Industrial Development Bill, 1975 (Certified Money Bill): Second Stage.

Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry and Commerce (Mr. Bruton)

The purpose of the Bill is to increase from £350,000 to £850,000 the amount of grant moneys which the Industrial Development Authority may make available, without the prior approval of the Government, for:—

(i) An industrial undertaking towards the cost of fixed assets purchased or leased for the re-equipment, modernisation, improvement or expansion of the undertaking;

(ii) An industrial undertaking towards the cost of fixed assets purchased or leased for new industrial projects.

The present grant limits of £350,000 which the Industrial Development Authority may make available for both purposes, without reference to the Government, were fixed by the Industrial Development Act, 1969. Since then, all costs associated with the setting up and expansion of industrial undertakings — plants, machinery, building costs, sites, and so on—have increased considerably. A further factor which has resulted in an increase in the number of cases affected by the statutory limits is the fact that the limits relate to the aggregate sums paid to an industrial undertaking and a number of undertakings would, of course, have submitted several proposals to the authority over a period of time.

The result has been that the number of cases which have had to be referred to the Government in recent years because of the size of the grant proposed has grown considerably. The number of such cases in 1971 was seven; in 1974 it was 33, and this year the number of such cases is likely to be higher. The processing of so many cases at official level for submission to the Government prolongs the period of negotiation with the promoters concerned and delays the creation of potential new jobs. It also creates the danger of losing some worthwhile projects.

It is accordingly proposed to increase to £850,000 the amount of grant moneys for both purposes which the Industrial Development Authority may make in respect of a particular industrial undertaking without reference to the Government. This will facilitate the negotiation of industrial projects under the industrial grants programme and will also reduce the demand on the Government's time resulting from the submission to it of many projects which are no greater in size or importance than projects which earlier would have involved grants of less than £350,000 and would not have been subject to the requirement regarding Government approval.

Work has at present reached an advanced stage on more comprehensive legislation in connection with industrial development activities and I propose to introduce a Bill in the Dáil dealing with these more detailed provisions either during the present session or at an early stage in the next session. This further Bill will afford the members of this House an opportunity for a full-scale debate on the industrial development programme. In the circumstances I would ask the House to facilitate the passage of the present Bill.

I accordingly recommend this Bill for the approval of the House.

Mr. Keegan

I welcome this Bill which I regard as a continuing measure increasing the capital available to the IDA, to enable them to continue with their work, which they were established to do.

At the outset I would like to pay tribute to the IDA for their efforts to provide industries in areas that had never been regarded as industrial centres. This legislation is all the more important because it puts at the disposal of the local IDA officers more capital to encourage and induce new industries to areas in need. We all fully realise the difficulties confronting industries at the present time, many of which are caused by indiscriminate dumping on the home market. We also fully realise that many of those small industries are going through a lean period because of the scarcity of capital available and because of the overall recession which is affecting industry throughout the world.

A discussion on this Bill at this particular time is appropriate and opportune because one cannot stress too often the importance of the role of the IDA. I would like to pay a tribute to those who set up the IDA. Its continuance in existence and its efforts to promote industry fully justified its establishment and this legislation will enable the IDA to continue the work for which they were established.

I should like to mention the role of small industries which is important to our economy. They are mostly family-owned and are small companies about which one hears little. Their role in the creation and maintenance of jobs cannot be adequately stressed or emphasised. The IDA officers would be well advised at present to give adequate assistance and attention to existing industries. It is very important to preserve jobs at the moment. While we all recognise the need for job creation, we also recognise that there is an equally or even greater need for job preservation. That is borne out adequately at the present time when we hear of closure after closure and more threatened closures. I believe greater liaison is needed between the IDA officers, the county development teams, the Midland regional development organisations and other bodies associated with industry. There is need for greater consultation and co-ordination of activities and services because they are all, in some way or other, directly or indirectly, concerned with the promotion of industry.

It is important to give greater assistance to long established Irish-owned industries. We are often inclined to bend over backwards in our efforts to help foreign industrialists here. Many of them established industries here with the help of grants and availed of the services of the Industrial Development Authority. These firms folded up and disappeared overnight in many instances. I know the IDA machinery is available to protect the industry and themselves against loss of investment through grants. At the same time, more attention should and must be given, to the maintenance of the small family industries which have been with us for years, industries that have passed from father to son and so on. We hear little about those industries. They seldom hit the headlines. Their opening announcements are never announced with a fanfare of trumpets, yet they are playing an important role in the economy of this country and the preservation of jobs.

When the Parliamentary Secretary is replying I would like him to give an assurance that the small industries operating in our smaller towns and villages will be high on the priority list for assistance, which will be made available from the increased capital allocation under this Bill. Of course, one always welcomes major industries. Only this morning I heard an announcement on radio and television of major industry for my county, County Westmeath. That industry, which is coming to Mullingar, will receive grant aids to the tune of £2½ million. The anticipated job potential will be in the region of 600. That is very welcome. In Mullingar we have many small industries which give employment to more than 600 people. We have not heard a word about them. That is why I want to stress the importance of the small industry and his role in the economic life of this country.

Nevertheless, industries of any kind will always be welcome in an area such as the midlands, which in the past did not receive due recognition. It is very encouraging to see that County Westmeath in particular is coming into its own and is being recognised as an area ideally situated for future industry. The employment content is and has been available there. The training facilities are there, through the College of Technology in Athlone and other vocational schools throughout the county. We also have available the services of AnCO, which is playing an important role in the retraining of redundant people, the training of young people and equipping them to participate in industrial employment in the future.

There is nothing more one can say on the Bill, except that it is an enabling measure to increase the capital available to the IDA. I want again to express that greater recognition must be given to the Irish-based industry. Greater recognition must also be given to industry being established which will utilise the raw materials available in this country. We fully realise that when an industry is established raw materials may have to be purchased in foreign countries which will add to the cost of producing the finished article. Therefore, what we need do — and this is fully recognised by the IDA and everybody concerned — is to promote the maximum number of industries which can utilise the raw materials available here namely, the meat processing trade, fertiliser industry, woodworking industries and so on.

I welcome this Bill and can assure the Parliamentary Secretary and his Government, that we, on this side of the House, will do everything possible to facilitate its speedy passage.

Mr. Russell

I should like to join with Senator Keegan in giving a warm welcome to this Bill, and particularly to compliment him on his generous tribute to the men who were responsible for the establishment of the Industrial Development Authority in 1956, mainly the late Deputies Sweetman and Norton. At that time the Bill was received with what might be described as not very great enthusiasm in certain quarters. Its success over the years has been a lasting tribute to the two men who conceived it and brought it into operation.

It is only right, having regard to the enormous increase in costs over the past six years, that the Industrial Development Authority would be given the necessary powers to negotiate grants up to a substantially higher figure than that established in 1969. While the increase from £350,000 to £850,000 may seem enormous to some, in present-day terms and having regard to the cost of buildings, machinery and equipment of all kinds, it is not excessive. Having regard to announcements recently made — Senator Keegan referred to one — a figure of £850,000 is quite a small percentage of a large industrial undertaking.

A further point was made by the Parliamentary Secretary — that £850,000 could be an aggregate of several grants paid out to a large concern. Probably one of the most encouraging features would be that it would be an aggregate grant, in other words, that a firm would start with a substantially smaller grant, get a second and possibly a third grant to cover extensions of its factory, premises, or additional plant and machinery or the training of additional employees. Those would be very encouraging factors which the Minister, the Parliamentary Secretary and all of us would like to see.

I am a great believer in giving all possible latitude to State and semi-State bodies. They should be encouraged as much as possible to work on normal commercial terms, in other words, give them the necessary capital, pick the right men and let them get on with the job. There is a lot to be said for that. They may make mistakes, but businessmen make mistakes, so do farmers, trade unionists, and professional men. If their judgement is sound, in the ultimate they will have more successes than failures. The IDA, looking back over the years—while it can and must naturally count some failures amongst its list of industries established here — has proved in the majority of cases an outstanding success.

I am sure that every Senator was greatly encouraged when he heard on the radio today, as I did, what Mr. M. Killeen, chairman of the IDA, had to say about the encouraging future for 1976. Obviously all these new industries will take a lot of capital. A substantial amount of that capital will continue to be supplied by this small country. That is the price we have to pay for industrial development. We are still a comparatively underdeveloped country and will continue to be for many years to come. For that reason, we must offer first of all to our own nationals every inducement to show initiative in enterprise and to establish industrial business to give employment. We must go further than that. We must show that we are an attractive country for the location of foreign industries.

It would be foolish to think that within the forseeable future — looking decades ahead — that we could possibly generate the sort of capital necessary to provide employment for our growing population and for the number of young people leaving our schools every year. The Parliamentary Secretary said quite rightly that the mere fact of giving a grant, or being in the position to give a substantial grant and make a decision quickly might be the deciding factor in winning an important industry for this country rather than letting it go elsewhere.

We should remember that grants are only one item in the very attractive package of inducements we offer, which include income tax concessions — which are possibly the most attractive concession we give — loans, retraining grants, the establishment of infrastructure, such as roads and waterways, sewerage water supply and so on, transport facilities, the quality and intelligence of our labour, educational facilities, AnCO as already mentioned by Senator Keegan, and — an important factor which may not be realised — the attitude of our people to industrialists coming from outside. They like to come here; they like our people; they feel at home; they feel we can offer them something that cannot be offered in the giant cities of America or Europe. Our very way of life is an attraction that appeals to outsiders. I know that from personal experience. This is something we should be proud of and do everything possible to retain.

