Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 16 Jun 1964

Vol. 211 No. 1

Committee on Finance. - Vote 41—Industry and Commerce.

Tairgim:

Go ndeonófar suim nach mó ná £4,718,300 chun slánaithe na suime is gá chun íoctha an mhuirir a thiocfaidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31ú lá de Mhárta, 1965, le haghaidh Tuarastail agus Costais Oifig an Aire Tionscail agus Tráchtála, lena n-áirítear Seirbhísí áirithe atá faoi riaradh na hOifige sin, agus chun Ildeontais-i-gCabhair a íoc

Tá roinnt níos mó ná £1,400,000 de mhéadú sa Mheastachán don bhliain reatha thar Mheastachán na bliana 1963-64, ag áireamh na Meastachán Breise. Soláthairtí breise le haghaidh deontas tionscail agus deontas i leith cabhair theicniúil do chomhlachtaí tionscail is mó is bun leis an méadú seo. Ag féachaint don fhás leanúnach i gcúrsaí tionscail, tá sé intuighthe go mbeadh méadú ar na hítimí sin. Bhí méadú so-aitheanta sa ráta forbartha i rith na bliana 1963. Timpeall 167,000, ar an meán, líon na n-oibrithe a bhí fostaithe i dtionscail déantúsaíochta le linn na bliana seo caite, is é sin le rá, tuairim is 5,500, nó 3.4 faoin gcéad níos mó ná mar a bhí sa bhliain 1962. I rith na bliana céana, cuireadh tús le timpeall 44 scéim nua tionscail chun earraí a tháirgeadh. Meastar go bhfuil beagnach £9 milliún caipitil sna scéimeanna sin agus go bhfuil acmhainn fostaíochta iontu a shroichfidh 6,300 oibrithe nuair a bheidh siad faoi lán seoil. Fairis sin, ag deireadh na bliana 1963, bhí 32 mhonarcha nua á dtógáil. D'éirigh go rí-mhaith leis an obair atá idir lámha ag an Údarás Forbartha Tionscail maidir le tionsclóirí eachtrannacha a mhealladh chun gnóthais tionscail a bhunú abhus. I rith na bliana 1963 tosaíodh ar thairgeadh earraí i 34 tionscail nua lena bhfuil baint ag dreamanna eachtrannacha. Is fiú níos mó ná £7 milliún an capiteal atá sna tionscail sin agus tá acmhainn fostaíochta do níos mó ná 4,200 oibrithe acu.

Lean an Coiste um Eagrú Tionscail dá shaothar i rith na bliana. Tá suirbhéireacht déanta acu anois ar 26 thionscal agus foillsíodh go dtí seo tuarascálacha ar 18 gcinn de na tionscail sin. Foilseofar tuarascálacha ar na 8 gcinn eile ó am go ham sna míonna atá cughainn. Beidh an Coiste ag teacht go críoch a shaothair ansin agus measaim go n-aontóidh gach uile dhuine go bhfuil ardmholadh ag dul dóibh as ucht na hoibre fónta a rinne siad maidir le laige agus easpaí ár dtionscal a nochtadh agus leighseanna a mholadh dóibh.

Ina gcuid tuarascálacha luíonn an Coiste go trom ar chomh tábhachtach agus chomh práinneach is atá sé go gcuirfeadh lucht tionscail i bhfeidhm na bearta atá riachtanach lena ngnóthais a chur in oiriúint do choinníollacha na saorthrádála. Tá a fhios ag an saol gur bhunaigh mé brainse speisialta i mo Roinn chun spreagadh a chur faoi bhunú comhairlí oirúinúcháin i gcúrsaí tionscail de réir mar atá molta ag an gCoiste um Eagrú Tionscail. Tá sé chomhairle dhéag tar éis a mbunaithe agus tá an chuid is mo díobh ag obair go héifeachtach.

Is eagal liom, áfach, go bhfuil roinnt comhairlí ann nach bhfuil ag déanamh mórán dul ar aghaidh, agus is mian liom a chur in iúl dóibh sin agus do na tionscail a mbaineann siad leo gur mhór an dearmad é a cheapadh go mbeidh an tír seo in ann iarmairtí na n-athraithe móra i gcúrsaí trádála idirnáisiúnta a sheachaint. Taobh amuigh de bheith réidh chun dul san iomaíocht ar an margadh coigríche caithfidh siad iad fhéin a ullmhú le haghaidh breis iomaíochta sa bhaile, ag féachaint do chlár an Rialtais maidir le laghdú ginearálta a dhéanamh ar chánacha custam agus le sriantaí na gcuótaí ar allmhairí tionscail a scaoileadh.

Tugann sé sásamh mór dom gur shroich ár gcuid onnmhairí figiúr buaice £196 milliún i 1963, is é sin le rá méadú £21 milliún thar an bhfigiúr le haghaidh 1962. Tháinig méadú tábhachtach ar go leor onnmhairí tionscail, go háirithe innealra agus gléasra iompair, éadach agus coisbheart, snáth, éadaí, leathar agus déantúis leathair. Táim ag súil go leanfaigh an scéal mar seo, agus táimid ag méadú go maith i mbliana ar an soláthair le haghaidh Chóras Tráchtála lena chur ar a chumas breis cúnaimh a thabhairt dár onnmhaireoirí.

San iomlán, mar sin, measaim gur cúis mhór misnigh dúinn an dul ar aghaidh a rinneadh i 1963, i gcúrsaí tionscail na tíre sa bhaile agus ar an gcoigrích.

