Each Senator has ten minutes and statements will conclude at 1 p.m. I call on the Minister.
Greencore: Statements.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
A Leas-Chathaoirligh, we have lost five minutes. It was agreed this morning to give one hour to this debate. Would you allow for that?
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
Does the House agree to sit until 1.05 p.m.? Agreed.
The Seanad will be aware of the recent press statement issued on behalf of the Minister for Finance in relation to the Government's shareholding in Greencore plc. The Minister for Finance indicated that it is the Government's intention to proceed with the disposal of its residual shareholding of 30.4 per cent in Greencore plc. A major international food group and a number of Irish food companies have expressed interest in acquiring these shares and the Government has decided to give all interested parties until Wednesday, 24 March, to put forward proposals to the Department of Finance for their purchase.
When the Irish Sugar Company was restructured, and floated on the Stock Exchange in April 1991, certain safeguards were put in place to ensure that the Irish sugar industry was protected.
Under section 2 of the Sugar Act, 1991, the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry acquired a special share in Greencore, the holding company of Siúicre Éireann cpt. The rights attached to this special share, which the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry may not dispose of, are set down in the Articles of Association of Greencore plc. The special share ensures that none of the following events can arise without the Minister's prior consent in writing: (a) any change in certain specified articles in the Articles of Association of Greencore; (b) the winding up of Greencore; (c) the sale of more than 49 per cent of Siúicre Éireann cpt. which is a subsidiary of Greencore; (d) the disposal of specified sugar assets, including the Irish sugar quota which is held by Siúicre Éireann; (e) the creation of a new class of shares in Greencore and (f) the building up by one shareholder or a consortium of shareholders, other than the Minister for Finance, of more than a 15 per cent shareholding in Greencore after flotation.
In summary, the special share prevents the disposal of the controlling interest in Siúicre Éireann or the sugar assets including the Irish sugar quota, and prevents a single shareholder, or a group of shareholders acting together, from gaining control of Greencore plc.
Now let me deal with any concerns which arise in connection with the Irish sugar quota. Ireland is allocated a sugar quota of 200,200 tonnes under EC legislation. Member states are required to allocate sugar quota to each sugar producing undertaking in their territory. As Ireland has only one such undertaking, viz. Siúicre Éireann cpt., the entire quota is allocated to that company.
Current EC legislation does not provide for the transfer of any quota, or part thereof, from one member state to another. The question of relocating Ireland's sugar quota in another member state does not therefore arise. It is precluded under national legislation, section 2 of the Sugar Act, 1991 and under Community legislation, so there is a double protection there.
I should mention also that at the time of restructuring of Siúicre Éireann cpt in 1991, special arrangements were made to protect the workers engaged in the sugar industry, and Greencore employs up to 2,000 workers. A provision was made in the Sugar Act, 1991, to ensure that every employee of Siúicre Éireann prior to flotation, enjoyed the same rights and was subject to the same obligations after flotation of the company. In that regard also Siúicre Éireann and the unions drew up an agreement and lodged it with the Labour Relations Commission and registered with the Labour Court. This agreement related to employees conditions, pay, continuity of employment, recognition of trade unions and continuation of existing procedures. This agreement gave reassurance to workers whose interests were already protected under the European Communities (Safeguarding of Employee's Rights on Transfer of Undertaking) Regulations, 1980. I want to stress that I fully endorse the contents of this agreement which I have no doubt constitutes a major protection for the rights of the employees in Siúicre Éireann.
The Irish sugar industry is of immense importance to the Irish economy. Some 1.3 million tonnes of beet are grown each year by about 5,000 beet farmers. The value of this beet is nearly £60 million per annum. The value of our sugar quota, which is over 200,000 tonnes would be conservatively estimated to be worth over £1 billion so we are talking about a considerable national asset and an important part of the agricultural and national economy.
