pride over the years in driving Ford cars. This was due to a sense of commitment to the car assembly plant. Perhaps Cork owes something to Ford's, but Ford's also owe something to Cork. I earnestly urge the Taoiseach to be a bit more aggressive in his approach than the statement he has read to the House today.
Deputy Mac Giolla.
On a point of order——
If the Deputy will bear with me for a moment, I see other Deputies offering. These statements are being made pursuant to Standing Order No. 38. That specifically provides, as indeed Deputy Gene Fitzgerald has stated, that one statement may be made by a member of the Government Party, one statement made by a spokesman for each party in opposition and that is all that I am enabled to permit under this Standing Order.
On a point of order——
Can one ask a simple question?
I would ask the Deputies to bear with me for a moment. To be fair, we had a statement on another matter within the last six months or so. I cannot recall what exactly the matter was, but efforts were made to ask questions. Those efforts were resisted by the occupant of the Chair at the time, as indeed they had to be. I intend on this occasion to enforce Standing Order No. 38.
On a point of order concerning Standing Order No. 38, do I take it, in calling Deputy Tomás Mac Giolla, that the Labour Party are not going to utilise their position to make a statement under Standing Order No. 38?
That is not a point of order.
The order permits only a statement from each party in Opposition.
Do I take it that the Labour Party have no answer to this matter?
The Deputy will resume his seat. Deputy Mac Giolla.
I am entitled to make a statement on it.
Are the Labour Party entitled under Standing Order No. 38 to make a statement or should we send for Deputy Cluskey to deal with it?
The Deputy will resume his seat. Deputy Mac Giolla.
I am entitled to make a statement on this.
Are the Labour Party entitled under Standing Order No. 38 to make a statement? Their behaviour might not be illegal.
If the Deputy will refer to Standing Order No. 38, he will see that one statement may be made by a member of the Government and a statement may be made by a spokesman for each party in Opposition who wishes to.
That is grand. That is the point I am raising. Do I take it that under Standing Order No. 38 the Labour Party, if they so wished——
They are not entitled to make a statement.
There is a precedent where they have made a statement concerning other matters.
That is not a point of order. Deputy Wyse.
Do I take it that the Labour Party flouted that Standing Order on other occasions?
Cork would expect more than one statement from the Government side of the House.
The Chair told Deputy Gene Fitzgerald at the outset, when he was raising the question which we had put down in the House today, that this was not the time to raise it.
I did not.
Would the Chair not think, rather than having a repetition later, that this would be an appropriate time for the three other Deputies to make a contribution and question some points of the Taoiseach's statement in the House today? That would be in fairness to the Cork Deputies.
I have not power to do that. I am tied by Standing Order No. 38. We had a scene in the House over this same matter within the last six months. There are other ways of raising it. I am going to comply with Standing Order No. 38 and want that to be understood. I am not going to deviate from it.
On a point of order——
On a point of order, on behalf of the Government I would like to say that we would be sympathetic to a proposal through the Whips for discussion of this matter, as I have said to the Opposition.
That is another question. I want to make this clear——
Why does the Chair let some people talk instead of others? Two or three have spoken before me.
I want to make it clear that I intend to enforce Standing Order No. 38 in the letter and the spirit. I am not going to have it waded through by people getting up on points of order all over the place. Deputy Mac Giolla.
I am glad the Taoiseach has said that there will be a debate on this matter. This miserable hiccup of a statement, or yawn, or whatever it is says absolutely nothing. All it says is that he regrets that there is nothing he can do about it. The shock and horror that we have been listening to from Government and Opposition all morning is unbelievable when they all know ever since Jack Lynch signed the Treaty of Accession in 1972 that Protocol 7 said that car assembly would end in the end of 1984. They have all known that since 1972. They have had equal terms in Government — the Coalition from 1973 to 1977, Fianna Fáil from 1977 to 1981 and then every second year after that. They have had equal time in Government and neither of them did anything for 12 years about the car assembly industry. All the rest have closed down, with a loss of 5,000 jobs already and Cork is now closing down. Presumably they thought that Ford's would stay on. Men are sitting in the Datsun factory on the Naas Road for the last six weeks fighting the same battle. They fought against this clause in the Accession Treaty in 1972 and marched in the streets of Dublin. They knew that their jobs would be lost in 1984 so why all the shock and horror from the Taoiseach or from Deputy Gene Fitzgerald that they are amazed at this closure? They knew for 12 years that our car assembly industry was doomed in any case. During that 12 years neither of them did the slightest thing about it.
The Deputy has it wrong. He did not read it properly, as usual.
(Interruptions.)