In the Book of Estimates, the net Estimate of £7,078,300 for the year 1964-65 is compared with a sum of £5,471,800 granted in 1963-64, including a Supplementary Estimate for £990,000, and shows a net increase of £1,606,500. On 3rd March, 1964, too late for inclusion in the Book of Estimates, an additional sum of £185,000 was granted by way of a further Supplementary Estimate, bringing the total amount granted in 1963-64 to £5,656,800. The actual position is, therefore, that the Estimate of £7,078,300 for 1964-65 is £1,421,500 greater than the total sum of £5,656,800 granted in 1963-64.

The principal increases in 1964-65 are in the provisions for the Grant-in-Aid under the Industrial Research and Standards Act, £84,000 (Subhead F.1); Grant-in-Aid to Córas Tráchtála, £65,000 (Subhead H); Grant-in-Aid to An Foras Tionscal, £1,815,000 (Subhead J); Technical Assistance, £101,000 (Subhead L.1); Grant-in-Aid to Irish National Productivity Committee, £29,000 (Subhead L.2); Grant-in-Aid to An Cheard Chomhairle, £22,500 (Subhead M), and care and maintenance of St. Patrick's Copper Mines £49,990 (Subhead R.). Increases in other subheads amount to £28,621, bringing the total to £2,195,111. To this must be added the decrease of £13,843 in Appropriations-in-Aid which brings the total increases to £2,208,954. The Book of Estimates shows a gross increase of £2,393,954 for 1964-65 compared with 1963-64, but when an adjustment is made for the Supplementary Estimate for £185,000 taken in March, 1964, the actual increase is £2,208,954.

The principal decreases in 1964-65 are in the provisions for Additional Laboratory Equipment, £24,000 (Subhead F.2); New York World's Fair, £94,000 (Subhead N) and Shipbuilding Subsidy, £660,000 (Subhead P).

Decreases in other subheads amount to £9,454 bringing the total decrease to £787,454. As I have said, the net increase in the Estimate for 1964-65 compared with 1963-64 is, therefore, £1,421,500.

The pace of industrial expansion increased perceptibly in 1963, particularly in the second half of the year. The provisional index of volume of production in manufacturing industry (to base 1953=100) was 151.9 for 1963 as compared with 142.5 for 1962 and 135.0 for 1961. This represents a volume increase of over 6½ per cent during 1963, reflecting roughly a 5 per cent increase in the first six months and 8 per cent in the second half of the year.

The average number of workers engaged in manufacturing industry rose to an estimated 167,000 in 1963— an increase of 5,500 or 3.4 per cent over 1962.

In the case of projects involving a capital investment of £10,000 and upwards. 44 new industrial undertakings or extensions to existing industries came to notice as having commenced production in the year ended 31st December, 1963. The total capital investment in these undertakings is estimated at almost £9 million, and the estimated employment potential ranges from 2,100 in the initial stage to 6,300 at full production.

Apart from projects which had reached the production stage, there were, at the end of the year 1963, 32 new factories in course of construction. It is anticipated that these projects will provide employment for about 8,600 workers when full production has been attained.

Industrial proposals before my Department and the Industrial Development Authority which had reached a fairly definite stage of development at 31st March, 1964, numbered 55.

The year 1963 proved to be a most successful year so far as the efforts of the Industrial Development Authority to attract industry are concerned. During the year, 34 new industries with foreign participation went into production throughout the country. These new projects involve a total capital investment of over £7 million and have an employment potential of some 4,200 workers.

A particularly pleasing feature is the wide variety of industries represented by the projects which commenced production in 1963. These include clothing and textiles, plastics, porcelain, electronics, trout farming, fish processing, broiler hatching eggs, diamond cutting and polishing, filters, agricultural machinery, prams, mink, cheese, precision ballbearings, and chemicals. Most of these industries are producing entirely for export.

The Authority's promotional campaign is now being actively carried on in the USA, Great Britain, Germany, France, Italy, Austria, Denmark, Belgium, Netherlands and Switzerland, and additional resources are being provided for the Authority to enable the campaign to be intensified.

Detailed surveys of 26 industries have been carried out by the CIO survey teams. To date, reports on 18 of these industries have been published. Reports on the remaining eight industries will be published at intervals in the next few months. In addition to survey reports on individual industries, four CIO interim reports, which are of general application to industry, have been published. The first interim report dealt with the forms of State assistance to be granted to industry to adapt itself to meet free trading conditions; the second dealt with joint export marketing; the third with the creation of adaptation councils to promote measures of rationalisation in individual industries while the fourth dealt with industrial grants. There has been general acceptance by the Government of the recommendations in these reports.

One of my main preoccupations is to ensure that our industries take advantage of the guidance provided by the CIO reports, so that their modernisation and re-adaptation may be achieved in as short a time as possible. As a further aid to industry, grants are available which will help substantially to defray the cost of re-adaptation and modernisation. I am sure that Irish industry appreciates that a unique opportunity now exists for re-adaptation, and it would be extremely regrettable if any sector of industry were not to avail itself of this opportunity to gear itself to more competitive conditions and to achieve a greater degree of efficiency. Any industries which fail to take advantage of the present opportunities would be seriously lacking in foresight, and I have no doubt myself but that eventually they will regret their lost opportunities.

The CIO have emphasised in their reports the importance of undertaking adaptation measures as urgently as possible, and they have expressed the view that adaptation councils set up by the industries themselves would be the most suitable vehicle for carrying adaptation measures into practice. The Industrial Reorganisation Branch of my Department, which I set up specially some time ago to deal with this matter, works in very close contact with industry with the object of facilitating in every way possible the speedy implementation by each sector of industry of the CIO recommendations for re-adaptation.