I want to assure this House that the disposal of any remaining Government shares in Greencore will not affect the operation of the Irish sugar industry which as I have already outlined is adequately safeguarded because of the special share which stays in operation irrespective of the profile of the shareholding and Community regulations.
May I recall that one of the major justifications for restructuring Siúicre Éireann was to enable the development of a major food enterprise based on indigenous resources with a view to maximising added value, exports, and, critically, the creation of additional jobs. Since its formation Greencore has progressed and developed well and is managed most professionally. Greencore is one of our largest and most broadly based industries, involved not only in beet growing and sugar production but also in flour milling, malting and various other activities. It is one of our finest indigenous companies.
I would welcome a bid for the residual shareholding from Irish companies. Here is a golden opportunity to develop an indigenous company with Irish management. Irish based companies are already doing a fine job, not only in Ireland but also in Europe and in the United States.
Proposals for the purchase of the Government's residual shareholding in Greencore will not be viewed solely on the basis of the price of the shares. The existing bid is for £2.60 per share bringing in about £70 million. That will not be the critical consideration. The critical consideration will be the strategic development of this agricultural industry, this indigenous resource and its value in terms of turnover, contribution to the economy and potential for retaining existing and creating additional jobs.
I welcome the Minister to the House. Everybody shares the Minister's concern about the Irish sugar industry and agrees that it should be allowed and encouraged to develop to the economic advantage of the State and of all employed in the industry.
It is unfortunate that while the Minister said a great deal with which we agree, he said little about the events of the last few days. This Government and the last Government have not been able to sell shares in a semi-privatised company without a major row. Last year when the then Minister for Finance, quite rightly, sold shares the Irish Association of Investment Managers objected as did a large number of financial institutions. There is now much more going on behind the scenes than is conveyed by the Minister's factually correct but not sufficiently informative speech.
Irish people fear foreign investment and foreign industrial presence especially in investment matters. It is ironic that last week we were pleading with Digital to maintain their presence here and this week we are trying to scare off a multinational company making a bid for 30.4 per cent of Greencore. Why this fear of selling 30.4 per cent? Indeed we will not be selling 30.4 per cent — I am sure the Minister will agree — but 29.9 per cent; the other 0.4 per cent will have to go to the market because of Stock Exchange rules. Why are we so frightened of selling a small minority holding which will not give control of the company to any foreign buyer? It will give the buyer 29.9 per cent, not over 50 per cent. We are apparently balking at selling even 29.9 per cent to a foreign investor. Greencore — the Minister can correct me on this — set up this deal with a foreign investor because it received support neither from Government nor from Irish investors. There were no funds available from Government in the event of a rights issue or of any other call on funds.
Greencore has been badly frustrated during the last year or two; it cannot expand for lack of the capital and the Government is not a supporting shareholder. The Government has been sitting on its shares waiting for a buyer; it has not been prepared to put money into the company. Although the Government — or some members of Government — obviously agreed in principle that this sale should go ahead, we are now looking for a so-called "Irish" buyer to purchase the shares at a similar price.
The Minister said there has been a firm bid of 260p per share which seems like a good price. I do not know if that reported bid of 260p is accurate but the Minister is undoubtedly well informed on this. The market price jumped 29p yesterday to 267½p. It has fallen slightly this morning. The Government was offered extraordinarily good value for its shares. It is unusual for a bid for a large amount of shares to be made at considerably more than the market price. Suddenly the Government hesitated. There were internal problems and now the shares must be put out to tender to what is called an Irish buyer. That is a faulty principle given our unjustifiable fear of multinationals in Ireland. The best hope for Greencore is a multinational shareholder with funds to expand the company and to allow it to go on the acquisition trail it has wanted to follow for the last year or two. Jobs are more likely to be created by a multinational shareholder than by Irish companies scraping around, as they have done in the last few days since this became public — I suspect against the wishes of the Government — looking for partners to get involved in a company not necessarily compatible with their own.