They had 12 years in which they could provide alternative jobs for the people in Ford's of Cork or the people in Datsun in Ballyfermot, or any other car assembly industries. They did nothing about it. During those 12 years we had a lead and zinc mine which was exporting all its raw material, when we could have established a smelter and had an industry which could have provided the components for cars, 15 per cent of which are lead or zinc. The zinc mines were exporting 360,000 tonnes of raw ore every year. There is a whole string of things which could have been done. They certainly could have done in 12 years what the Taoiseach is now talking of doing, sitting down with management to see what options are open by way of State action to enable the assembly of cars to continue in Cork.
What about Standing Order No. 38 now, on a point of order?
This is what the Taoiseach is talking about now in January 1984.
This man is talking about everywhere and I am not allowed to talk about Cork.
Deputy Lyons will resume his seat.
I shall resume my seat.
It is hung down with a load of lead.
If the Deputies want to have a debate on the closure of Ford's Cork assembly plant without mentioning Protocol 7 of the Treaty of Accession to Rome, then they are wasting their bloody time, because that is why it is closing down. The only thing about Ford's is that they stayed in business a bit longer than the others. They are staying in until the autumn of 1984, whereas the others were closing down in 1982 and 1983, shutting up shop, importing their cars. I asked the Minister for Industry and Energy on 5 July last what consultations had been held with the EEC, or if any were planned, regarding the possibility of extending the period under Protocol 7 of the Treaty of Accession to the EEC during which car assembly could be continued. In answer the Minister said this in reply to Question No. 384 of that day:
There has not been any consultation with the EEC Commission regarding the possibility of extending the special arrangements for the motor assembly scheme beyond the date provided for in Protocol 7 viz., 1 January 1985, and it is not intended to seek such an extension.
Nor, he said, was it intended to have any consultation with them in regard to extending the period for assembly. Therefore, it was shot down at that time. There was no question of car assembly remaining after 31 December 1984 because that decision was made, and no alternative industries were supplied.
I put down another question to the same Minister on 7 July last, No. 338, in regard to the motor assembly industry and in his answer the Minister did give a commitment but that commitment is not now contained in the Taoiseach's statement. In the course of the Minister's reply on that date he said:
Firms currently assembling and who cease operations before the end of 1984 will be required to provide alternatives to assembly in order to continue to qualify for facilities to import fully built-up vehicles.
What I take it that means is that the Minister is prepared to say to Fords, if they close down assembly here: "Right, we will allow no fully assembled cars in until you provide an alternative industry to give 800 jobs there". That is what I take that commitment to mean. But there is no mention of that in the Taoiseach's statement, nothing whatever about it. He merely talks about options by way of State action to enable assembly of cars in Cork. I took it that was a commitment from the Minister for Industry and Energy at that time. Such commitment is at least necessary, taking a hard line with all the assemblers. They talked about that with the other assemblers who closed down before, that they were to provide alternative industries. British Leyland, when they closed down assembly, promised to set up an industry to manufacture frames for car seats, which they started up but then shut down. That has gone as well. The same type of thing might be done in other cases.
We want something definite and firm so that if they do not provide the jobs they will not be allowed to bring in the cars. Other EEC countries are taking their own decisions, are backing their citizens when they fight against imports which are affecting their jobs, whether it be farmers in France or wherever. The citizens and workers of this country would be prepared to do the same thing if the Government would give them the same backing as other EEC Governments give their workers when they fight against things which deprive them of their jobs and their right to work. This import of fully assembled cars here is doing 5,000 workers out of a job. With regard to the 800 workers going out of work in Cork, according to Mr. Pádraig White of the IDA last evening, every industrial job set up now gives five spin-off jobs. If Mr. White's figures are correct — and he maintained last night that they were — that must mean that every industrial job lost also loses five spin-off jobs. Then the loss of the 800 industrial jobs in Cork will mean the loss of another 2,000 spin-off jobs there. When one talks about 800 jobs lost in Cork, anybody in Dublin should be thinking in terms of something like 6,000 or 7,000 jobs lost here in proportion to the population.
If there is a debate I hope we will get from the Taoiseach some more definite commitment, harder, firmer, none of this wishy-washy stuff contained in this statement but hard, firm decisions that speak harshly to the people who have made their profits out of this country for 60 years and ask why they are going to abandon us now. We should say: "Right, no more Ford cars come into this country until you set up alternative jobs for those 800 workers".
It is seldom I interject, but might I ask you, a Cheann Comhairle——
If the Deputy is on a point of order I will hear him.
I want to ask you to qualify something you said yourself at the outset when you said: "You can raise it another time". When is the other time? After the Order of Business, tomorrow, when?
There is procedure here——
You will have to qualify what you said.
No, I will not. There is a procedure here known as Question time.
You must qualify it.
I am not going to be cross-examined. Order of Business.