The response by industry can be said to be reasonably good. Sixteen adaptation councils have now been established, and the majority of them are doing effectively the task assigned to them. I regret, however, to have to say that a few councils have not been very effective up to the present. I do not know whether this is due to the uncertainty of our trading position, vis-à-vis different international trading blocs, or whether it is attributable to an impression that competitive trading conditions are a matter for the distant future rather than the immediate present. Whatever may be the explanation, I cannot urge too strongly on these sectors of industry and on any others which may be inclined to hesitate, the imperative necessity to modernise the structure of their industry. It would be fatal for firms to be so unrealistic as to think that major changes in international trade are not inevitable and that new competitive conditions are not already almost upon us. Apart from the necessity for competitiveness in external markets, Irish industries must prepare themselves for more competitive conditions in the domestic market as a result of the progressive reductions in tariff levels generally and the loosening of the quota restrictions which protect a number of other industries. The response by an industry to its obligations in the matter of modernisation and re-adaptation will be a relevant factor in my consideration of any situation affecting that industry in the future.

The CIO has now almost completed the task for which it was established, and I think that the committee are to be congratulated on the fine work they have done in diagnosing the weaknesses and problems of our industrial sector and in prescribing measures designed to enable Irish industry not alone to hold its own but to expand in an era of increased competition.

During the past financial year An Foras Tionscal approved grants amounting to £1,300,000 for projects located in the undeveloped areas, bringing the total provision for such grants to £7,700,000. Of this amount, grants totalling £5,100,000 were paid to 31st March, 1964, leaving outstanding commitments of £2,600,000. The total capital investment involved in the approved projects amounts to over £19,000,000, and it is expected they will give employment to over 12,000 persons. One hundred and eleven projects assisted by An Foras Tionscal are in production in the undeveloped areas, and there are 25 other projects for which grants have been promised and which are in varying stages of development. Of the 136 projects in the undeveloped areas for which grants have been approved, 65 were promoted entirely by Irish interests, five were sponsored by Irish interests in association with foreign interests, and 66 were promoted solely by foreign interests. A substantial number of these projects will produce mainly for export markets.

As regards grants by An Foras Tionscal for industries outside the undeveloped areas, during the year ended the 31st March, 1964, grants amounting to nearly £1 million were approved bringing the total grants approved for such projects to £6,700,000. Of this latter sum, grants totalling £3,300,000 were paid to 31st March, 1964, leaving outstanding commitments of £3,400,000. The total capital investment in these projects amounts to almost £29 million. It is estimated that these projects, which are mainly in the export field, will employ about 16,000 persons. Forty-six projects assisted by An Foras Tionscal are actually in production in areas outside the undeveloped areas, and there are 30 other projects for which grants have been approved and which are in various stages of development. Of the 76 projects established or being established outside the undeveloped areas for which grants have been approved, 23 were promoted entirely by Irish interests, 14 were promoted by Irish interests in association with foreign interests, and 39 have been sponsored entirely by foreign interests.

In February, 1963, the Undeveloped Areas Acts and the Industrial Grants Acts were amended to provide, inter alia, for the making of special grants to assist industries in expansion or adaptation programmes in order to enable them to become more efficient. Up to 31st March, 1964, 282 applications for these special grants had been received. At that date, grants of over £3½ million had been approved in respect of 130 applications which will involve a capital expenditure of over £19 million.

In accordance with the Government's desire for greater industrial efficiency and productivity, an increased amount is provided for the Technical Assistance Grants Scheme to cater for the increasing demand for these services. Separate provision is made this year for a grant-in-aid to the Irish National Productivity Committee. The committee was formerly financed directly from the Technical Assistance subhead. Provision has also been made in the Technical Assistance subhead for a grant to the Irish Management Institute.

Under the Irish Steel Holdings Ltd. Act, 1960, and the amending Act of 1963, Irish Steel Holdings Ltd. was authorised to increase its share capital to £6 million, to be subscribed, as required, by the Minister for Finance. The final stages of the company's development plan are now approaching. All the civil engineering works have been completed, and new major plant installations, including the new extended merchant mill, the new section mill and the merchant bar mill, have been brought into commission. The oil-fired open-hearth furnace has also come into operation, and the new soaking pits and blooming mill have been brought into production.

There remain to be completed and brought into commercial operation the wire rod mill and sheet mill. Arrangements are well advanced for the installation of these units, but it will be some little time before commercial production can be commenced.

Nítrigín Éireann Teoranta was incorporated on 3rd October, 1961, as a private company under the Companies Acts, 1908 to 1959, having as its main object the acquisition, erection and operation of a nitrogenous fertiliser factory in Ireland. Construction of the Arklow factory by the contractors, is advanced to the stage when mechanical erection can proceed. While the main factory plant is of German design, inquiries for equipment have been made in Ireland and orders have been placed with Irish firms whenever possible. Employment on the erection of the factory has been steadily increasing and is expected to reach about 600 during the early part of the summer. This will include the men engaged on civil engineering and mechanical erection and the supervisory staff. The factory is expected to go into production in the first half of 1965.

Min Fhéir (1959) Teoranta, the State-sponsored company which is carrying out a project to produce grassmeal from bogland at Geesala, in the west of County Mayo, has now succeeded in resolving some unexpected difficulties encountered in regard to building and equipment and is in the concluding stage of its development programme. Some trial quantities of grassmeal have already been successfully produced, and production on a commercial basis will commence during the 1964 season.

The outline which I have given of the trend of industrial development in 1963 augurs well for the achievement of the industrial targets set out in the Government's Second Programme for Economic Expansion. As Deputies will know, it is envisaged that industry will almost double its output during this decade by annual volume increments of 7 per cent and will increase its exports of manufactured goods by 150 per cent in the same period. An overall increase of 86,000 in the number of jobs in the industrial sector is expected to derive from yearly increases of 3 per cent in employment. This expansion, coupled with an annual increase of almost 4 per cent in productivity, is expected to contribute the larger part of an annual growth of 4.14 per cent in gross national product.

