Yes. As I said, I do not want at this stage to go into all the economics of the undertaking because of the juxtaposition of time. Deputies will have a full opportunity of discussing the matter later. In the meantime, I feel that Deputies on all sides of the House will join with me in deprecating the serious imputations made in this article in the Irish Times against members of the Board of Nitrigín Éireann Teo. This article reads:
The final decision to go ahead with the project followed a favourable report received by the Minister for Industry and Commerce from a committee appointed in September, 1960. As some members of this committee were subsequently appointed to the board of the new company, reasonable doubts must exist as to their neutrality in assessing the project.
It is true that some members of the committee were appointed to the board that was charged with seeking tenders for the setting up of the factory. The names of the members of the board were published widely and are well known throughout the country and therefore are absolutely identifiable. This, as I have said, is a most serious imputation against their integrity and I submit it is a lamentable departure from the high standards which we have come to expect from the Press of this country. It is well known to the management of the Irish Times that these officers in their capacity as civil servants have no public voice to reply to a newspaper attack of this nature on their honesty and integrity which, so far as I am concerned, are absolutely beyond any shadow of doubt.
The work of the members of the board and of those whom they have since employed has impressed me most favourably. The extent to which they have gone to seek the best possible advice has been a test of the severest kind of their application and devotion to duty. In general, in my few years as Minister and in my experience before that, I feel that Irish public representatives and the Irish public generally can feel proud and happy about the standards of integrity and ability we have in our Civil Service. It is for these reasons that I feel constrained to mention this lamentable article at this stage.
There is one other point about this Irish Times article which was headed “Firms think project unfeasible,” and in support of this the article goes on to say, following the quotation I have just given:
At the same time the leading firms in the Irish fertiliser industry submitted confidential memoranda stating that they did not think the project economically feasible.
I want to inform the Dáil here and now that no such memorandum, confidential or otherwise, was submitted to me or to my Department or to the fertiliser factory. Indeed, already one of the leading fertiliser companies, Messrs. Gouldings, have taken the trouble to address to Nitrigín Éireann Teo., with a copy to my Department, a letter of denial in the following terms:
An article in the Irish Times dated 18th July makes the statement that “The leading firms in the Irish Fertiliser industry submitted confidential Memoranda stating that they did not think the project economically feasible.
The letter goes on to say:
It would be correct to say, should the Government wish, that the confidential Memorandum which was submitted by W. & H.M. Goulding Ltd., related to its requirements as a substantial consumer of nitrogen and did not comment as to the economics of the State-owned factory for nitrogen.
Since then, another large-scale firm manufacturing fertiliser has also disclaimed any responsibility for the statement attributed to leading fertiliser firms.
I have been called on in the public press to comment on the statements made by Mr. Deasy, president of the National Farmers' Association. It was not my intention at this juncture to do so and I have been preparing data to make a comprehensive reply to Mr. Deasy's criticism but again I feel I can take advantage of this occasion to do so. Mr. Deasy's speech was reported in the daily press of 12th of this month and I shall quote extracts from that speech and make comments on them. First, he says:
Farmers could expect no benefit from the proposed industry before 1965-66.
The plans for the factory do not envisage production before the early months of 1965. This has been stated by me in the Dáil and Mr. Deasy, therefore, was not throwing any new light on the position by this statement.
Mr. Deasy went on to say:
Farmers could expect very probably no benefit thereafter (from the industry) and for which the outlet in the context of free competition within the European Economic Community is at best very dubious.
It is accepted as an established fact by all concerned in this country, including the NFA, and, presumably, Mr. Deasy that sulphate of ammonia and ammonium nitrate have been available in recent years to Irish farmers at prices very substantially below the prices obtaining for the same commodity in Britain, the Netherlands, Belgium, West Germany, Austria, and other countries.
It is not because of the colour of our eyes that we are getting the advantage of this cheap fertiliser because before this committee was set up in 1960, it was well known that the Government had been actively pursuing the prospect of establishing a nitrogenous fertiliser factory. When consideration of the project had been on the point of completion, there was a sudden drop in the price of imported nitrogenous fertiliser in this country and I submit to the House that that drop and the consideration of the establishment of such a project in this country were not entirely unrelated.
European producers of fertiliser, however, have now been showing a growing concern about a position in which their export prices in 1961-62 were as much as £4 per ton below the prices at which they were supplying the products to the agricultural communities in their own countries. In the European Chemical News of 6th July, 1962, it was reported that the major European producers have formed an association called Nitrex. The report states:
"The main reason behind the formation of Nitrex is to avoid cut throat competition and, therefore, uneconomic prices in the large exports markets."
The report goes on to state:
"Although it will be several months before any results of the new organisation can be seen, Nitrex officials hope that one major result will be the stabilisation of the nitrogenous fertiliser market."
The clear expectation from this development, so far as Ireland is concerned, must be that the era of dumped prices of nitrogenous fertilisers here is coming to a close, Common Market or no Common Market. Even before the Nitrex development, the c.i.f. prices of sulphate of ammonia and ammonium nitrate are tending to rise. The official import figures show an increase of almost 11/- per ton of sulphate of ammonia and 9/- per ton of ammonium nitrate in the year 1961-62 as compared with 1960-61. The prices for the coming fertiliser year have not yet been announced by the continental suppliers but the indications are that the upward trend in prices will be maintained, quite independently of what may happen under the aegis of Nitrex.
The agricultural communities in, say, the Netherlands and Britain have, of course, an interest in this matter. In the event of Ireland joining the Community, it is not to be expected that the farmers in those and other Member countries will look with favour on a position in which fertiliser manufacturers in their countries would continue to make available to Irish farmers nitrogenous fertilisers at prices lower than the prices obtaining in the home country. On any reasonable view of this matter, therefore, it must be accepted that there are compelling reasons for the belief that Irish farmers will not long continue to enjoy the benefit of the prevailing favourable prices of imported nitrogenous fertilisers.
If, on accession to the EEC, we must expect harmonisation of prices of agricultural products and the means of agricultural production, including fertilisers, then we must expect to be at a disadvantage, without a nitrogenous fertiliser factory of our own, vis-á-vis our competitors in Holland and Germany, by reason of the fact that the cost of loading, sea freight and discharge of fertilisers imported from Europe is from £2 to £2 10s. per ton. This charge would represent a permanent addition to the cost of nitrogenous fertilisers, if Irish farmers were to depend indefinitely on imported supplies. It could represent an additional charge of as much as 20 per cent. on the ex-factory price.
The Government have given an assurance to the farming community here that the products of the Arklow factory will be made available to Irish farmers without protection or subsidisation in line with the prevailing import prices.
Mr. Deasy goes on to say:
It was intended to draw the principal raw material, pyrites, from the Avoca mines; the argument being that cheap pyrites would give us cheap Irish nitrogen. Recently, however, the whole future of these copper mines had been publicly questioned. If Irish pyrites should cease to be available or if they should cease to be cheap, this argument fell to the ground.
My comment on that is that as a matter of ordinary commercial prudence, the planning of the factory project provided for the use of other forms of pyrites, or sulphur in the event of any failure in the continuity of supplies of Avoca pyrites.