Can the Minister tell me if an Irish company bids less than 260p, will the Government sell to that company? Is it prepared to sell the shares at a discount to ensure the company is kept in Irish hands even though only 30 per cent of the company is for sale and the majority shareholding will remain Irish? Is it Government policy now to forego commercial criteria? Perhaps somebody on the Government benches could tell me why it is necessary to keep the company in Irish ownership when the Minister says blatantly that he would retain control over the sugar quote even if we sold 100 per cent of the company. This is muddled, confused and wrong thinking. In the Minister's own words the company is protected. It does not matter whether we sell to an Irish buyer or not because the quota is protected. The Minister's thinking is confused like that of other members of Government when they see anything falling out of Irish hands. We should not adopt that attitude but welcome the fact that multinationals are prepared to invest in a thriving Irish company. The board of Greencore is to be congratulated for setting up the deal and selling the Government's share, which is apparently what they did.
I understand fully what the Minister said in an aside, about creating jobs. However, it is misleading to suggest that by keeping the company solely in Irish hands jobs will be created. We need to be honest about this. The Government made a decision which it revealed in last week's budget, to raise £150 million by selling its stake in Greencore to a private sector. At present, it can only do so by selling to a single buyer. The Minister knows as well as I do that it would be almost impossible to place these shares on the Stock Market in the current environment. There is insufficient liquidity in the Stock Market to sell this shareholding to a variety of institutional shareholders. The Government is lucky to have received this bid and if I were the Minister I would thank the board of Greencore and sell the shares to a constructive overseas company prepared to inject capital into Greencore at a critical time thereby helping the Government's budgetary arithmetic.
May I share my time with Senator Roche?
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
Is that agreed? Agreed.
I welcome the Minister and his statement of intention to sell shares in Greencore. The Minister for Finance in his Budget Statement indicated the Government's intention to proceed with the disposal of its residue shareholding of 30.4 per cent in Greencore and also stated that an international food group and a number of Irish food companies have expressed interest in acquiring these shares.
There are fears among farmers, beet growers and workers in Greencore as to what the consequences might be if these shares were sold to a multinational. Some people, however, have no fears about multinationals buying these shares. As Senator Ross pointed out, the buying of such shares would not give the buyer complete control. However, given our unfortunate experience of multinationals over the years, and lately, some of the objections to multinationals buying these shares can be justified.
It appears Greencore approached a multinational food group in the United States to interest them in the shares without the knowledge of Irish groups. It is surprising that a multinational should be made aware of the proposed sale of these shares before an Irish company. It is a poor reflection on all the money invested in Irish education that we should look abroad first for people to manage our affairs. We must be assured whatever sale takes place that the interests of beet growers and Greencore workers will be protected. I live close to the sugar factory at Mallow which gives great service to local beet-growers. At one stage it was compulsory for farmers to grow beet and now there is a quota to restrict it. I am delighted to see under Article 2 of the Sugar Act, 1991 that the golden share will protect our quota and cannot be interfered with. That will allay the fears of farmers with quotas and also allay the fears of Greencore workers.
The farming organisations that favour rationalisations, generally — the ICMSA and the IFA — are in favour of the shares being sold to an Irish company. It is not long since there were four sugar factories in Ireland. That was under General Costello who did a great job managing Siúicre Eireann as it was known at the time. Now we have two sugar factories. We should also be aware of the fear that with selling, privatisation and rationalisation, we could be reduced to one sugar factory. I am sure the Minister will allay those fears when he replies.
Many workers are involved in the Mallow sugar factory, processing beet and making cattle feed products vital to the farming community in the Mallow and Carlow areas. It is important whatever sale takes place that the interests of farmers, beet producers and workers are protected. Some people favour a multinational shareholder on the basis that it might invest money in Ireland. I would prefer if the shares were sold to an Irish company.
I thank my colleague for sharing his time with me.