Deputies will be aware that the National Industrial Economic Council, following a detailed examination of these targets, has reported that the industrial aims of the Second Programme are capable of being achieved and that the sectoral targets provide a realistic starting point for discussions with industry. These discussions with the principal functional and other organisations concerned have already commenced.

Our industrial programme has also been the subject of favourable comment by the OECD which has indicated in its recent report that, in its view, given a continuation of the Government's vigorous growth policies and favourable external conditions of trade, the planned industrial expansion, although ambitious, is not unattainable.

I do not think it necessary to dwell at any length upon the matter of price increases. This matter has been debated in the House on a number of occasions recently, and Deputies will be aware of the measures I have taken to secure that there should be no unnecessary or excessive increases in commodity prices or service charges. The Prices Section of my Department has been reorganised in order to secure the enforcement of the Retail Price (Food) Display Order, 1963, and to assist in the investigation of complaints about price increases. While I am happy to note that the measures which I have taken, backed by consumer resistance and the work of the Fair Trade Commission in preserving fair competition, have curbed excessive price increases, I assure the House that the provisions of the Prices Act, 1958, will continue to be used to prevent any excessive price increases.

The position regarding our application for membership of the European Economic Community remains unchanged. It is our wish that negotiations on our application will be resumed when circumstances permit. In the meantime we have succeeded in having established a procedure for maintaining contact with the EEC under which meetings, at official or ministerial level as appropriate, take place from time to time with the Commission of the EEC for the purpose of exchanging information and considering matters of mutual interest, particularly the question of maintaining and developing our trade with the Common Market.

Action on our application for membership of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade was suspended when a decision was taken to apply for membership of the EEC. Following the breakdown of the UK/EEC negotiations, consideration of the applications by this and other countries for membership of the EEC was suspended. The Government have been reconsidering the question of joining the GATT and have now decided to revive our application for membership. We have, accordingly, requested the re-opening of discussions on our application, and the negotiations in connection with our accession are likely to take place within the framework of the GATT trade and tariff negotiations known as the Kennedy Round which commenced on the 4th May, 1964.

The arrangements for our participation in the New York World's Fair have proved very satisfactory. The site area of about 12,000 sq. ft. which was leased for our pavilion is in an extremely favourable portion of the Fair grounds, directly opposite the United States Federal Pavilion and on a corner of the Avenue connecting the Federal Pavilion with the focal point of the Fair, the Unisphere. We felt that this was an area which would attract a great number and variety of visitors and this is already proving to be the case.

The display consists of a national exhibit of a prestige nature, and the objective is to present in an attractive way an honest image of the industrial, commercial, cultural and social life of Ireland and its people. The exhibit highlights Ireland's economic development, its tourist attractions, its contribution to world literature, its missionary influence and its contribution to the development of other countries, particularly the United States.

It is always very difficult to assess in advance the tangible benefits of exhibitions of this kind. It may be expected, however, that positive benefits by way of increased trade, tourism and industrial investment will result. From what I have seen on my recent visit I feel confident that the display will effectively achieve the objective of presenting a realistic image of Ireland and the Irish. The effect of the entire exhibition is to present an impression of a small but well-ordered and well-balanced country which, while looking to the future, maintains continuity with its past. Our pavilion and the exhibits have already attracted considerable attention and have been the subject of most favourable comment by visitors.

The Institute for Industrial Research and Standards continues to develop on satisfactory lines. Its existing Departments, notably the Science, Engineering, Building and Technical Information Departments are being expanded on a considerable scale, and additional staff is being recruited. In addition, it is proposed to establish two new Departments, one for chemical engineering, the other for electronics. It is intended, also, to extend the policy of forming divisional boards within the Institute to look after the interests of particular industrial sectors. The field advisory services in engineering and textiles are being strengthened, and similar services are being initiated in applied chemistry and the building industry.

In the field of labour/management relations, it is encouraging to note, in recent years, the increasing readiness of both sides of industry to meet at the national level to discuss their common problems. As I have intimated on previous occasions, the question of improving and bringing up-to-date the existing statutory industrial relations machinery, provided under the Industrial Relations Act of 1946, has been under review in my Department for some time past and, as that legislation was an agreed measure, it is my hope that, before finalising any new proposals for amendment of the legislation, I shall have the benefit of agreed proposals from the employer and labour interests in the National Employer/Labour Conference. However, in suggesting that there is need for the review of the 1946 Act in the light of experience gained over the past eighteen years, I do not intend to imply that the Labour Court, as now constituted, has failed to achieve the objects for which it was established. On the contrary, the court has an impressive record in the settlement of the trade disputes which have been brought before it.

Despite the fact that 1963 was a comparatively quiet year in employer/ worker relations, it is notable that, even in this situation, the extent to which the Labour Court was availed of as a means of settling industrial disputes continued to grow. The number of trade disputes dealt with by the court during 1963 was 366 and was a record for any year since the inception of the court. Conciliation conferences were held in respect of 337 disputes as compared with 300 in 1962. When it is remembered that the 1962 figure itself represented a record compared with previous years, the importance of the conciliation services of the Labour Court will be evident.

It is now clear that employers and workers are becoming increasingly aware of the desirability of exploring to the utmost extent the possibility of an amicable settlement of matters in dispute. I am extremely pleased with this development which offers a sound basis for the hope that this method of approach to the solution of industrial disputes will, in time, be adopted generally.

An Cheard Chomhairle continues to push ahead with its proposals for more effective arrangements for the recruitment and training of apprentices. It has now established statutory schemes of apprenticeship for the trade of motor mechanic, the trade of electrician and the trades in the furniture industry. Apprenticeship committees now regulate the recruitment and training of apprentices in these trades throughout the State.