It may seem at times odd, and businessmen might at times have felt resentful of the fact, that large and wealthy corporations and companies who could easily afford to get on without a grant get a grant. But to look at it purely from that point of view would be to look at it from a narrow point of view. Other countries give very attractive inducements too. Unless we are in a position to give equally or even better facilities we will not get the type of industries we want. When at times we feel resentful and are a bit short of capital for the development of our own businesses, and know that certain wealthy companies could easily afford to do without the grants it might be as well to remember that if it were not for this little extra cream in the coffee we might not get this industry at all. It may be — and I was interested to hear the Parliamentary Secretary say—that new and comprehensive legislation dealing with the whole question of grants and inducements to industrialists would be introduced as soon as possible.

It may be necessary to have another look at our grant policy. I do not suggest that grants should be done away with. They should be retained as long as they are necessary to induce industries to come to here but the policy and the type of grant may have to be looked at. What I have in mind, having regard to the still great imbalance of industrial development between Dublin and the east coast and the rest of the country, possibly outside Cork, is that it may be necessary to lean more heavily in favour of the south-west and western areas. I know the designated areas have an edge on the other areas. I suggest that in future legislation the policy of giving greater encouragement to industries prepared to locate in specific areas in the south-west and west should be considered.

I naturally have my own area in mind. I come from County Limerick, the capital of the mid-western region. If we are serious in our ideas of developing areas outside of Dublin, and Cork, to a lesser extent, we have got to be prepared to back our ideas with capital and incentives. One way of offsetting the continuous trek to Dublin, which is becoming bigger and bigger, is to develop centres, such as Limerick, to take big industries and provide the sort of amenities that modern industrialists and their staff now require. That is the only possible way of hoping to offset the trend which, in my view, will continue unless something imaginative, backed by the necessary cash, is done by the Government.

A few years ago a policy was produced which suggested that we should have industrial centres dotted all over the country. It was a popular political policy at the time. I think, economically and factually, it was the wrong policy. It is far better to concentrate on a limited number of viable centres such as Limerick, Galway, Sligo, Athlone and so on, rather than trying to proliferate industries all over the country, which will not get there anyway. It would be far better to build up centres such as Limerick, Ennis, Galway and other viable places in the west of Ireland in order that they can carry industries of the size we need, give extra employment and give our students coming out of our regional technical schools the type of employment they require and for which they have been trained.

I should like to take this opportunity to pay a tribute to the Shannon Free Airport Development Company who are in fact the IDA in the Mid-Western Region. They, too, have done an excellent job over the years. Sometimes we are not fully appreciative of the value of the IDA and its offshoot SFADCo in our economic set up. Men in both these authorities have acquired an enormous amount of valuable experience and expertise down through the years that we could not hope to acquire with our present limited resources. They have been working there, in some cases, up to 20 years and there is not a corner of the globe that they do not know. They have given weeks, months and years of their time and their talents trying to induce industrial development into this country.

The fact that we are now going through a difficult and anxious time should not preclude us from paying a generous tribute to the men involved in both the IDA and SFADCo. I would like to join with Senator Keegan in making a special plea on behalf of the smaller business and factory. Notwithstanding the industrial development that has taken place over the past 20 or 25 years, 75 per cent of our industrial enterprise employ less than 50 people. They are spread all over the country. The far greater proportion are owned by Irishmen, some of them owned by the same family for several generations. They are the type of people, whether times are good or bad, who will stay on. They will not close down if the going gets rough. They have a deep interest not only in their business but in the country.

They are the kind of people that I would like to see given the maximum amount of encouragement. We all have experience of businesses and small factory owners who are having a very rough time. They cannot command the capital or other resources of the big corporations. They stay on because they were born and bred in the country and their people before them resided there also. They deserve something extra special in the way of encouragement from the Government. For that reason I join with Senator Keegan in what he said. I hope that in any new legislation there will be particular reference to two things, the absolute and urgent necessity to be regionalise industrial development and, secondly, to ensure that the small Irish-owned and family-owned business is given the maximum amount of encouragement to stay in business in difficult times and to expand in good times. Having said that I would like to give a warm welcome to the Bill.

Mr. Killilea

Like Senator Keegan and Senator Russell I, too, welcome the Bill even though the amount of money made available to the Industrial Development Authority is small. It is true to say that the Industrial Development Authority did a lot with £350,000 since 1969. I have no hesitation in saying that the IDA need more money but I have one reservation in giving them more money. We should ensure that the money is distributed within the authority on a proper regional basis.

We have heard a lot of talk about what can be done industrially in designated areas. Designated areas have been thrown overboard by the Government now in office, as we saw very recently in the distribution of EEC funds by the Department of Agriculture, among others. To come in here with a pious platitude and say that, industrially, we are in a special situation in the West of Ireland by being classified naïvely by the Department for Industry and Commerce as being a designated area is nothing short of sheer bunk. There is nothing extra given to us on account of that situation. Nothing has ever been given to us since this Government came into office on account of that. It is quite safe to say that in defining the West of Ireland as a designated area we were not lucky enough to get a Minister.

When money is given to a semi-State organisation like the IDA it should be written into it that that money be divided equally and in a compatible measure to each area. It is true to say— I defy contradiction — that in the last two years no industry in our area of any significance has been opened by the present Government. I know times are not as easy as they were. No extra jobs have been created in the western section of the IDA. The number on the dole has increased. The amount of nonworking people in our area has increased no matter what the Parliamentary Secretary or the Government may say. The £850,000 we are willingly giving to the IDA is only a very tiny proportion in relation to what is paid out each week in the labour exchanges of the western seaboard of this country.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Killilea

I ask the members of the Government to name a single industry that got £350,000 in the last two years in the western region of the IDA?

To get back to the Bill, I would like to see that all moneys distributed by the Government to agencies such as the IDA, are distributed in such a manner that each area gets a fair slice of the cake. I come from an area which has not received a fair slice of the national cake. I am sure every western Senator feels the same way as I do because the cranes have vanished from Galway city and other cities as well. They were in abundance until very recently and we wish to see them back. We would also like to see further development of the nature which took place as quickly as possible.

I welcome Mr. Killeen's statement this morning and I hope that every word he said last night was true. I wish it would come sooner than that. He is a responsible man and has commanded respect throughout the country. We have listened to statements from Ministers for two years but maybe, coming from him, there is more fact in it. I listened to some Senators, who spoke today, at the Monaghan by-election and all was rosy. That was some time ago. They were only gathering votes then.

The IDA have always paid respect to the multinationals. In the statement by the IDA chief he paid respect to the multinationals who have made a good job of their projects in this country. Money such as this to any industry basically means we are employing our trained youth. Unless we have a growth level and can provide employment for them, we are training them in the technical field for emigration. Any move made by the Parliamentary Secretary or his Department in this direction is welcome to us and will get a speedy passage through the House. I would be part and parcel to this to bring it through. The Parliamentary Secretary said in his statement that since the present grant limits of £350,000 which the Industrial Development Authority may make available for both purposes mentioned in the Bill were fixed—

all costs associated with the setting up and expansion of industrial undertakings — plant, machinery, building costs, sites and so on — have increased considerably.

There is no doubt about that. There is an obvious need for this increase. At the same time, the Parliamentary Secretary had in mind that the IDA is an autonomous body and he must be careful about the expenditure of public money to such an authority that may, through the Acts of this House, not report back in relation to the smallest detail on the amount of money that would be made available by the Houses of Parliament.

The case has been made by both Senators Keegan and Russell about the smaller industries. The Parliamentary Secretary said he was bringing a new Bill before the Dáil — I assume it is in more detail than the present one—and I hope he will take into account small Irish industries employing in the region of 25 men. At the moment the county development teams look after such industries. I do not think they have the finances available to them to do the job which is required of them. A lot of it is thrown in the laps of the local authorities to help out in different ways. Such viable little industries are as important to the nation as some of the larger ones. I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will include in his new Bill a way to help those smaller industries to a greater extent than what is feasible or possible through the county development teams. I agree with Senators Russell and Keegan that the Bill is welcome and it can be assured of a speedy passage through the House.

Mr. M.D. Higgins

I should like to join with those Senators who have welcomed this Bill. I hope Senator Killilea will not think too ill of me if I refrain from accepting his invitation to comment at length on the expenditure of the IDA over the years in the western counties. Such participation in the debate in the other House brought the reply from the Minister that it probably would be more appropriate to a discussion on the Estimates. Similarly, any discussion of structural changes within the Industrial Development Authority would probably be more appropriate to the major legislation which the Minister has indicated, and the Parliamentary Secretary has reaffirmed, will be introduced in the near future.

I share Senator Killilea's concern, and that of other Senators, for the apparent lack of fit between the willingness to vote money for the activities of the Industrial Development Authority and the effect of such action. I am in no way taking from the achievement of the people who have worked in the Industrial Development Authority. However I suggest that if we look at the history of the Industrial Development Authority and its achievements we can see that State initiatives by way of grants and other inducements have failed to affect radically the location decisions of industry here.