I compliment Senator Ross on his contribution; I agree with much of what he said. There has been a kneejerk reaction from certain public representatives to plans to dispose of the remaining parcel of shares in Greencore. These kneejerk reactions could result in the Irish taxpayers getting less than true value of Greencore shares. They could result also in prohibiting the company establishing long term international connections which would be valuable not only to suppliers, but in the long term, to employees. Criticism is particularly hypocritical when it comes from persons who participated in the Government of 1983-87, which effectively gave away a partly State owned company producing non-sugar sweeteners. Some of the recent adverse reaction could also have a major detrimental impact on the yield to the people of this country from any future disposal of State assets.
I can understand why people should be disenchanted with multinationals. I certainly have no remit for them, but we need to be a little more cautious in our comments than some commentators have been. Placing the balance of the shares with Irish institutions and pension funds without competition would undoubtedly result in the shares being bought at below their true price. Senator Ross is correct when he suggests that something we do not know of may be going on in the background. The reality is that managers of institutional shareholdings in recent months have not been overly anxious to boost the share prices of either Greencore or Irish Life because they were fully aware that further placement was to come. An arrangement to sell off these shares to an Irish buyer without overseas competition would not prevent the buyer from selling on to a multinational subsequently at a considerable profit. Such an arrangement would not only deny the Irish taxpayer the true price of the asset but would allow a privileged few to make an additional killing in further dealings.
Confining the sell-off to the Irish market could, as observed by Fine Gael's finance spokesperson in the Dáil, have the additional undesirable effect of absorbing any liquidity in the Irish capital market, to the detriment of small and medium sized firms currently seeking capital for expansion. Senator Ross touched on that issue too.
In the current context and in the light of historical facts, criticism from politicians who supported the Government between 1983 and 1987 could be considered hypocritical. That Government allowed Wheat Industries Limited, a company partly owned by Ceimicí Teo., to be effectively given away at its written asset value. That was and remains a national scandal that has never been adequately explained or examined.
That was another Fianna Fáil Government and Deputy Lenihan was the Minister. The Senator should check his facts.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
Senator Roche, without interruption.
I have checked my facts. The Ministers for Industry and Commerce and for Agriculture prevented the Irish sugar company from buying that company in 1984. As a result of this a major Irish producer of non-sugar sweetners was disposed of to a multinational. The company has changed hands several times over the intervening years and it is interesting to note its current owner.
We need a more balanced debate on the issue of the disposal of a minority shareholding in a company which is already privatised. We need to be careful in the criticisms we make. Other shareholdings currently owned by the Irish people will need to be disposed of.
Is there an agreement on that?
Some of the commentary and interference of recent times will contribute towards having the present proposal approved and made it likely that in future disposal of State shares Irish taxpayers will receive less than the true value of their shareholdings.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
I understand Seantors Quinn, Sherlock and Dardis will share time.
I had not planned to speak but I am using this opportunity to make a brief contribution.
Business is difficult all over the world and is becoming more so. To survive and to thrive in business one needs competitive advantage for which international links are necessary especially in the food business. We should not be concerned about who owns the business, but about how that competitive advantage might be obtained. If competitive advantage is best given by a company with international links, we should support that partnership wholeheartedly rather than be concerned about enabling a more familiar Irish company to acquire ownership. Let us seek the competitive advantage in this case. Whichever company Greencore chooses as its preferred partner, let us sell the shares there to make sure that Greencore survives.
My party believes the public interest will not be served by the decision to sell the 30 per cent public shareholding in Greencore and will resolutely oppose any such move. As a former employee of the company I feel strongly about this proposal.
The circumstances surrounding the reported bid for the 30 per cent share by a US company require immediate clarification. In particular, the Minister for Finance must say if he discussed with the management of Greencore the possibility of finding a buyer for the State's share. How can the Minister claim to have been unaware of the move? Was the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry consulted in this matter? As the holder of 30 per cent of the shares is he not represented on the board of the company? Do his representatives not let him know what is happening? In a partnership Government why was the matter not discussed with An Tánaiste?
