asked the Minister for Finance if he will state if, when making the latest nominations of directors to the Board of Cómhlucht Siúicre Eireann, Teo., it was intended that the chairman was to devote his whole time to the post.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Comhlucht Siúicre Eireann, Teo.
asked the Minister for Finance if he will state if the managing director of Cómhlucht Siúicre Eireann, Teo., who is seconded for that purpose from the Civil Service, in addition to his salary as managing director retains his Civil Service salary.
asked the Minister for Finance whether, in view of the lack of confidence in the management of Cómhlucht Siúicre Eireann, Teo., on the part of the farmers and the feeling created by recent dismissals, and in view of the State guarantee of debentures of the company, etc., he will set up a commission to inquire into the affairs of the company, the working of each factory, and to report on what economies may be effected.
I propose to take questions Nos. 3,4 and 5 together. As the Deputy is aware, Cómhlucht Siúicre Eireann, Teoranta, which was set up under the Sugar Manufacture Act, 1933, is a limited liability company operating under the Companies Acts. The powers of the Minister for Finance are laid down in the Sugar Manufacture Act, and they provide inter alia, for the acquisition of a limited amount of share capital and for the appointment of a certain number of members of the the board so long as the Minister holds a certain proportion of the share capital under the Act. The Minister had also power to appoint the first managing director of the company, but this power has now been exhausted and the present managing director is appointed by the board and, on the point raised by the Deputy, does not retain his Civil Service salary. The chairman to whom the Deputy also refers is also appointed by the board and my function is confined to the approval of his remuneration, which was fixed on a part-time basis, and is, I am satisfied, reasonable in amount. The Minister's powers, apart from those referred to above, are those of an ordinary shareholder and the board, as in the case of an ordinary company, has full responsibility for the management of the affairs of the company, and I am sure the Deputy will appreciate that it would not be in the public interest to interfere with the discretion of the board in its administration. There is nothing, to my mind, in the statement of accounts of the company as presented to me and as laid before the Dáil which calls for an inquiry such as that suggested.
Mr. Bourke
Arising out of that answer, has the Minister in view any other steps which would enable him to allay the great discontent, suspicion and indignation which is rife in the country at the present time, amongst both farmers and workers, as a result of the crushing attitude of the directors of the Sugar Company towards them?
I can only reply to that by referring the Deputy to what I said in the House on the Second Stage of the Sugar Manufacture Bill. It appears in Volume 49, column 388, of the Parliamentary Debates:
. . . it is the Government's desire and intention that the company should be left as free as possible to carry out the business of establishing the industry and, once the company is formed, there will be as little governmental interference with it as possible. The directors will be left free to administer and to operate the undertaking entrusted to them. They will be empowered to secure the best available technical advice in matters pertaining to the construction and equipment of the factory and they will be left free to the fullest possible extent to develop the business in the same way as a purely privately-owned company would develop it.