It is a reasonable aspiration of Senators, such as Senator Killilea, that more money be spent by way of industrial incentive in the western region and that the expenditure be regionalised. It is true when you look at the record of the Industrial Development Authority and the experience of the two-tier system of giving grants that we have failed to push industries into areas where they were most needed. Any serious politician interested in the industrial development of this country, interested in the political context of that development, knows very well the reasons for this. The reasons for it are that foreign industry has tended to locate where profits will be at a maximum, where disabilities on economic efficiency will be at a minimum. The result has been an expansion of industrial activity in an already overloaded eastern region, and slight increase in industrialisation in the western region.

The truth of the matter then is that there is no reasonable fit between the industrialisation strategy and the actual decisions being made by foreign enterprises and other enterprises. It is as if the Industrial Development Authority and indeed the kind of vote we are making now accepts a certain social obligation. Of course the experience is not fitting that social obligation. When the Minister for Industry and Commerce, Deputy Keating, was replying to the debate on this Bill in the Dáil he spoke about a number of important matters. In Volume 283, No. 3, column 499, he refers to what he should like to do. He said:

I want to put on the record of the House that the people with the first claim to help are those who live where the need is greatest. That is all there is to it. The definition of greatness of need is made on an economic and sociological basis. The only way to order the priorities is to say what has been the evolution of population, industry and income and what has happened about emigration. I will not permit any other guidelines than those objective ones of an economic and sociological kind.

Senator Killilea's interest would be better spent in his native Tuam. If I might continue, I was making the point that in this Bill, which is an enabling Bill to increase the ceiling concerning that sum which the IDA have to refer to Government and which they have not, I share the concern of those Senators who have suggested that the IDA's expenditure to date — I have been looking at its history — had not moved into areas which would be regarded as of great social necessity. I had been making the point across the different criteria of emigration, dependency and unemployment that we had not been so successful in securing the industrial base we might mention.

Here I raise a question concerning this also. I have said that the primary reason is that you simply cannot expect from private enterprise that it will accept social criteria as a means of operation.

In other words, unless the role of the IDA is changed and it is decided to move in the direction of a national enterprise board, it will not be possible to reduce the indicators I mentioned. Neither, I would suggest, will it be possible to regionalise expenditure. However, as I mentioned at the outset, the restructuring of the IDA, giving it a new role, and the whole question of participation probably belongs in a discussion on major amending legislation which will be before the Seanad shortly.

Concerning the sum itself—a lengthy discussion would not be appropriate as it was promised the Bill would be given a speedy passage — it is not a very great increase. In so far as it represents an increase, I should like to make some points concerning IDA expenditure which is not of a regional nature. The difficulty in changing the decisions of industrialists as regards location is probably affected by the provision or existence of infrastructure in the different regions. It is interesting to note that the huge flow of money into the eastern region is adding to an urban dis-economy. We will probably begin to accept the notion of regional strategy, not because we are convinced we should allow all the people to participate equally in different kinds of activities but rather because of the necessity of regional policies being forced upon us. As the cities foul up, as the existing stock of social provisions becomes overburdened, it will be economical to establish disincentives in an already overindustrialised region. It might be useful if we looked at the appropriate intervention of the Industrial Development Authority in the area of infrastructure in some of the underdeveloped regions.

To return to the question of environment, which I mentioned briefly in the discussion on the earlier Bill before the House this afternoon, the Bill dealing with restrictive practices, I was interested to see, on the front page of the June issue of the IDA News that they intend to become involved in the establishment of a recycling industry. They listed in that issue a number of the existing recycling plants which are in operation. I think there are approximately eight. This kind of industry is long overdue in the field of industrialisation. It would be schizophrenic in an unplanned economy to expect the location decisions of industry to achieve one's social aim. That cannot be achieved except in the atmosphere of a planned economy. Similarly, when we reflect on it, when people make statements suggesting that any cost in industry is welcome, that we must provide any kind of employment activity, we must remember that much of existing industry is involved in the production of waste. Certainly much of human behaviour is engaged in the structuring of waste. We are all indebted to people like Deputy Moore who has drawn our attention to the fact that something like 800,000 tyres per annum are discarded on local authority dump heaps and that a couple of million bottles are littering our environment. We have not managed to institute, nationally or regionally, an adequate recycling activity in relation to paper. Therefore, I do not see the point in going entirely for the idea of new and more industry without building a recycling component into our existing industrial activity.

I would argue as something closely related to that point that before any future grants or increased grants are allocated industrial projects should be asked to indicate clearly — admittedly in a discussion like this we can only do it on a voluntary basis — what precise environmental monitoring devices they intend to apply. In countries like Japan it is now required by law that this be done. It would be very useful if those industries which have received Industrial Development Authority grants in the last year or who may receive them in the future—there are a few involved and they are in the Bill—voluntarily offered us these environmental monitoring controls before they are legislatively demanded. These controls should be legislatively required.

Obviously there will be a number of Senators who will disagree with much of what I have said concerning the role of the Industrial Development Authority. Some people think the Industrial Development Authority exists as an organisation simply to promote jobs. Under the statute which established them, they are no such thing. They are charged with the promotion of industry. A number of developments are possible. I hope that when the IDA are restructured new developments will give them, not merely a promotional role but a far more critical one, which will help the IDA to develop in the direction I have outlined.

A number of Senators referred to the present economic difficulties. With respect, I would suggest, regarding these difficulties and the reaction of the IDA to them, we must take cognisance of the fact that it is in capital intensive industry we have experienced some of our worst difficulties. When we look at the whole question of industrialisation in a broader spectrum—I would agree with those Senators who suggested we should look at small-scale industries again—we might also look at other kinds of labour activities on a small scale. It may well be time, taking cognisance of the failures occurring now and based on a number of false assumptions concerning economic growth to place our faith on labour-intensive industry with an indigenous base rather than in the creation of jobs at any cost on a capital-intensive base over which we have very little control.

It is interesting that a number of the points I have made today were adverted to by the Minister when he was replying to the debate on 1st July in the Dáil. On that occasion, the Minister announced that he was reserving his position on the future role of the IDA— this is quite fair—because we are awaiting major legislation. It was quite appropriate for the Minister to pay tribute to the Deputies who suggested there should be an environmental consciousness of the kind I have just described. Commenting at column 500 of Volume 283 of the Dáil Official Report the Minister paid tribute to Deputy Seán Moore for his reference to the necessity of trying to assess the sociological effects and the effects on the whole environment of the establishment of new industry, the need to study, when an industry was established in a certain place, not just what it did for industrial jobs in that place but also its effect on the whole fabric of life.

One of the things I found most appalling in the last two years—this is not a party political point but the reaction of someone who is critically interested in industrialisation as an historical phenomenon—has been the great dishonesty of members of the business sector in relation to the environmental monitoring of industrialisation of a certain kind. There is the feeling that somehow or other you can add in a care about the environment when the industrialisation has taken place. It is not only that jobs are set against environmental conservation but it is sometimes suggested that environmental conservation can take place after jobs have been created. It would be much better if industry openly opposed the environmentalists' lobby and said so. It would be more honest. What it is intended to do is to kill the effort by faint praise—to suggest there is a place in public life and in public discussion for the environmentalists' lobby but that, of course, it has to be considered in moderation. That kind of statement has very often been made.

I feel that on this it is wiser, as another writer has somewhere else reminded us, to remind the Senators that one of the most thundering denunciations in the Bible is the phrase of St. Paul that God will not be mocked; one might, in 1975, say our ecological systems will not be mocked. If we throw in a few lines here and there about care for the environment after the industrialisation effort there may be no environment to care about. I would ask for a greater concern and much greater care for the kind of argument a number of people have been making. I would ask that it be taken far more seriously by those people who find it totally unpalatable to consider environmental arguments, who say they are in favour of industrialisation at any cost and an industrial development authority that will promote industrialisation without restraint. It would be extremely useful if this were done.

We are, for example, voting now a small sum to the Industrial Development Authority. A project that could come before us for consideration might be a project dealing with oil or gas. The idea that such a project could even be considered without clear environmental criteria being laid down as a policy, as a strategy, having before us the lessons of Scotland, the evidence of architects, planners and all types of social people, would be appalling.

Recently I discussed this matter in another area. One of the oil lobby told me the environmental lobby made him sick. I was very appreciative of his comment because I had met an honest man. It is time we had proper overall monitoring of the environment and, when we come to consider the larger legislation, we should move far more in the direction of participation, in the direction of a national enterprise board and probably an industrial promotions board, telling foreign industry that we are as environmentally conscious as anybody else and it is not a matter merely of accepting the creation of jobs at any cost.

Mr. Markey

There is no doubt that the Industrial Development Authority are a very powerful agency in this country's economic fight. Tribute will continue to be paid to their work and I would add a special note with regard to the integrity of the members and officers of the authority. There are no finer men. They are dedicated to the promotion of job opportunities. To them it must be very satisfying to see such achievements and I wish them success in the future. They have, of course, had their failures and, like all failures, they make news whereas successes very often do not make news. The success rate has been out of all proportion to the failure rate.