An Chomhairle recently carried out a statutory examination of apprenticeship in the engineering and metal trades, and, as a result, these trades will shortly be brought within the scope of the Apprenticeship Act. An Chomhairle has announced that it is undertaking a statutory examination of apprenticeship in the building industry, and statutory control is likely to be applied to that industry later this year. It is hoped early next year to tackle apprenticeship in the printing industry so that by the end of its first five year term of office most of the important industries where apprenticeship is the method of training for skill will have been brought under statutory control.

During the past year, the Fair Trade Commission completed their survey of certain aspects of the supply and distribution of medicinal and toilet preparations. The Commission then made Fair Trading Rules with the object of preventing collective restrictions in relation to proprietary household remedies, infant and invalid foods, non-alcoholic health drinks and toilet preparations.

Following the introduction of the turnover tax, a number of complaints were made alleging collective action by traders to fix prices for certain commodities contrary to the provisions of the Restrictive Trade Practices (Groceries) Order, 1956. The Commission carried out investigations in more than 60 towns throughout the country in November, December and January last. They reported that, with the exception of less than a dozen cases, there was no evidence of collective action to fix prices. I directed that proceedings be taken against the traders who had offended. However, later investigations by the Department's inspectors in the towns concerned showed that the efforts to maintain fixed prices had not been successful, and that trading conditions had reverted to normal competitive levels.

I am satisfied that it has been brought home to traders that they could not be allowed to take advantage of the turnover tax to manipulate prices in a manner detrimental to the public interest, and accordingly, I have decided not to proceed further with prosecutions against individual traders.

I have spoken of the need for raising productivity in industry. It is also necessary to pay close attention to the services sector of the economy. The distributive traders are a very important part of the services sector and the efficiency or otherwise of these trades in handling the output of the production sector can have a very marked affect on the prosperity of the economy as a whole.

In view of these considerations, I have created within the Commerce Division of my Department an efficiency of distribution unit which will be specially charged with ensuring that the maximum potentialities of the distributve sector of the economy are employed towards the realisation of the aims of the Second Programme for Economic Expansion. It may be that the unit will arrange for the setting up of an advisory committee on which appropriate interests would serve and whose views would be taken into account in the consideration of measures proposed for the assistance of the distributive trades.

I have also arranged for the formation under the auspices of my Department of the General Council on Commercial Consideration of Freer Trade Conditions. The Council has been formed to consider the problems which will arise for industry and for the distributive trades in the movement towards freer trade and to encourage the distributive trades to support Irish products. The Irish National Productivity Committee has also turned its attention to productivity in the distributive trades and after a recent seminar on the subject it is giving consideration to the establishment of a productivity committee for those trades.

It is very gratifying to be able to report that our exports for the year 1963 amounted to the record figure of £196 million, which represents an increase of more than £21 million over the export figure for the year 1962. Apart from increases attributable to agricultural products, there has in this period been an important increase in our exports of machinery and transport equipment, clothing and footwear, yarns, fabrics and made-up articles, and leather and leather manufactures. The increasingly important role which industry is now playing in relation to our export trade is a source of great encouragement.

Export achievements by industry over the past number of years are very impressive and must be a source of great encouragement to both old and new industries which are contemplating export development. Irish industry has sometimes been regarded in the past as a form of economic development capable of existing under conditions of protection and concerned solely with meeting the requirements of the domestic market. Whatever may be the validity of this viewpoint—and I am not to be taken as subscribing to it —it is plain that a transformation has taken place in the attitude of industry itself in relation to competitive marketing.

It has now been established that, over a wide range of products, Irish industry is capable of meeting keen competition in external markets and of overcoming that competition, notwithstanding the existence of external trade barriers which have to be surmounted. We are now exporting the products of our factories in ever increasing quantities and varieties to foreign markets. This is a most dramatic and encouraging development. It has now become evident that industry will have a much more decisive role to play in the future than in the past in relation to our external trade, and there can be no doubt as to its ability and willingness to meet the challenge of competition in foreign markets.

The year which has passed has been a year of steady progress and consolidation. It has witnessed the establishment of new and important industrial manufacturing units with a considerable export potential. Industry has continued to provide a satisfactory level of employment which will increase further in the year which lies ahead. Industry, generally, has become more conscious of the necessity for re-adaptation and reorganisation with the object of increasing its competitiveness not only in the domestic market but in external markets as well. I feel that we can look forward with confidence to a further expansion of the economy based on the practical achievements of the past 12 months.

I move:

That the Vote be referred back for reconsideration.

One of the facts which presents itself to industrialists or persons who wish to start or expand an industry is the multiplicity of bodies dealing with industrial matters. It may well be that the time has arrived when a general review of the number of bodies dealing with industrial matters is necessary. It would appear from experience and from the Minister's speech on this and other occasions that too many bodies exist. We have the Industrial Development Authority, An Foras Tionscal and the Industrial Credit Company, all of which have separate functions. While all are contributing in one way or another to industrial development, the position is that any person wishing to start or to extend an industrial project has to visit and consult all these bodies.

One of the problems which arise from this multiplicity of bodies is the delay, which indeed in some cases arises from the mere fact that a number of organisations or boards and their different staffs have to deal with these matters. Sometimes these delays appear unnecessary to industrialists and very often frustrate efforts to proceed with plans for development. The fact that so many bodies are involved also causes a good deal of additional work for those concerned as well as for the staffs of these undertakings. While these bodies have played a very effective role in promoting industrial development, the question of reducing in some way the number of such bodies is worthy of consideration, and after the experience of a number of years, the matter might be examined again.

