I want to thank yourself and indeed the House for allowing me the opportunity to raise on the Adjournment of the House today the continuing unemployment situation in my own constituency in the town of Carrick-on-Suir and the problems that have arisen, arising from this continued unemployment. I would like to take this opportunity to welcome to the House the Minister of State, Deputy Enda Kenny, who is a young, dynamic Minister. I am quite sure that when he hears my plea for Carrick-on-Suir he will devote his unlimited energies to the problem that I have experienced there. It is a town that is noted for its successes in many ways, not least of all in the sporting field as I mentioned this morning. But in recent times it has been bedevilled by a high level of unemployment which has led the residents and the workforce of the town to resort to actions that they would not normally resort to in a period of normal unemployment.
The urban council led by its chairman, at the prompting of a colleague of mine, Councillor Denis Power, availed of every opportunity to bring to the attention of the Minister, the senior Minister in the Department of Industry and Commerce and the IDA, the problems that have arisen in Carrick-on-Suir from the moment that we lost Rexnord and then the closure of the tanneries in the town of Carrick which was the final straw that broke the camel's back.
The tannery was operated under the name of Irish Leathers and under the company, Plunder and Pollak, who had a reputation in the tanning business second to none throughout the world. Unfortunately it closed on 19 July 1985. On that date it is known that orders in the region of £750,000 for their product still remained unfilled on the books of the company. When the receiver appointed by the courts went to dispose of the company he was given the responsibility to dispose of not alone the factory in Carrick-on-Suir but also a sister factory in the Waterford constituency. Mr. Somers, in fulfilling this charge from the court to dispose of the factory as quickly as possible, did so with extreme haste, I would say. I know from having spoken to people within the industry that, if they had been given ample opportunity to evaluate the factories and their potential and the markets, the orders and the existing machinery, it is possible that a higher figure could have been realised from the disposal of this factory.
However, be that as it may, Mr. Raymond Lennon of International Hides and Skins was eventually the successful purchaser at a figure, I would say for the record of the House, considered by everybody to be a bargain considering the orders on the books, the machinery on hand and the stock on hand. At subsequent meetings with the unions involved, the ITGWU and the ASTMS, the new purchaser intimated his intention of reopening the tannery and in fact he gave a commitment to the workers' representatives at that time that the factories would remain intact. It was agreed that all the machinery would remain intact as this would be part of any reopening programme. At subsequent meetings with the regional manager of the Industrial Development Authority, the county development team, the county development officer, the assistant county manager, the Urban District Council and a steering committee which was set up with the intention of possibly forming a co-operative movement, similar commitments were also given but, unfortunately, in spite of these commitments, two vital pieces of equipment were removed.
We realise this is a privately owned factory but I have to have regard to the commitments given to the representative of the court and the workers. Once you give commitments, people expect you to honour them. Equipment like a splitting machine which is a vital piece of machinery, and a saw which is a vital piece of equipment for the shaping of timber required for maintenance of the various yards involved, the lime yard, the tannery yard and the dyeing process in the factory, were removed. Once these were removed the workers began to feel a certain unease about trusting the purchaser and it was only when he decided to remove a compressor, which was a vital piece of equipment for the restarting of the boiler at any stage, that the workforce were forced to occupy the factory.
None of us wants to condone any illegal actions, certainly not in this House. Having visited the workers on the site recently I can sympathise with them. I can understand the reason for their frustration and their worry. I know they are doing it in a peaceful way. They are not creating any problems for anybody but they want to highlight for the owner, the Government and the IDA, who have a responsibility, their complete frustration at the way things have evolved.
A co-operative was formed just before the closure following a highly emotive and well attended public meeting at which I was present. That co-operative movement offered to the new owner to look after and maintain his factory pending a decision by him to open it. A copy of those proposals was sent to various Government Departments, to the Minister for Labour and, indeed, other Ministers who have visited the constituency have been given an assurance by all the statutory bodies that the workforce in Carrick are competent and capable of achieving production figures that would be to the benefit of any industrialist who has access to this market.