I often think all the IDA need is the means to allow them to get on with the job, unhampered and unpestered in their efforts. They have an unenviable task. As we all know, they set themselves certain targets for the period 1973-1977. To date, one regrettably must admit that these targets have not been reached and one must extend sympathy to them because of that. In the north-eastern region they have achieved 6.2 per cent of their target for the period 1973-1977, two-fifths of the period expired. Breaking down the figures of net job creation in 1973 and 1974 we find that, whereas there was a plus figure pertaining to the net job creation of 1,324 in Counties Cavan, Louth and Monaghan in 1973, that figure changes to a minus of 1,113 for 1974, giving us a mere minimum of 211 new jobs created, allowing for redundancies in that two-year period. That amounts to only 6.2 per cent of their target.

The selling aids the Industrial Development Authority have provided over the years have been a very powerful incentive in job creation. Possibly after 1977, when the transitional period allotted by the EEC to allow the selling aids to continue at the present level expires, these aids will have to be reviewed and that could create difficulties for the country as a whole and not only for the IDA. One can only hope that in their battles with the EEC Commission they will be able to retain industrial incentives at their present level.

The Parliamentary Secretary has indicated that one of the reasons for this increase from £350,000 to £850,000 is to speed up the processing of negotiations which can be tedious, lengthy, detailed and complex. The Parliamentary Secretary indicated there is sometimes a danger that an industry may well withdraw its project if there is undue delay. It is only right that such danger should be avoided. I am not aware if it has happened in many cases but certainly I had one personal experience in which I had a slight fear there would be withdrawal due to a two-or three-month period involved between the preparation of the memorandum and the final approval by the Cabinet. It is a good idea to avoid such danger and, if not a danger, even a fear of it happening.

One respect in which our industrial efforts fall down is in lack of coordination between the different bodies. For a number of years the North-Eastern Regional Development Organisation has had to have a certain liaison with the Industrial Development Authority, local authorities and certain other statutory bodies in regard to planning, infra-structure and general industrial development. As far as I could find, there was never any real sense of purposeful realisation or even purposeful participation in all of this work. I think it was possibly due to the fact that the RDOs have a lack of real standing or effectiveness. This is something the Government should examine if it is to extract the best from the RDOs and the bodies which liaise with them in this important work.

The public view very often is that many long-established industries are not receiving the same consideration in regard to grant assistance as foreign industries receive. I know that the IDA will refute such a statement. It is a public misimpression which should be corrected by the facts. Maybe in regard to small industries there is that feeling that these are not getting a fair crack of the whip. In this regard it is worth reminding ourselves that 75 per cent of the total number of manufacturing industries are small industries. They provide 20 per cent of the total manufacturing employment and 20 per cent of the total manufacturing output. These are quite convincing figures, but they are not measured up to when one sees that the small industries receive only about 7 per cent of the total IDA grants. There is no doubt that small industries can be in very many instances a real bulwark against the effects of recession, particularly in rural areas where there is neither the population nor the labour supply available to provide for large-scale industry. I am a great believer in the saying that five small industries providing, say, 40 or 50 jobs each are a much better proposition for any community than one large industry providing the equivalent 200 jobs.

One aspect that has been the subject of a certain amount of public concern in the past year or two in regard to the number of closures and threatened closures has been what happens taxpayers' money when it is given to industries in a shoring-up operation. Is there sufficient control over that money, and how it is spent by the industry which receives the assistance? There are grounds here for a long-term discussion as to where the IDA should stand when it renders assitance together with Fóir Teoranta, as regards control of the taxpayers' money. One finds the cries of alarm sometimes going off only at the eleventh hour. The mechanism within Fóir Teoranta and the IDA is switched on at that eleventh hour. It is "all systems go" and the only objective seems to be to save that industry at all costs. When the mechanism is switched on with that objective in mind we can unfortunately find instances where grants are given by either Fóir Teoranta or the IDA to concerns that might well be better off in the final analysis reassessing whether or not they should continue in existence.

There is matter for discussion here about the criteria under which grants are given in such instances. I believe the only criteria that should apply in the case of eleventh hour assistances is whether the money allocated can create a good job out of what is a bad job. In the more comprehensive legislation the Parliamentary Secretary has intimated will be forthcoming we could go into that matter to a far greater extent.

In welcoming this very small measure the least we can do is give it effect very quickly. Senator Higgins spoke about ecology and the environment. These are important matters. We all realise that the earth is a finite resource. It is not infinite in its supply, and we must care for what we have been privileged to receive. I do not think this country is yet at the stage of economic growth where it can say to any industrialist, no matter where he comes from, that we want certain standards applied in regard to the environment and the ecology which he must either comply with or else we will have to reconsider giving him a grant. I think the IDA would feel pretty hampered and restricted with such constraints upon their activities. In the light of the IDA target in job creation over the next 20 or 30 years, if we are to keep our people at home and reach anything like full employment, I do not think that anybody in this House or the public at large would consider it appropriate to apply such constraints at this time.

I welcome this Bill and I look forward to more comprehensive legislation with regard to the future work of the IDA. We could have a very constructive debate on that, and the defects and the good points in regard to the operations of this very fine Authority would be forthcoming in such a debate.

Mr. McCartin

I welcome this Bill. It is a subject that holds a great deal of interest for me or for anybody from the part of the country that I come from, where we have not sufficient industry, where we have not got the resources, the people with sufficient resources or with experience of industry behind them. We will not necessarily look to the IDA for the sort of development we need in our area. I would add that I have some experience of the IDA and I believe that they have done a very good job with the resources given to them. They are an organisation of very dedicated and qualified people.

Contrary to what so many believe, they are available and can be reached at any time by the ordinary man who has a worth while idea. I have always found this. It is a semi-state body and in the past many people had the impression that political pull was involved. On a public occasion in a small town in the west of Ireland I saw four or five families who had started small industries, upright sincere people, working hard to develop these industries, looking for grants, and I saw them blatantly walking into a political party meeting of the particular party that happened to be in power. I am not making any judgment on the party at this moment, but I thought it was a great shame that these people should have got the impression that they must, if they were to succeed in getting an industrial development grant, walk into that particular party meeting, be seen to be there and be seen to be playing their dart with the Government of the day. I would say, from my experience, that it was entirely unnecessary. I know from long experience of working and having contact with the IDA that there was no need whatever for this demonstration.

I see every good reason why local Deputies of any particular party should take an interest in industrial projects going on around them. I see every reason why a Deputy should be asked on occasion to take particular problems to the Minister concerned, to ensure that what the Minister and the Government have in mind is being followed by the IDA. In addition there are often special statements to be made in special areas and very often the best person to make them is the local representative. From my experience there is no need whatever for anybody to crawl to any political representative or to any political party. That has not been the position in my experience in the past. It is a pity the small industrialists in particular should find it necessary to subscribe to any party fund or crawl to any public representative. I do not believe it is necessary.

Because of the amount of resources available to the IDA there are severe limitations on what it can do. When we talk of the IDA we are inclined to think of something that ought to be a bit bigger than just a body that is there with money to hand out to particular industries when they have a good idea. The IDA should be much bigger than that. Taking the two together, the IDA and the county development team, I would like to see more resources available, more co-operation and a much more efficient job being done. I am not talking now about the subsidiary of an international company but about the man who thinks he can make some article or has a special skill and who, with a little bit of money could get an industry going in his area. Very often an idea can develop into a worth-while industry, probably a most durable industry, where you have people with roots in the area employed, where there is a concern for the neighbours employed and a better understanding altogether between employer and employee. At the moment this man must first of all employ accountants and prepare his case. These people have very little experience in business and no experience in bookkeeping. They find themselves at a loss in the preparation of a case. For this reason many applications have dragged on over the years. The whole process could be short-circuited in many ways to the advantage of the potential industrialist and the IDA.

Agriculture meant a great deal to this country in the past. We had a complete advisory structure available to farmers. I will not comment on it except to say it is probably a little out of date, but there was available to every farmer a very worth while and useful advisory service.

Business suspended at 5.30 p.m. and resumed at 7.15 p.m.

Mr. McCartin

I was speaking about making a comparison between the advice that is available to the agricultural community and the significance of the fact that the Industrial Development Authority, while doing a good job, are too restricted. Particularly in the western areas and in the field of small industries generally, we could do with a team of high-powered consultants or advisers who could be called upon by people in smaller industries to give them advice and guidance in the initial stages. There is no way in which that advice can be got at the moment without it being paid for. Very often too many small industrialists who have a good idea and are able to do the job and have the technical know-how are left high and dry without the sort of high-powered industrial advice that ought to be forthcoming.

This is an area which I would as the Parliamentary Secretary to have a look at. Perhaps he might come up with some solution. The county development teams are an important link here. Generally speaking, it is only through the county development teams that developers get encouragement and guidance in the early stages.

To begin with, the make-up of the county development teams is not what it ought to be. The two sides of industry should be represented on the county development teams, who could gain a lot by having representatives from industry—successful industrialists and men with knowledge and experience. It is too much to expect that the chairman of a county council, the county engineer, the CEO, the county manager and the chief education officer could have between them all that is necessary to make an adequate county development team. There is far too much chance there. It usually ends that a county which happens to have a good county development officer has the right link with the IDA and the right machinery for availing of the facilities that the IDA provide. The county that does not have a good county development officer is out in the cold. The resources of the county development team as well as their make-up are not anything like adequate.