The only way to protect the jobs of Greencore employees and the interests of growers and hauliers is for the State to retain its present shareholding in the company which last year made a profit of £30 million. The sale of its 30 per cent shareholding to outside interests apparently supported by the executives of the company would jeopardise an important element of our food industry. The golden share would not protect the sugar quota as there is no obligation to produce the full 200,000 tonnes of sugar in this country. The Minister can have a golden share in the Articles of Association but there is nothing to stop the company importing sugar; sugar has been imported into Ireland previously.
The Labour Party should see this for the anti-public enterprise move and short-sighted decision that it is. They should respond to the calls of workers and unions to retain the present element of public ownership, when the unions contributed so generously to the election campaign of many of the Labour TDs, up to £6,000 per constituency.
One aspect that particularly concerns me was referred to by Senator Roche. In 1982 Ceimicí Teoranta joined with Wheat Industries Limited to establish in Ringaskiddy a plant to manufacture fructose corn syrup. A limit was placed on the quantity that could be produced there. I am not aware that that restriction has been lifted although another company ADM, has been looking at the factory obviously seeking a back door into the European market.
When the food industry was separated from the sugar industry in the late sixties and linked to the great Heinz company, what happened? We had vacant food factories in Mallow, Midleton and at Fastnet in Skibbereen. Heinz was not interested in Irish workers or growers but was in profit and the company gobbled up our food industry. The proposed link up between American multinationals and the Irish Sugar Company does not give grounds for hope when we see what happened when Erin Foods was linked to Heinz. I call on the State to retain its 30 per cent shareholding in Greencore and on the Labour Party to support that call. It is the only way to protect jobs.
I thank Senator Quinn for sharing his time with me. This debate reminds me of the point made on the Order of Business that all shades of opinion should be represented in the House. I disagree with some of Senator Sherlock's statement.
The Progressive Democrats support the disposal of the State's 30 per cent shareholding in Greencore under certain specified conditions. The first condition is that the best possible price for the holding should be obtained for the taxpayer. Second, the strategic interest of Irish farmers and in particular of the 5,000 sugar beet growers should be fully protected. The Irish quota must be fully protected also and I have been reassured by what the Minister said about that in his statement. Thirdly, the vital interest of Greencore in the Irish food industry should be fully protected in the event of a disposal, together with the jobs of 2,000 food industry workers. I am satisfied that the golden share protects the vital national interest in the industry adequately.
I would like an Irish company to take up this shareholding but like Senator Quinn and Senator Ross I have no difficulty about large cash rich multinational companies coming into Ireland. Our experience with Digital has not been the most fortunate but nevertheless that experience should not deter us from encouraging future international investment. If this country is seen as a haven for international investment, so much the better for the country.
It is unquestionable that Greencore could be greatly helped by a company with money to inject into it. It is badly in need of cash.
After making £30 million profit?
We were generous to the Senator this afternoon and allowed him to have his say. The Senator should not abuse the privilege.
It is my absolute conviction in respect of some proposals in the budget that money raised from the disposal of State companies such as this should not be devoted to current spending. It should be used for capital expenditure; otherwise we go down the dangerous road of selling the family silver to fund current spending.
It seems to me from statements made by the Minister for Finance, Deputy B. Ahern, in the Dáil that he and his Department were not aware that Greencore seemed to be touting the world for business partners. The shareholding for sale is not Greencore's but the State's. It is for the Government to decide on its disposal, not for Greencore executives to seek pals in international financial markets.
I support the proposal to dispose of the holding on the conditions I have mentioned and reiterate that the sale should not be used to fund current sending.
I wish to share my time with Senator Cashin and Senator O'Kennedy.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
I agree with Senator Dardis's objection that the board of Greencore should tout Government shares. That board did not cover itself with glory on the occasion of the company's flotation as we well know. There has been an attempt to railroad the sale of this shareholding through on the basis of the tick tack operations common to financial circles here and abroad — an operation Senator Ross understands. I do not blame Senator Ross who moves in a world that possibly does not understand fear of multinationals. If the Senator got on his bike and visited the towns and cities of Ireland he would learn about the fear of multinationals. Ask people in Galway.