There is general agreement on the need to plan industrial development and for the provision of State assistance to help industrialists expand and develop. The picture given in the Minister's review and the statistics on employment and exports indicate that the main increase in employment and the main contribution to any expected increase in the future must come from industrial expansion. While agricultural production may expand, the prospect of increased employment in agriculture is nil. In fact, the whole effort will be to ensure that those already employed in agriculture will remain in employment. It is significant that despite the increase in employment which the Minister mentioned in his speech, there are today some 70,000 fewer persons in employment than seven or eight years ago, so that allowing for the normal movement to manhood and womanhood by those seeking employment in the future, we will also have the problem of absorbing those who will leave the land and leave rural employment.

We believe that economic progress is not possible except by careful planning and in this endeavour the Government must not merely provide the various necessary incentives but must in addition take the lead in spearheading this movement and in securing the co-operation and assistance of industrialists, workers and all who play a part in this national endeavour. The necessary measures to achieve this objective can be adopted and implemented in conformity with our great belief in individual freedom and our universally accepted Christian principles. This is a matter which has been the subject of investigation and study in other countries. In Europe and in those countries which are our competitors, as well as in Britain, one of the problems which have been the subject of investigation is the extent to which State or semi-State planning can be undertaken, whilst at the same time ensuring that individual initiative and freedom are allowed adequate play.

In the April-June issue of Political Quarterly, this year, a careful study of this problem, Planning and Persuasion in a Mixed Economy, is undertaken and there are many relevant comments. Although it deals primarily with conditions in Britain, there are many aspects which may well be somewhat similar to ours at any rate to the extent to which we have a mixed economy. There is in the article a phrase which I believe epitomises the answer and sums up the problem and it is this : “Obviously a balance must be struck somewhere between efficiency and flexibility”. That precise balance is the problem which Governments and those directly concerned with the problem have to face.

In this country the State companies and other large organisations have little difficulty in planning ahead and over a reasonably long period they can set well defined targets. Indeed, in most cases these targets are fixed a number of years in advance. The same applies to non-State companies of size and experience. Where the difficulty arises is in the case of small undertakings in respect of which, because of their size, lack of adequate market research facilities and the lack of up-to-date information on future prospects problems will arise. To that end the State, through their various agencies as well as the assessments that have been made in the CIO reports, can play an effective and practical role in supplying these smaller firms with the necessary data and providing them with technical knowledge and the experience which is available to larger organisations and which the committees set up by the CIO have.

It is appropriate in that regard to pay tribute to what has been done by these committees. As the Minister said, many valuable studies have been made and one case in particular comes to mind, that is, the committee dealing with footwear which has provided practical benefits for the trade in general. If these reports are carefully analysed and studied and if the recommendations made are implemented, then such implementation will encourage and assist particularly small firms as well as, of course, larger ones, in the planned development which is necessary in reaching either the targets which have been set by themselves or the general targets for development in the Programme for Economic Expansion.

I have long held the view that the trade agreements existing between this country and continental countries require to be revised, and the statement by the Minister for Finance in his Budget Speech that the Government have decided to reopen the discussions on the terms of our admission to the GATT was generally welcome. The existing trade agreements between ourselves and continental countries have in most cases now been in operation for a number of years. They were, in the main, negotiated shortly after the War but the circumstances were entirely different from what they are today. In the years that have passed, the general pattern of trade with continental countries has been heavily adverse, to such an extent that the pattern now in most cases is that we import from them about four times what they buy from us. If it were possible to get a multilateral trading arrangement which would govern our trading relations with the various European countries, it would obviously be the most satisfactory agreement possible. However, in default of such an agreement, it seems to me the time has arrived when the bilateral agreements should be reconsidered and revised in order to take account of the changes which have since occured.

The revision of these agreements might not have been necessary if we had become members of the EEC or if there seemed a reasonable prospect we would become members in a short time. With the breakdown last year of the negotiations for a wider EEC membership, the need to reconsider our whole trading position has arisen. While, as I have said, we welcome the decision to reopen negotiations on the terms of our admission to the GATT, if these negotiations are protracted, and that would appear to be the likely situation, then we ought to take some further measures adequately to protect our interests in the trading arrangements we have. I would be interested in hearing whether, and to what extent, consideration has been given to the possibility of a bilateral trade agreement with the EEC Commission. I gather from the Taoiseach's reply in the course of his answers today to Parliamentary Questions that the possibility of that is one of the matters which is being considered.

In considering trade matters and existing agreements, it is also important we should consider our trading position with Britain, which is our largest market. There is now a general recognition of the value to this country of the British market, but whether we are making the maximum use of that market is another matter. Indeed, when we realise the immense trade advantages which certain preferences in the British market give us, it is well to consider whether our food exports to that country could not be increased. At present food exports from this country to Britain amount to approximately only five per cent of Britain's total food imports. The fact that we are in such close proximity to Britain, with its very large industrial population, and that we have the ability to produce food of the highest quality and standard makes it obvious that this aspect of our external trade needs more attention.

In no sphere of national affairs is there greater need for a more intelligent approach than in that of industrial relations. To say that is not to reflect in any way on those concerned in these matters but it is important to try to devise means which will provide a better system for the discussion and settlement of all problems under this heading. The growth and development of the Labour Court emphasises the anxiety of those concerned in these problems to utilise the machinery available for the purpose of discussing and settling the various problems which arise. The establishment of the National Employer/Labour Conference was a definite move in the right direction.