I do not see this as being a problem in relation to the larger industries. People who can pay their own consultants and who usually have big capital connections to begin with, know where capital can be got, know the sort of accounts that must be produced and the sort of things that must be said to get themselves finance. The small industrialist, generally speaking, is left to himself. Even though he may be able to do the job, when asked to submit projections or to look for finance he will put his foot in it. He ends up getting nothing. Nine times out of ten he would scare off the IDA. I knew men who had the potential, and who succeeded eventually, who scared off the IDA just because they did not know what was the done thing in the circumstances.

For this reason the IDA will not be complete as an industrial development authority until such time as we have a better force of high-powered advisers to whom the proprietors and managers of small industries will have access through their county development team. I should like to see an extension of the county development team by the inclusion of the industry and labour side.

On the question of finance for small industry, in the past year there was a very large number of small industries where the number of employees fell off and the profits dwindled away. In many cases there was nothing wrong except lack of finance. Fóir Teoranta have done a good job but on the industrial development front we should look again at this idea. Many industries tried to get finance from various sources but they were unsuccessful. In the end they had to go to Fóir Teoranta for the residue operation which in the minds of a lot of taxpayers is a charitable operation. We should have one body like the Agricultural Credit Corporation in agriculture for the financing of these industries. That body should decide whether an industry was worthy of financing and should be in a position to give the necessary finance.

As far as Fóir Teoranta are concerned—there is nothing charitable about it—there is no question of the money not being paid back or coming out of the taxpayers' pockets. It is just like a loan from a bank. In 99 cases out of 100 it will not be given unless the people are satisfied that the industry is potentially viable.

All we want is one national industrial body that will cater for those who cannot convince the high financiers or cannot put forward the necessary security to obtain finance—a body that will not have a hard, callous, banker's outlook where security is all that matters and return on capital is all that they are interested in.

Dr. West

What about the ICC?

Mr. McCartin

The ICC have been in existence for long-term finance only. There is a gap still remaining. People will go to the bank and they are not concerned about employment. They could not care less if there are 1,000 jobs at stake or if the area is dying or if shops are going out of existence or if schools are closing. They are not interested. There is a crying need for the sort of facility for people who have been grant aided by the IDA of providing finance through a responsible semi-State body. The idea of Fóir Teoranta is a bit out of date and looks too much like a hand-out and a charity which it is not. I would ask the Minister to look at that.

I have found the IDA to be receptive and co-operative. However more recognition should be given to the areas from which the application comes. They get applications from areas, say the west, from an industry which may be in trouble, and the IDA are forced to say "We cannot grant aid to you because your particular industry is in trouble". There is a problem about this. If an area needs an industry and an idea comes up, special consideration should be given regardless of the state of the industry. What they should look at is the viability of the idea before them. In an area where jobs are not available and structure is breaking down, the IDA should be more lenient than they are, if they are convinced that the co-operative or individual or whoever is concerned has the ability and can make a go of the industry even if there is over-production in that area or if that industry is in trouble in other areas. I welcome the Bill. It is a step in the right direction. I would ask the Minister consider what I have said.

Dr. West

Listening to this debate is another constructive and interesting example of the reception in the Seanad of problems concerning semi-State bodies. There is a general feeling in favour of a body such as this. We should try to see how we can develop it and make suggestions, such as that which Senator McCartin made, which will help it to fulfil the purpose the IDA were originally set up for.

There is an interesting philosophy in the Houses of the Oireachtas vis-à-vis semi-State bodies. They are institutions which were set up by the State to fulfil specific needs at specific times. The first such body was set up to operate or develop the Shannon Scheme. The second one was either the Agricultural Credit Corporation or the Dairy Disposal Board. From that small beginning a whole host of semi-State bodies have been set up, now employing more people than the Civil Service. They were given a great deal of independence from the Oireachtas and were set up with this in mind. On the whole, this has worked.

There is always a need to look at the original requirements, conditions and the straitjacket in which the bodies were set up. The only opportunity we get to discuss a problem confronting a semi-State body is when a Bill such as this comes before the House asking for an increase in the grant, unless a new body is being set up.

We heard recently about the establishment of an all-party committee to review the operation of the commercial semi-State bodies because they are the ones that impinge on the public. Such bodies include CIE about whom, when they put up their fares, there was a howl, or the ESB. When they put up their rates, there is a howl. The Government have decided to establish a committee to monitor the operations of the commercial semi-State bodies. A similar all-party committee should be set up so that Members of the Oireachtas will have an opportunity to monitor the operations of non-commercial semi-State bodies such as the Industrial Development Authority.

Neither the public nor the Oireachtas would look on this as an effort to restrict the operation of these bodies but rather to ensure that they fulfil the needs which may change from the time they were set up. They were set up by legislation; they may be restricted by legislation and that legislation may need to be changed. This is the kind of this which an all-party committee, which should contain independent representation, should be doing. It would be very effective and provide an important public relations link, because it would help the Members of the Oireachtas to realise what the scope of these bodies was and it would inevitably filter down, via the media, to the public.

An Cathaoirleach

The Senator has been talking in pretty general terms.

Dr. West

As an academic you will appreciate we do that a lot of the time.

An Cathaoirleach

When we do it in the Seanad we are liable to be rebuked for it.

Dr. West

I appreciate the manner of your rebuke and I am sure you will appreciate that I now wish to turn to some of the problems concerned with the specific semi-State body before us but, of course, as I said, this is our only chance to review the operations of this body, and while we welcome the Parliamentary Secretary's determination to bring in a wider Bill which will give us an opportunity to look at the whole field which he has mentioned in his Second Stage speech, it means there is a problem in this respect: unless such a Bill comes in we, as public representatives who should be having some regard for the spending of public money do not get such opportunities.

The annual report which the IDA issue is a very impressive document. They obviously have gone to considerable trouble to design it and to get the material together and to produce it in an attractive format in which one can readily get the impression of a wide-ranging organisation with links in all parts of the country, not just in the developed east coast area but with links in all parts of the country. If one took this report at its face value, then the IDA would be a remarkable body indeed. I am not saying they are not, but the problem that we face is that we have no criteria on which to judge the performance of the IDA.

One of the figures which constantly comes from the IDA is the jobs forecast for the current year, the number of jobs that are to be created either by the efforts of the authority or across the whole industrial board. We see this figure. It changes from time to time: when things are bad it revolves downwards; when the boom is on it is revised upwards. There really are not any comparisons of this figure in the following year with the number of jobs that actually were created. This sort of comparison, which might not be flattering, would help to put the picture into perspective.

Of course, the annual report of the IDA will favour the IDA, and quite rightly so—one would not expect it to do otherwise—but one would like to see some other information, which would have to come from another source. Perhaps the Parliamentary Secretary would be able to give us the figures of the jobs forecast for last year compared to the number of jobs that were actually created to give us an impression of how close this IDA forecasting is to what actually happens. One cannot expect it to be 100 per cent accurate, but it is important for us to know, to be able to judge, because we see these figures in the newspapers day after day. "The general manager of the IDA forecasts the creation of 20,000 jobs in 1974-75." At the end of that year, when a forecast like that had been made, it should be tested against the reality of the situation. That is one of the things I should like to see, and it is the sort of information we should have.

A number of speakers mentioned the problem of IDA resources, the fact that the IDA have done well inside their limited resources. They do excellent work and I should always like to see their resources being increased because the sort of philosophy by which they operate is an important philosophy for this country in helping the people to help themselves, introducing overseas industrialists to the Irish situation, trying to entice them away from the developed areas to areas where there is plenty of labour, trying to get them to move to places where there is high unemployment but where there are plenty of skills, and helping such people with training and grants and setting up factories, with equipment, and generally providing a very well worth while stage-set for industrialists.

It is encouraging to see that this stage-set applies very often to Irish industrial-lists, and I should like to see more Irish industrialists making use of IDA facilities. It is always encouraging to see foreign industries, foreign investors, coming into this country, but it is more encouraging to us as Members of this Parliament to see an authority such as this, developing home-based industries, home-based skills, developing the ideas of people who are living in this country, who will not be moving away, who will not do a flit when the pressure comes on, and so it is encouraging to see more Irish industrialists making use of the IDA.

Here I would very much back up what Senator McCartin said. Perhaps for the smaller man who needs short-term finance there should be another body. There is a bit of a stigma attached to Fóir Teoranta although they do an excellent job. There is this idea that they do a fireman operation, a rescue operation. He has a point when he asks for a single body to look at the whole problem of industrial financing in this country.

One of the possible sources of revenue for the IDA must be the EEC Regional Fund about which we have heard so much and from which we have got so little. One continually hopes for agreement on a substantive regional fund and policy. The IDA would be a splendid agency to disburse some of the money from the Regional Fund because they do a lot of development in the underdeveloped areas of the country. Perhaps the Parliamentary Secretary might convey this message to his boss, the Minister for Industry and Commerce, and, even more important, to the Minister for Industry and Commerce, and, even more important, to the Minister for Finance—that one Member at least of this House would like to see the IDA dealing with some of the Regional Fund money and spending it in a constructive way.

There is another point which has been very ably dealt with by my colleague, Senator Higgins, and that is the problem of conservation. Here rapid strides have been made in recent years, and we are now not so inclined to give our money away in industrial grants without tying in some pretty rigorous and rigid clauses on the effects of pollution from a particular industry. Why should we give taxpayers' money away unless we are as sure as we can be that the problems of unemployment which the industry helps to solve are not less than the problems of pollution which the industry creates?