Ask the Labour Party.
When significant control is transferred to interests outside the State the hope that that outside interest will involve itself deeply in advancing the future of Irish industry is a forlorn one. Every Government since the foundation of the State has said that the way forward for Ireland is to develop an indigenous, highly efficient food industry. This has been done to some extent. Companies seeking partners outside the State ignore Kerry Co-op and Waterford Co-op, success stories of immense proportions. There are other sectors within the food industry more than capable of developing a highly efficient and profitable enterprise in tandem with Greencore.
Greencore is a private company with a State shareholding; it is not a State company. It was clearly signalled in the budget that £150 million would be raised by the disposal of some assets but there are ways of disposing of assets which take account of the national interest. The way to do that in this case is to ensure that those shares are sold to an Irish company. I make no apologies for that. We have seen the result of transferring power outside the State and of then trying to persuade people in Boston, New York, Chicago or wherever to come to our rescue.
The fear of multinationals is real. In my view, the board of Greencore acted highhandedly and without regard for the national interest. The Government must now ensure that that interest is fully protected by whatever action is taken in relation to the disposal of shares.
I thank Senator Magner for sharing his time with me. Having listened to the contributions I feel vindicated by the provision I inserted in the Sugar Act, 1991 when it came before the Oireachtas. This was the special provision of the special share which sought to ensure that the interests of the Sugar Company workers, the beet growers who supplied the company and the interests of the Irish people, because of this industry's national significance, would be protected and could not be ignored except with the sanction of the Oireachtas. I do not expect the Oireachtas at any time to sanction the transfer of the sugar quota which, under European legislation, cannot be transferred from one country to another. This is why I am reassured by the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry's notification this morning because it is the Minister, who carries the responsibility in relation to the special share.
We have to achieve a balance between a vigorous effective indigenous company consistent with the recommendations of the Culliton report, and the reasonable promotion, and not just the protection, of the interests of beet growers who supply Greencore and of workers who have contributed much to its success. The profits that prepared Siúicre Éireann, as it was then, for partial privatisation were achieved as a result of redundancy packages. This was a hard reality and I had some reservations about it because it meant job losses in former Siúicre Éireann factories. Profit is important in the world of international competitiveness but it should never be pursued without due regard to the contribution and dignity of workers.
At this critical time of high unemployment in Ireland everything must enhance the capacity of our indigenous sector. We must get out there and compete on a level basis with any other sector in any other country. We have many advantages. I believe this proposal based on the original legislation will facilitate that development but I accept that the legitimate concerns of workers and farmers must be protected. I support the proposal before the House on the basis that the special share in the remit of the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry, affords adequate protection.
The Labour Party agree in principle that if 34 per cent of the State shareholding of Greencore is to be sold, it should be sold to an Irish company. I agree with that. In the fifties and sixties in Mallow, as Senator Sherlock said, the great General Michael J. Costello developed food processing factories — Erin Foods — in Mallow and other areas of County Cork. We had the drive, the technology and the workforce to create something great for Ireland had it continued.
At that time we had 300 steady jobs in Mallow. Unfortunately, there was a change of management and the company merged with one of the American giants — Heinz — and the company was known as Heinz-Erin. That merger benefited the few rather than the many. In time, the company diminished in size to become a private factory with 60 workers and no conditions for the workforce. That factory is now for sale and the 300 jobs that could have been there are gone forever.
If the Greencore shares should be sold, I believe they should go to an Irish company.
I support the proposed sale of shares in Greencore. What is astonishing is that, after six weeks in this new Government, the Labour Party has agreed to the sale of shares in Irish companies, a privatisation they opposed during the election campaign. The workers in Aer Lingus must look forward to the same fate as is happening here; the family silver will be sold to pay for the day to day expenses of running the country.