On these matters there is an advantage in looking elsewhere to see what has been accomplished. To suggest that what has been done in other countries could be adopted here without modification would be absurd. Whatever arrangements are adopted or whatever system is put into operation must obviously take account of local conditions and circumstances, the character of the people and the background from which they evolved. Nevertheless, it is worth considering what has been done in other countries in Western Europe. In Sweden, Norway and the Netherlands, the development of industrial relations has been quite remarkable. Sweden, for example, is notable for the fact that two major organisations have developed: the Swedish Confederation of Trade Unions and the Swedish Employers Confederation. The fact that in Sweden these arrangements have worked satisfactorily has been referred to on many occasions and they have been held out as a model for other countries.

In the past year, with two exceptions, industrial matters, particularly the fixing of wages and matters of that sort, have been dealt with by negotiation between representatives of employers and workers, either direct or under the auspices of the Labour Court or whatever other machinery was available. However, with the advent of the turnover tax and with the effect of that tax on prices and the consequent substantial rise in the cost of living, the Government felt that direct Government intervention was necessary.

In certain European countries, there is a tripartite representation of bodies dealing with wages and salaries, the State, the employers and the trade unions. Heretofore in this country, it has been a matter, as I have said, for direct negotiation, but the intervention by the Taoiseach in the last round of wage and salary increases has marked a definite change in the State's attitude towards wage and salary adjustments. Whether the departure from what has been normal practice is desirable or in the long run is in the national interest might well be open to question.

The fact that a decision in the form of a direct intervention has taken place marks a break with past practice and a departure from existing arrangements. While a tripartite arrangement may have many factors to recommend it and may offer solutions to the problem involved, the haphazard manner in which the Taoiseach intervened in wage and salary matters by writing to the employers and trade unions may have consequences which have not yet been properly calculated or fairly or accurately assessed. This decision, which in the normal way should be taken on economic or social grounds, was undoubtedly influenced by political consideration. Wage and salary adjustments should not normally be altered on the basis of political expediency. The consequences of wage and salary adjustments made on the basis of political considerations rather than on economic or social considerations need no emphasis. The repercussions of such a yardstick for settling or adjusting these matters might have serious reactions and might alter the whole basis of wage and salary adjustments.

The prime reason for the Taoiseach's intervention in this matter was the substantial rise in prices effected by the introduction of the turnover tax and I was somewhat surprised that in the course of the Minister's speech he dealt in such a brief manner with the rise in prices. I believe that experience has shown that price control is rarely effective except, perhaps, during wartime when compulsory controls operate. Our experience during the war indicated that the prices fixed become the minimum prices and that generally competition is the most effective method of ensuring that the customer gets a fair deal. While allowing for these general criteria to apply we seem, in the last six months or so, to have gone from one extreme to another and it is difficult to estimate how a turnover tax introduced at the rate of 2½ per cent can have had such a dramatic effect on the price range.

The latest cost of living index figure shows that it rose from 159 in mid-May, 1963, to 171 in mid-May, 1964, and that since mid-February of 1964 it rose from 165 to 171 in mid-May. The Minister mentioned that there had been a number of price investigations but these have taken place behind closed doors and the results have only been made public on a limited scale. I believe a public inquiry is valuable at times if only for the purpose of bringing the searchlight of public attention to focus on the matter under discussion.

The very steep rise in the cost of living is felt particularly by pensioners and others living on fixed incomes. It has adversely affected all sections of the community and, while Ministerial or Departmental action may not operate to reduce prices, at least the Minister's Department might act to ensure that price rises are not excessive. There is a general belief that the range of increases far exceeds the 2½ per cent, even allowing an adequate margin for the trade concerned and that the rise has been beyond what is justified by the turnover tax.

This country lacks any great resources in raw materials and with the exception of our arable land we have very few raw materials capable of being exploited. We have, however, a highly intelligent and adaptable people capable of being trained and equipped to exploit and thereby benefit by their talents and capacity. When trained and equipped they can benefit not merely themselves but the nation. Recently great emphasis and considerable attention has been directed to the need for improved educational and training facilities and one of the satisfactory features of the educational system has been the vocational schools. The development of the Ceard Comhairle and the committees established under it indicate the further attention being given to this matter. The Minister should collaborate with the Minister for Education in utilising to the full the facilities available in these schools to give our people the latest technological and scientific training which, when applied to industrial and commercial matters, will enable them to obtain better positions at home and assist those who are obliged to emigrate to have the knowledge and skill necessary to command better positions.

The growth of industrial expansion is something in which the country as a whole may take pride. The fact that we are developing our industrial arm much later than many of our competitors is no reason for feeling disheartened or disappointed with the rate of development. We have people of considerable skill and ability capable of being trained and equipped to utilise their talents to expand industry and the potential of the country. If we make maximum use of the technical facilities and assistance provided, if we plan our trade arrangements and industrial developments on the basis of our ability to secure a growing share of the European as well as the world market, we can offer more of our people employment in good conditions and in security in future, but to that end the combined resources of all sections of the community must be brought to bear in the most co-operative manner and in the way best calculated to achieve the results that all who are interested in the problem desire. In order to achieve these results, the combined efforts of all must be directed towards expanding our economy and developing the resources of the country.

First of all, the Minister has put quite a new face on the approach of the State to industry. We all welcome the energetic way the Minister sets about his task. Unfortunately, while the growth in national expansion has been quite good over the past 12 months, there seems to be something lacking. From the Minister's figures, it would appear as if the increase in employment in industry over 1962 is a round figure of 5,500. There still appear to be some 70,000 fewer people in employment than there were a few years ago and it looks very much, therefore, as if we are not taking up the slack.

Agriculture seems to be able to get rid of people far faster than industry can find employment for them. The Minister will have to do a great deal more in order to try to bridge the gap. In addition to that, over the past year, if we are to go by the figures supplied by the Central Statistics Office, the emigration figure has doubled and from 12,500 last year, the figure this year has increased to 25,000. The Minister will agree that, if that is the correct figure, a great deal must be done to try to find employment for those people who will otherwise have to emigrate. If industry is not finding employment for them, they must emigrate.