This applies particularly to the big chemical industries. It is very important to have not only very strict conditions but to have a properly organised, staffed and qualified team of monitors who will deal with the problem of pollution.

I am glad to say that in the last five years or so, when there has been an emphasis on the environment, on preserving our ecology and our land, the various Government agencies, including the IDA, have been much stricter in applying rigorous environmental control and conditions before allocating grants to industries.

We are failing in our task if we invite foreign industrialists to set up industries and who may give employment and provide revenue but cause serious pollution problems. It is right that there should be this kind of controversy. It is also right that the media and the public should be aware of the problems which may arise from the siting, for example, of a refinery in Dublin Bay or chemical factories being established around the country. We should know, too, the conditions laid down, not only by the local authority but by the grant-giving bodies, such as the Industrial Development Authority before they give money to an industry which could have serious side effects in terms of pollution and destruction of the environment.

We all see what consistently happens in Bantry Bay. Each time there is a 100 per cent chance of no risk and a new system has been developed to prevent an oil leak. Than there is another big oil spillage three months later. All the good work done by environmentalists is undone. This sort of thing must not be allowed to happen. The preservation and conservation of the environment must be conditional on the allocation of a grant in advance. It is no use trying to do it afterwards because that will be too late. It is no use doing it unless we have a proper way of monitoring the effects and an organisation to deal with the effects of industrial pollution.

I welcome this Bill. The Parliamentary secretary might give us an estimate of the increase in total expenditure by the IDA likely to occur in the current year through the increase being voted in this Bill.

Mr. Bruton

There is no increase in expenditure in the Bill. It is merely altering the procedure in relation to the approval by the Government of grants. It does not imply any extra expenditure. Certain grants have to be passed by the Cabinet and the requirement is being changed.

Dr. West

Then it is purely an administrative matter. I take the point. I welcome the Bill but I should like to see some general way of reviewing the operations of the Industrial Development Authority without waiting until measures such as this come before the House, but that is no reason for not supporting the Bill in full.

Mr. Kerrigan

I will be very brief because most of the points I intended raising have already been mentioned. In welcoming the increases which the Industrial Development Authority may make available we should bear in mind, as the Parliamentary Secretary said, that it is not a monetary increase but an authorisation to make grants available on a slightly larger scale than before because of the drop in money values. This measure is to be welcomed because it gives the IDA more freedom to make decisions without having to refer back to the Government. At times quick decisions have to be made and this Bill will improve decision-making.

While there may have been some criticism of the IDA they have done a very good job. Our own industrialists may have criticised the IDA for looking after the foreign industrialist more than the Irish one. This depends on the function of the authority and on many more agencies mentioned by different Senators during the debate. The functions of some of those agencies seem to overlap and I agree with Senator McCartin's suggestion that they should be brought in under fewer umbrellas. There are too many State agencies doing different types of work and it would be better to examine the whole structure of State agencies now.

I welcome the Parliamentary Secretary's assurance that during the next session there will be legislation to deal with this matter. When Senators speak about conservation there should be an area of agreement. It has happened that, even before the IDA decide what industry will be sited in a certain place, there is uproar. This has frightened off many people. I have had the experience where certain people were negotiating for an industrial site but before it was decided they abandoned the project because they felt they would have an unenviable task trying to please the objectors. We all realise that we must look after the environment but we must do it in such a way that will be in accordance with the plans of the IDA and the local authority. These two groups are involved in the scheme and will be affected by any change. Therefore people who worry too much about conservation and who make too much fuss before anything is known about an industry, should get the facts straight before they begin their campaign. I welcome the Bill.

Mr. Dolan

I have not very much to say on this Bill which gives us an opportunity to say a few words on the work of the IDA. The IDA have performed an excellent job on industrial expansion because most of our industries are established through the IDA. Members of that organisation go abroad and try to get foreign industrialists to set up factories here. We should also pay a tribute to the regional development authorities. These colleges have had close co-operation with the IDA. They are doing excellent work by coordinating the work of each county. In my area, Mr. Cullinane, the director, and his staff prepared an enormous amount of data on the number of school leavers in the region, their ages and the various infrastructures and knowledge pertaining to them that would be needed and would satisfy questions that an industrialist might ask if he was advised to go to a particular area.

I am sorry. I do not want to be awkward. I was going from one point to another. There is a tremendous amount of merit in the IDA trying to encourage people to set up factories in those areas. In most counties and in most regional development organisations, the figures are at hand so that an industrialist coming into the area can know at a glance what labour is available in that area. I feel that AnCO, Mr. Agnew, who is in charge, and the colleges of technology have played an important part in seeing that we have an intelligent and highly skilled work force. On its own that should be an incentive to any industrialist from outside. The IDA can say with confidence that the Irish worker is on a par and, indeed, far ahead of many workers in other countries.

I should like to put in a special plea for the native industrialist who has remained in Ireland and has found it difficult in the past to get any assistance, while the multinationals are getting grants to the tune of thousands of pounds. Naturally he was discouraged. The man, woman or group who set up an industry based on our raw materials should be helped by the IDA and their staff. In my area we have industries based on food. In Killeshandra we have Killeshandra Milk Products, McCormacks and various food processing factories. The latest is a cheese factory. These are factories which will not fold up overnight because at home and abroad people get hungry everyday. In a business using native material the local people around are employed supplying the raw material. That is very important to the area. The same applies to industries based on cattle. In the past many native industrialists worked under adverse conditions, and I would not like to see them by-passed in any way.

I do not know how much money has come from the EEC to assist the IDA but much more is needed. I do not think many of the people in the EEC are aware of our facilities, our climate and the ability of our people in general to look at industry and take a pride in our work. We are a sociable people with whom foreigners can mix with ease. All these should be an incentive to foreigners to set up new industries here.

When some industrialists arrive in Dublin they may have a very large cylinder or tank to transport across the country. A look should be taken at the harbours on the west coast to ensure that it will not be necessary to take these tanks across the country, probably to the west of Ireland. Some attention should be paid to the harbours because we have the best harbours in Europe.

Bantry Bay was mentioned here. I attended a congress there very recently and I can truthfully say that I did not see any sign of any oil pollution. As a matter of fact I said to myself that it was well for the people there who are getting an industry so close to them.

We may cry a lot about the pollution but there are pollution inspectors appointed for these areas. I do not know what powers they have. People are generally aware of pollution and the harm it can do. There must be a better approach to establishing new industries than trying to hound some of these people before they have the industry set up. We are on the outskirts of Europe. We are not a highly industrialised country. Jobs are tremendously important to a man with a family. He would rather put up with pollution than take the emigrant ship. We could be too hard on industrialists because we feel we will be all dead in nine or ten years because of industrial pollution. Remember many of our people had to go to England to work in coalmines, for ten or 15 hours a day, in the tunnels under London city and so on. They had to put up with pollution, sand, coal dust and many other hazards.

A reasonable number of anti-pollution laws are necessary. We must realise that the world will not fall asunder because of pollution. There are highly industrialised countries whose people— I do not know if the people live as long as they do in Ireland—live a fair length of time and their standards are fairly high. Our aim should be to try to give foreign industrialists confidence in the ability of our workers to do a good job, the co-operation of our industries and to pin point our excellent harbours, and our geographical position as a jumping off ground, not only to the EEC, but into Europe and Asia. Anything we, in the Houses of the Oireachtas, can do by way of increasing the grant, or changing the conditions under which they are given, which would help create more employment for our people, is very worth while.

There are many areas that need assistance to get industries established there. In my own north-western area it is very difficult at the moment because of the unhappy situation that existed there over the last five or six years and also because we were on both sides of the border and there were custom duties and so on. Because Britain decided to go into the EEC many tariff barriers have been crumbling. The Six and the Twenty-six Counties are very favourable areas for industries. The IDA, the county councils and the Minister for Local Government should ensure that areas such as the north-western and north-eastern areas, which suffered the loss of the railways and do not have any airfields, should have more money pumped into them.

Mr. Ferris

I will endeavour to give a brief, non-academic contribution to this Bill which has been generally welcomed by Senators on both sides of the House. This is an enabling Bill. Many Senators, because of their affiliations with the IDA and the county development teams, have found it difficult, in their efforts to compliment the IDA, to stay within the confines of the Bill. I no doubt will have the same problem. I hope for your indulgence, a Chathaoirleach.

Many comments have been made about the IDA, complimentary and otherwise. Anyone who criticised it did so constructively. It might be no harm to put it on the record of the House that the credit for the formation of the IDA goes to a colleague of mine, Senator Connolly, who in March, 1949 in the Dáil, initiated a Private Members' Motion requesting that such an authority be set up. If anyone cares to check the records of the Dail Report of that time, Volume 114, column 796, they will discover that Deputy Connolly had a Private Members' Motion down which the then Minister for Industry and Commerce, Mr. Morrissey, accepted with gratitude and formed the IDA. That was the beginning of an organisation which contributed more to the economic development of this country than any other body which has been set up in the meantime. The then shadow Minister, of course, promised that as soon as he came to power, he would abolish it. However, having seen the wisdom of it, that did not happen, and today we have a Bill before us which enables us to pass additional funds to the IDA to ensure that they will have additional grants available for industrial development. For that reason everybody welcomes the Bill. We realise that undue delays in dealing with applications whether these delays are primarily caused by appeals against the setting up of their industry or because the IDA lack funds can cause industrialists to have second thoughts. Within the restrictions of the previous Bill they had to come back to Cabinet level. That usually caused delays. Therefore anything that eases that situation will be welcomed by all sides of the House. Many of the recent applications before us from industrialists by their very nature, size and complexity, particularly in the pharmaceutical and chemical industries, are of a very high order requiring extremely high capital input by the Government. Any Bill like this that enables the IDA to deal with it in the first instance is certainly to be welcomed.