I was a Member of the other House last year when the 15 per cent share was sold without anybody knowing. The present Minister for Finance told us that it had been sold at the best time and on the best advice available. On this occasion, he told us he did not know about the proposed sale or what the Greencore board is doing. Is this another example of having his eye off the ball in these developments? Is that the way the Government is going to continue? In the space of a week we have learned that both parties have not got their eyes on the ball in relation to major issues.
That is a distortion of the facts.
The facts speak for themselves. Mr. Summers, who represents the workers, says it is a complete reversal of the policy on which the smaller party in Government fought the election.
I did not accept, when the Greencore shares were sold last year, that the money should be used for day to day spending. If we sell State assets the money should be used for reinvestment in new jobs or in the reduction of our national debt. I am sorry that this Government, at its first opportunity to make capital out of State shares, will use the moneys for day to day spending and there is more to come. That is the reality.
I object to the Government deciding — and we do not know whether it has been agreed — that only an Irish company can buy the shares. In other words if I have a property to sell, one neighbour cannot buy it but two or three neighbours down the road can, and I must take whatever price is available. That is what we are talking about.
I hope the Minister will explain to his partners in Government that if some of the Irish companies mentioned by Senator Magner, for example, Waterford Co-op or Kerry purchase the 30 per cent share, they will be in direct competition with Greencore for about 34 per cent of their business in Ireland. In other words, there will be rationalisation of part of the business of Greencore because if an Irish company buys Greencore and some of its business is in the same area as Greencore's, the company will rationalise and jobs will be lost. Nobody has mentioned that aspect of this proposal.
The other important point is that if we have something worth selling and the main Members of the Board being appointed by the State will have control of the board and we sell it to an outsider, we will have badly needed money coming into the State. I do not believe you can compare this development to Digital as Digital was solely owned by an American multinational. There are questions to be answered in connection with the fertilizer business in which, if an Irish company buying the shares was involved in that business, rationalization will take place and ultimately there will be a loss of a substantial number of jobs.
I do not believe that thought has been given to the long term effects of the proposal by certain members of the Cabinet who say Greencore has to be sold to an Irish company. Why put it up for sale at all if it is to be restricted in that way? I do not believe this is on. This decision has only come about recently because the union's representative, Mr. Summers, said that the Government was not elected on this policy.
If this is an indication of the type of decision that will be made, we will have one hand behind our back when the next decision is made to sell the other part of the £150 million of shares agreed in the budget by the Cabinet to be sold over the next 12 months and we will not receive the best price. That is not the road we should take and I do not agree that we should sell assets for day to day spending because of inadequate budgeting on the part of the Minister for Finance. This is only the beginning of what is to come. If we do not use moneys to reinvest in job creation or to reduce the national debt, then it is a waste of a decision.
I have no ideological hangups about the sale of assets. It baffles me to hear from the other side of the House that the money raised in this way will be used for the day to day running of the country.
That is what happened last time.
It is irrelevant——
It is not irrelevant, it is paying with tomorrow's dinner——
The money has to be raised either through the sale of assets or by another form.
The Greencore issue has caused much contention because there is always a certain amount of suspicion due to what happened in the past. I am concerned that there has not been enough time allocated to other companies to negotiate and investigate the possibility of a purchase or a takeover bid. I have no problem with a multinational being involved in a takeover, but we must look at the circumstances, now that three or four weeks have been given for companies in Ireland, besides the one that has been mentioned, to make a bid for Greencore. I fear that Greencore might not realise its true value and the taxpayer will not receive the full benefit. The shares have jumped in value since this was mentioned; this is an indication that this company is profitable and there is great interest in it. When the people concerned contemplate this sale, they should realise its full value to the State.
In recent years Greencore has made rapid advances in technology. We must give time to those concerned to negotiate this matter with care and it is important to make the details public to avoid future problems.