Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 24 Jun 1931

Vol. 39 No. 7

Trade Loans (Guarantee) (Amendment) Bill, 1931-Second Stage.

I move that the Bill be now read a Second Time. This Bill is exactly the same as the one I introduced last year, with the necessary change of date. The change is shown in Section 2 of the Bill, which allows for guarantees to be given up to 31st July, 1932, under both sections of the original Act, with the precise limitation which was in the measure of last year, that at any time in that interval there may be published a notice in the "Iris Oifigiúil" stating that no applications for guarantees under Section 1 of the Principal Act, as amended by this Act, or for loans or guarantees under Section 2 of the Principal Act, as so amended, would be entertained by the Minister after the particular date. I had no intention this time last year of having any measure of this type this time, but I am in exactly the same position as last year, except that the applications which are pending are even more numerous than this time last year. There are five applications. Some of them have advanced to a certain point. One of them is with the Minister for Finance, the application having been granted, while others have only been notified to me as coming forward. There are three rather large applications, and there is one relatively small but still of a considerable amount. It would be quite unfair to people who made application on the strength of an Act in existence to close down this system of guarantee until these applications have been disposed of.

The Minister has repeatedly, in this House and outside, expressed his view that this Trade Loans (Guarantee) Act has exceeded the period of its usefulness and that he intended to let it expire. Statements have appeared in the Press that he was contemplating a new measure on different lines, but that is denied and he has expressed the view that when assistance is to be given to a particular industry it can be done in the manner in which sugar beet was assisted, by special legislation or special vote of the Dáil. We are not opposed to the continuation of the Act for another year, although I must say that we have the idea that its continuation is very largely due to the fact that the Minister has not given the problem of finding an alternative method the attention which it requires. A great deal can be done to foster industry in this State and it is necessary that it should be done. If this particular method of doing so is not going to produce the results, and it has not produced the results heretofore, then some other means has to be found.

We passed a Bill like this last year on information that certain applications were pending. A year has passed and not one of these applications has come to maturity. No guarantees have been given. I think the Minister should tell us what has happened to the applications which were pending when the Bill was before the Dáil last year which necessitated the continuing of the Act on that occasion. Is there any reason to anticipate that the applications which have occasioned this Bill are likely to get any further than the applications which were referred to twelve months ago? I would like also if the Minister would tell us what progress has been made in the disposal of the assets of the companies which failed. No definite arrangement has been made for submitting that information to the Dáil. The Minister stated that when the assets had been disposed of the information could be got by question. Has the disposal of the assets in any one of the six cases concerned been completed? If so, to what extent has the State been recouped for the loss involved? Further, I would like to get some information from the Minister as to the nature of the applications which are now pending and which he expects to have considered during the next twelve months.

The applications that were before my Department this time last year have not been heard of because they were not proceeded with. Of those that are before me this time I can only speak of one. I mention that one simply because it has been given publicity outside. It is an applisation for a considerable amount by the Limerick Harbour Commissioners, which is in the last stage. It is the one I referred to as being before the Minister for Finance. The others are still in a state in which they might be regarded as being extremely confidential, and I could not give any information regarding them.

Has the Minister received an application in respect of a loan for the development of Galway Harbour?

I received no application for a trade loan in connection with that. The Deputy has questioned me as to assets recoverable in connection with several of these loans where the State has made this guarantee. I cannot say what amounts have been realised. I can give the amounts so far as they are available in answer to a question. In the case of the Allihies Mines the property was realised but I have not the actual figures. The sale has actually been carried out. I think, apart from the information that might be elicited by an ordinary Parliamentary question, a return will have to be made quite soon. It will probably be necessary to fill in details of the amounts received. When previously a return was presented that was a blank column, because there had been nothing received up to that time. I do not know whether it is absolutely essential that it should be produced, but I certainly can produce it on a question being addressed to me later on, where there have been particular sums realised.

Would the Minister give us any information as to the position in connection with the Glass Bottle Works, as to whether he will proceed with the sale of the assets or get the factory re-started?

[An Leas-Cheann Comhairle took the Chair.]

To get the factory re-started, but the two things are in complete distinction-selling the assets and getting the factory re-started are two different operations. I have come to no decision, because I have no definite application yet for the factory. People are still being sought out with a view to getting it re-started.

It is not the Minister's present intention to break up the plant or anything of that kind? Has the Minister come to any decision in reference to that?

I have a long time ago taken a decision that I will sell as scrap, provided I cannot get the other arrangement.

There has been no decision to sell the factory as scrap?

I would not like to say. The decision to sell as scrap has been taken provided arrangements were not completed within a certain time. I do not think that time has expired yet, but it has very nearly expired.

Would the Minister have any objection to stating the names of the Advisory Committee operating under the Act?

Mr. Pim, Mr. John O'Neill, and Mr. Briscoe.

Question put and agreed to.
Barr
Roinn