I note from the Parliamentary Secretary's speech that there is more comprehensive legislation dealing with the IDA coming before both Houses of the Oireachtas at a later stage. Naturally that will give us ample opportunity to go into a very wide debate on the pros and cons of particular industrial development. I will confine myself to just two points. One is the policy of the IDA with regard to advance factories. I understand now that advance factories as such will not in future be provided, that preference will be given to the provision of development sites allowing the industrialist the provision of a factory more tailored to his needs rather than building an advance factory and then the local development team having the problem of endeavouring to get an industry to fit the factory. If we have gone away from this to developed sites this is a very welcome move and one to be commended.

We have such an advance factory in my area. I know we have problems and because of the closure of Gortdrum mines I hope that the IDA will consider that area for a designation, that supreme efforts will be made by the IDA to have an industrialist, at all costs, come into the advance factory in Tipperary Town so that some of the unemployment that will be caused by the closure of Gortdrum is absorbed in the factory. We will of course have a new IDA assisted factory there shortly, but this is primarily for the employment of females.

The second point I would like to deal with, which has been touched on by several Senators, is the protection of the environment and the anti-pollution policy followed by the IDA. It is as well to put on record that the county development teams—I have been a member of a county development team —in fact under the auspices of the IDA, avail of the facilities of the Institute of Industrial Research and Standards, which is a body set up, of course, independent of any particular industrialist or otherwise. They have the technical know-how and facilities. They have indeed assisted my county development team to check out the industries that are now coming to the Suir valley, as regards pollution. They have tremendous facilities in the Institute of Industrial Research and Standards. If the public were more generally aware that the IDA as such do not grant aid to companies that they fear for and that they make use of these facilities, we could nip in the bud many of these objections we have to planning and be able to assure the people, through public relations and other media, that primarily our concern is not alone for employment but also to ensure that the environment will be protected. I would like to go along with the sentiments expressed by Senator McCartin when he wished that the local county development team was broadened.

I can see a very useful function for industrialists and indeed the trade union movement at that level. With the present structure of the county development teams there is room for the advice of industrialists, whether they be through the Federated Union of Employers or any other such industrialists, that have an interest locally and the trade union movement to involve the workers at that level. I certainly welcome that kind of development. I would like the Parliamentary Secretary if possible, to give an indication as to whether the IDA would consider this trend.

I will reserve any other remarks on other functions of the IDA to another time when it would be more relevant to a Bill before us. I will just welcome this Bill before us, I am sure it will get a speedy passage.

Mr. Kilbride

I, too, welcome this Bill. I am very pleased that an opportunity is presented to this House to discuss and review the development of industry and the advance that the Industrial Development Authority have made in contributing to the establishment of new industries and, to some extent, assisting industries that are already in existence.

During the debate I heard observations made that the IDA was the authority in respect of small industries. I do not think that that is correct. There are two sections of the IDA, the small industry section and the large industry section. In a general way the Industrial Development Authority are to promote and assist the establishment of industry in the country generally. That to my mind should be based on the fact that the country generally has to have development, industrial-wise. To have that industry, and to give it a fair chance of succeeding in the country the Industrial Development Authority should examine the extent to which aid is required, financial or otherwise, in certain areas of the country.

When one looks at the situation in the country the first thing that one sees is that industrial-wise the east coast, with particular reference to the Dublin area, is over-loaded. The number of people from the country, 70 or 80 miles away, who find employment in Dublin in industries is very considerable. You have only to go along the road on Friday or any week-end and you find hundreds of people, working in industries in Dublin, hitch-hiking home. The number of people who do not go home in such a way is even more.

From a national point of view I see no reason why industry should not be established all over the country so that people do not have to travel 70 or 80 miles in order to find employment. That is the situation in Dublin city in regard to the location, and in rural Ireland, in the western or north western counties particularly, in regard to the employees.

There are what might be called advantaged areas and disadvantaged areas where industry should be looked on in regard to what extent industrialists might be subsidised or allowed to establish industry with a maximum or a minimum of subsidisation in regard to the particular location. I do not think that an industrialist coming into Dublin should be given the same incentive to establish an industry as if he was putting it in Leitrim, Longford, Roscommon or Cavan. I want to remind the House that the first Senators who spoke here were from maritime counties such as Galway, Limerick, to the extent that it is an estuary of the Shannon, Louth and Meath. The idea that some of these speakers put across was that regionalisation should obtain to the extent that industries should be sited where it was most economic to operate them and where it was most attractive to industrialists to locate them.

If we take a national view we must disagree with that entirely. We have to recognise that there is in the country the attractions I referred to, to bring industries into certain areas. The area I refer to which requires the greatest incentive is an area roughly 30 to 40 miles from the east coast extending inland to the centre of Ireland and 20 miles from the west coast extending inland to the centre of Ireland. The same is true in relation to the area from Tipperary to Dublin keeping as near to the Shannon as possible.

These are the areas that have not the particular attractions both in relation to the modes of transport of manufactured goods outwards or the incentive of recreational or social attractions in regard to locations for people to set up homes and to find more comfort and more likelihood to have a happier and easier time. The people within the central plain and up to the very north of this State should get money to a greater extent than the maritime counties. We should examine to what extent this incentive might be allocated. If we look at the last census we will find that the counties which had the greatest amount of emigration were the ones that should come first. In that regard on a hard economic analysis, an impartial and an unbiased approach we have to come to the conclusion that amongst these counties were Leitrim and Longford. These are the counties that suffered most in the ten years prior to the last census. The IDA should have a look at the situation and see to what extent they can help that particular area.

The county development teams are energetic and determined in respect of their counties. I appeal to each county development team within the underdeveloped areas in the 12 western counties to emphasise the importance of securing the maximum amount of the EEC industrial grant. This is the area which, on analysis, is seen to be the most necessary to develop. It is the area which, because of emigration, is most in need of immediate aid and help. If we are to value in terms of money and personal comfort the advantages of being in Dublin, Galway, Limerick or Cork we must recognise that persons who exist in this country but have to leave it and turn their backs on it for ever are entitled to first consideration to the greatest possible extent in the area in which they intend to reside. I would appeal to the Minister to ensure particular care is taken to influence industries into these areas that are regarded as unattractive areas. It is true that certain industries have been established in some of these areas. Some of these industries came about by reason of the fact that natural wealth was found there. In regard to the extent to which employment has been provided as a consequence the help of the IDA is certainly to be appreciated.

In areas where big industries are set up and subsidised to the extent of £2½ million, as is the case in Mullingar, we welcome the efforts of the IDA and the Government and also the people who are coming in. Industry of that nature, which has such an expansive capacity, is something to be welcomed. The sooner we have more of these industries in areas of big population the better for this country and all the people concerned. It is a compliment to the Government. Regarding what Senator Dolan said it is an indication of the confidence and the amount of trust that the Government have from industrialists coming in as to the effectiveness of the system of government, security and progress in this country. It is a fair barometer of the image of this country, the Government and the people in the eyes of industrialists abroad.

It might be correct to say that industrialists coming into this country examine the opportunities from the point of view of labour force, whether it is free from strikes, whether it is a secure place to invest money, and whether as a country the reports that other industrialists have of it are in keeping with a progressive, sound, sincere people. Our record in this regard is good. We are going through a very difficult time. The various funds and institutions that are set up to help industry in this country are certainly being called on.

It is no crime or shame to say that any industry under present circumstances in the world today should have to have recourse to special funds to bring them over the hump in the industrial world. The depression that exists is severe in every country in the world. The extent to which the people's confidence may be enhanced in regard to our general wellbeing is certainly reflected in the extent to which outsiders and industrialists come in and invest their money. I am delighted that the Minister has got this authority. While the sum is being increased to £850,000 in respect of any particular industry it is an advantage that will be availed of, I hope, in the coming year to a greater extent than it was in the past. I welcome the Bill and I wish it success.

Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry and Commerce (Mr. Bruton)

I would like to thank Senators for the gracious welcome they have given to this legislation. Basically it involves a delegation of responsibility to the Industrial Development Authority in deciding on grants on their own without recourse to Cabinet decision up to a limit of a grant of £850,000. The Seanad can have confidence that it will give this delegated responsibility to a body well fit to exercise it in a manner which is careful of public funds. I should point out that in relation to every major grant that is given by the IDA they go in to considerable detail in regard to the credit-worthiness of the firm in question. They study their annual reports if they are a public company. In some cases they have specialist international consultants to advise them, both on the prospects of the particular company in question and the general prospects in the market for the products which it is intended they should produce.

In any grant-aid decision there will be an irreducible minimum of commercial risk. There will always be the danger that the company will not do as well as is projected. We can be confident that the IDA have been very careful indeed in the grants they have given out. In fact, it has been recognised internationally that they have a very good record in relation to this matter. The First National City Bank produced a report on investment in Ireland and one of the sentences in that report was as follows:

One of the impressive features of investment in Ireland is the low failure rate amongst new grant-aided industry.