Other proposals made by this responsible organisation, this co-operative movement, suggested that Mr. Lennon might do what he said he would do — reopen the factory with a full bovine tannery production line, or sell the Carrick end of the factory to a new owner who would then operate it as a full bovine tannery factory. There are people in the constituency with the competence and the expertise to do this if the owner decided he had no interest in the Carrick factory and disposed of it. However, he still owns it. By every means available to us we have to try to ensure that he either does what he promised to do, that is to open it, or release the asset he has there to somebody else. I know that, when he disposed of the tanneries, the receiver disposed of them lock, stock and barrel in two or three different areas.
Another suggestion was made that there should be full participation by the co-operative in a scheme which would actually reopen the factory, and a final one that the premises could be leased by Mr. Lennon to the IDA. The IDA, in turn, would have the co-operative movement available to rent the factory from them and they would open it as a bovine tannery. The co-operative now involves all the workers who were previously involved in an expert way and they have the skills and the know-how and, extraordinarily, they still have markets for this product. However, there has been no response of which I am aware. Perhaps the Minister might be more forthcoming on this than the owner. That is why there is so much frustration and worry among the workers especially having regard to the fact that the Carney report, which was initiated by the Government, recommended that there should be one full tannery in the country and that that tannery should be located in Carrick-on-Suir where they have some existing equipment. Although that equipment may be old, in some aspects it is still very serviceable and ready for use.
If we look at what we want to do in this area and judge it on all the statements of responsible politicians about import substitution and about processing the natural resources here, we realise we have an unending supply of the natural resource, the skins of animals, the bovine animal in particular. Imports of upper shoe leather exceed 80,000 sq. ft. per week and this tannery is capable of producing 140,000 sq. ft. of upper shoe leather per week. Those are the last production figures available.
To convince the Minister further, if that is necessary, the workers are so concerned that, out of their redundancy money and out of the payments the Government have made available to them under the workers employees/ employers insolvency provision, they contributed £100 per man to the Irish productivity centre to carry out a survey on 11 April this year. The result of that study is extremely encouraging, so much so that I felt it my responsibility as a Senator from the constituency to bring it to the attention of the Minister so that he can consult with the IDA and the owner of the factory and support our efforts to ensure that all the people who are at present unemployed, some of them on a rota basis occupying the factory in a peaceful way, are re-employed. It is an area that has suffered because Rexnord, which was a major multinational company, went and left us with a factory. I understand that at present discussions are nearing fruition which will being about a reopening of the Rexnord factory. This would be most welcome in an area where there are tremendous labour relations.
This Government have a responsibility. In the redesignation of areas for industrial purposes and increased grants, the town of Carrick-on-Suir needs attention like no other area in the country. We have had many black spots. The Minister of State has had them in his own constituency. I have them in other areas in my constituency. There is a most excellent development association in the town of Carrick-on-Suir. There is a 40 per cent unemployment rate in the urban area. That is a percentage which has not been reached by many other towns or cities so far. Almost half of the town's population are unemployed. That is between the age of 15 and 25 years, which is the age where there will be the greatest demand for new technologically trained employees. In Carrick-on-Suir alone there are 325 people in that category available for employment, technological or otherwise.
I have confidence in the workforce in Carrick-on-Suir. I have confidence in the business people there who have supported the workers in their action. I have confidence that if the Minister approaches this problem, in the spirit in which I hope he will approach it, in addition to success in the Rexnord factory then we could have success in the tanneries where we know that they have a reputation on the market abroad, where the existing workforce who were involved as sales executives in that market know the contacts and know where to go with them and the product. Mr. Lennon, this private individual who has acquired these factories, is a man with some expertise, a man with more than one factory involved in this industry. Because of that it would worry me that he has just acquired a parcel of factories, that he has rationalised them and that he has allowed some of them to remain closed because if they opened they would be his competitors in his own field of business. It would be a tragedy if it happened that way. It would have reneged on the commitment that was given to the workers. From my knowledge of them and having spoken to them on the site last week, I am satisfied that they are prepared to enter into meaningful dialogue with the owner of the factory and the IDA with a view to a settlement of this dispute which could bring much needed employment to a town of which many of us are very proud. It is a town which can aspire to many things. It has produced some of the world's best sportsmen and politicians. I would like to pay tribute to the late Councillor Seán Healy with whom I served on Tipperary County Council for almost 20 years and who unfortunately died two years ago. I would like to pay a tribute to his memory because he lived and died for Carrick-on-Suir. I feel a responsibility to bring it to the attention of the Minister that I need something to be done urgently for this town which deserves a fair crack of the whip from the IDA.