It can also be said that less than 7 per cent of the grants paid in the period 1960 to 1973 went to companies which subsequently failed. This is a very low percentage, I understand, on an international comparison basis.

The Government have substantially increased the amount of capital available to the Industrial Development Authority to create new jobs and assist in expansion of existing industry. In the nine-month period April to December, 1974, £19 million was available to the IDA. This, on an annual basis, would represent £26 million. This year, in 1975, the following 12-month year, £42.5 million is being made available, that is against the previous annual equivalent of £26 million. Even allowing for an intervening inflation rate of 20 per cent we can show that in real terms the extra grants made available to the IDA in 1975 represent a real increase of 40 per cent on that made available in the immediately preceding year and that is making an adjustment for inflation. The Government are putting money, which is what really counts, into industrial development in this country.

It is obvious that we are facing a difficult economic situation at the moment. A Government in this context can be measured in their effectiveness on the basis, not on the problems they confront, but on their relative success in meeting those problems vis-à-vis the success of other Governments facing similar problems. Obviously the most severe and relevant problem in terms of industrial development is the problem of unemployment. I should like to draw the attention of the Seanad to the fact that in the period 1974-75 there was an increase in unemployment in Denmark of 340 per cent, in West Germany of 110 per cent; in France, 72 per cent; in Belgium, 70 per cent; in the Netherlands, 55 per cent. These are all higher than the increase in unemployment, unduly high as it is, of 41 per cent which we have had in the most recent 12-month period. The fact that we have been able to keep the increase in unemployment down to this level represents two factors. One is the increasing activities by the Industrial Development Authority, and the other employment-creative initiatives of the Government and also, in fairness, the fact that we were starting from a higher base in terms of unemployment in this country. We have had traditionally a greater problem. As I have said, the effectiveness of a Government can be measured in their relative performance vis-à-vis other Governments and previous situations rather than in absolute terms. On that basis, the IDA and the Government have been doing reasonably well.

A number of Senators expressed concern about the need to provide aid in particular for small industries. This is a point of view which finds considerable sympathy with me. It is represented in thinking expressed by such people as Professor Schumacher when he speaks of intermediate technology, that is forms of technology which are suitable to small industry. Many economists would agree that the best proof against inflation is competition. To have competition you must have a number of competing units. This means encouraging diversity, encouraging small units in many cases rather than allowing one monopolistic concern to dominate any particular market. Therefore, I concur with the spirit of the remarks of many Senators in seeking a strong emphasis on the development of small industry. Our attitude in this country must not be one of solely seeking to control multinationals and trying to seek some punitive approach towards them but rather to compete with them. I believe small industrialists can, if they get the technology and show the enterprise which they should be able to show, compete in many fields with the multinationals.

Senator McCartin made a characteristically good speech and referred to the need for an advisory service for small industrialists seeking to set up in this country. While I do not go all the way with his suggestions that there should be some new institution or advisory body I agree with him that small industrialists need more help. They should be aware of the help that is available already. There exists not only the IDA but also the Institute of Industrial Research and Standards which such small enterprises can approach. The Institute produces a magazine, Technology in Ireland, with many ideas of new forms of processes in industrial production. The Patents Office produces, on a regular basis, information on new inventions and new industrial processes which have been deposited with them. We need more entrepreneurs in this country who are prepared to seek out such new ideas from the sources already available. If, having sought out these new ideas, they want further to develop them, the IDA are prepared to make available research and development grants to enable small industries to develop the technology which can compete with the technology and the strong R. and D. arm which exists in so many multinational companies.

I intend, so far as my responsibility extends to the Patents Office and others, to ensure that the maximum help is made available in the dissemination of new innovative ideas for small entrepreneurs to get going in this country on a competitive basis.

In relation to small industries, we should also bear in mind that the IDA are prepared to make available a substantially larger proportion of grant to small industries than they are to large industries. They are prepared to go up to a proportion of 60 per cent of the fixed asset investment in the case of small industries. This is far more proportionally than they will make available in the case of larger industries. It can be borne out by some figures. In the context of the small industries programme grant commitments in the nine-month year, April to December, 1974, to small industries represented £1.5 million. This was as against a total investment of £3.5 million; in other words, almost half the cost was going to be put up by the IDA.

On the other hand, in the case of fixed asset investment by domestic Irish industry which was not within the small industry category the IDA were putting up £14.8 million towards a total fixed asset investment of £77 million. Again, the figure is more striking still in the case of new overseas industry in that period. The grant commitment by the IDA represented £34.3 million as against a total fixed asset investment of £153 million by the companies themselves inclusive of the grant aid they are receiving. While the total amount being invested in small industries is relatively small we can thus clearly demonstrate that the proportion of that being made available by the IDA themselves is proportionately highest in the case of small industries and relatively higher in the case of domestic new industry, which is not small industry, than in the case of industry coming in from overseas.

Senators expressed concern also about what some considered to be an insufficient attention to the regions outside the eastern region in the matter of industrial jobs creation. Here again there is a need to place on the record some statistics which will indicate the real situation. In 1972, the Industrial Development Authority drew up a five-year industrial plan covering the period 1973 to 1977 and they set for each region and, indeed, for sub-groups within such regions, specific job creation targets. It is important, before I give the figures, to bear in mind that these were targets to be achieved by 1977, that is within the 1973-1977 period. In the Donegal region, which is perhaps the most remote of all, 137 per cent of the target had been reached in terms of job approvals by the end of 1974. Job approvals represent grants which have been firmly committed. They may not all have been paid out but the money is firmly committed. In taking job approvals along with money already paid out, 137 per cent of the regional target had been reached by the end of 1974 in the Donegal region and that was for a target set, as I say, up to 1977.

In the north western region by the end of 1974, 95 per cent had been reached. In the western region, 148.7 per cent had been reached; the target has been exceeded by almost one-half again; in the mid-western region, 98.7 per cent; in the south western region, 100 per cent; in the south eastern region, 264 per cent; in the north eastern region, 99.4 per cent; in the midland region, 127 per cent and, in the area where everybody was saying that there was too much industrial development, the eastern region, which comprises Dublin, Meath, Kildare and Wicklow, only 64 per cent of the target had been reached. Therefore, relatively speaking, in terms of the target set for the period the eastern region has been doing least well.

I have been talking in terms of job approvals and grant commitments. I am sure Senators and, in particular, Senator West will be anxious that I should talk in terms of firm actual money spent. In this context I can tell the Seanad that in the period April, 1972, to December, 1974, out of a total overall expenditure by the IDA of £176 million only £30 million was spent in the eastern region. That represents approximately 17 per cent of the total expenditure, although approximately 34 per cent of the total population are resident in the eastern region. A statistic was given to me recently which stated that within 15 miles of the GPO there are one-third of the total population and, perhaps this is more important still, half of the children in the State. While I fully agree with the sentiments expressed by Senators in their anxiety to see decentralisation, we must also bear in mind that unemployment exists in Dublin too, that real needs are there and there are people whose talents are not being fully utilised in the Dublin region. It is important to set one against the other.

Mr. M.D. Higgins

It is fair to point out that the special commitments of the year 1974 totally changed the nature of the statistic. My figures, which relate to the period 1961-71, differ radically from the figures given by the Parliamentary Secretary. It is the special nature of the commitment made in 1974 which has had the affect of changing the figures radically if, in fact——

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

I trust Senator Higgins is not going to make a speech.

Mr. M.D. Higgins

It is a matter of being perfectly clear as to the difference that might arise in the minds of a number of Senators. If you take the decade 1961 to 1971 you will get the difference, for example, between the north west and the east of 4.8 and 19.3 per cent but, if you add in the 1974 specific commitment, as the Parliamentary Secretary has said, you will see that the decisions taken in 1974 had a curiously different effect. It would probably help the Seanad if the Parliamentary Secretary emphasised that the decisions made by the authority in 1974 differ quite radically from the decisions made in the decade 1961 to 1971. These are being shown now in the figures adopted in the House.

Mr. Bruton

Of course, the policy of the Government has been one of regional development. I am merely pointing out in hard statistical terms the implications of this policy and how it has affected the relative performance of the different regions in terms of the targets set for the IDA. I might come now to something that would be of even greater interest perhaps to Senator Higgins and Senator Killilea, who is unfortunately now absent having made a rather passionate speech in which he sought to extend into the political arena also. I should like to say something about the west of Ireland. In the nine months ending December, 1974, in the western region grant commitments made represented £11.7 million as against only £6 million in the whole period from April, 1972, to March, 1974. That bears out in the case of the western region what Senator Higgins was saying, which is perfectly correct, and disproves conclusively what Senator Killilea was trying to establish. In the first two years of the regional industrial plans there has been a net increase of 2,200 new manufacturing jobs in the western region. Twelve new industries were approved by the IDA in the western region in the nine month period from April to the end of 1974 and seven major expansions were approved. Senator Killilea suggested that nothing was done, which was the exact reverse of the facts.

I thank the Seanad for their generous welcome of the Bill and I compliment Senators for the high standard of debate.

Question put and agreed to.

Agreed to take remaining Stages today.

Seanad Éireann debate - Tuesday, 15 Jul 1975