Right through the Minister's speech, I notice that, when employment is referred to, the phrase used is "the employment potential". He and I crossed swords over this some months ago during Question Time here. Would the Minister say is this, in fact, the figure which industries seeking grants give to An Foras Tionscal as being the possible number who will be employed, because it would appear that very few of them have so far reached the so-called employment potential? We find industries which were supposed to employ 500,600 and 700 men employing fewer than 100, and the 100 may be made up mostly of girls with a small residue of men. Would the Minister comment on that because, if we are to remedy the position, we must get down to facts? There is no point in saying that an industry will employ a certain number of people over a number of years if the history of the industries we have already helped to start is that they are not employing anything like the number they stated or thought they would be able to employ.

I noticed today at Question Time that the Taoiseach had gone back again to the old story about the EEC. He was back on the "go it alone" line. A few months ago, he made it quite clear to everybody that if Great Britain did not go in we would not go in. That was a complete change from what he had been saying previously but I think everybody agreed, in view of the fact that Great Britain buys the bulk of our exports, it was the honest thing to say.

We all know that.

The Taoiseach did not know that today.

He reversed engines. He was back again to the "go it alone". In matters such as this, it would be far better for the Government to come down on one side of the fence or the other. Possibly the visit of the French Foreign Minister has created new enthusiasm for the idea of membership of the European Economic Community.

He did not say "go it alone".

I shall not comment on what he said. Perhaps he said some rude things. No matter how anxious we may be to enter the Community, it should be made quite clear that we are not going in unless our best customer is still available to us. That, I think, is the sensible approach, and I suggest the Government would be much better off if they stated that bluntly and not have this dithering. Whether or not it is a question of full membership, or what type of association we may have, or the correct term for the association, and the Taoiseach made great play on this at Question Time today, does not really matter. What does matter is whether or not we are going in and, if we are not going in, then let us know where we stand.

We are told in the Second Programme for Economic Expansion that we can easily reach the target. Everybody says we can reach it and, therefore, there should be no difficulty about it. It is all based on membership of the European Economic Community by 1970. We should, I think, be very careful about this. If we do not go into the Community, are we still confident we can reach the target set in the Second Programme for Economic Expansion? That is something on which the Minister should make a definite statement when he comes to reply.

It has been said—Deputy Cosgrave referred to it and welcomed it—that the application for membership has been reconsidered. Perhaps we could have some further information on that. I know the Government cannot tell the House or the country every step they take but the members of this House should, at least, be taken as far as possible into the confidence of the Government. While the Government are the people in control, at the same time, every elected representative in this House is entitled to know if some important step is being taken.

The question of the balance of trade with other European countries has been mentioned. The Minister should attempt to do something about this question of countries which are flooding this country with various commodities and taking very little in return. I mentioned this the other night to the Minister on a Bill. The drop in the tariff barriers, which the Government have set as one of their declared policies, has encouraged this lack of balance between imports from and exports to certain countries. I believe that exceptions should be made and countries which buy very little from us should not be treated in the same way as those which buy on a large scale.

In the Minister's speech, there was a passing reference to the Industrial Relations Act. I agree with the Minister that, taking the country generally, we have at the present time a better climate than we have had for a very long time as far as industrial relations are concerned. That being so, is it not a pity that a Department of State should say to its employees: "You cannot have the same type of treatment as any other type of worker"? Is it not a pity that something cannot be done to prevent the continuance of a strike which has already lasted too long. I do not want to go further with it, but I think the Minister might very well use his offices, because someone will have to intervene. This is a matter on which I feel very strongly.

Another aspect of industrial relations about which I think the Minister should be informed—I intend to write to him personally if he is not aware of the position—is that there are industries which are not prepared to recognise the right of their employees to become members of a trade union. As recently as last week, one such industry dispensed with the services of two employees who had committed no greater crime than that of acting as shop stewards of a trade union which had recently started to organise the workers in the industry. It is shocking that in 1964, 51 years after the 1913 strike, 51 years after Larkin taught the workers of Dublin what they could do, and the employers what the workers of Dublin could do, we still have that type of approach.

I am told this is not isolated. I am told that there are people who are prepared to accept industrial grants in a big way, such as the firm to which I have referred, who are under the impression that they can do so without allowing their employees to be members of a trade union. The only reason any employer will object to his employees being members of a trade union is the fact that he does not agree with paying fair wages or giving fair conditions. There is no other conceivable reason why any employer should attempt to keep his employees out of a trade union. I intend bringing this matter to the Minister's notice personally and, knowing the Minister, I feel the necessary action will be taken, but it is as well to have it placed on the records of the House that 51 years after 1913, some people still have that mentality. The people concerned in this case are not Irish. They have come in from another country, and I suppose they have a different point of view.

Deputy Cosgrave made a comment with which I entirely disagree. He used an argument which has been used on numerous occasions, and wrongly used. A number of speakers from both sides of the House have said that the Taoiseach fixed up the ninth round of wage increases. That ninth round of wage increases was agreed on between the employers and the workers' representatives. Let me repeat that the Taoiseach did not fix it up. That ninth round of wage increases would have taken place, whether or not the Taoiseach gave the green light. That cannot be said too often. If anyone has any doubt about it, it is as well to repeat that at a critical stage of the negotiations, the Taoiseach said his advisers had told him that the most the national economy could carry was not more than an eight per cent increase.

In fact, a 12 per cent minimum was agreed on between the employers and the trade unions which is 50 per cent more than the Taoiseach felt could be given. How anyone, no matter from what side of the House, can claim that the wage negotiations were carried out by the Taoiseach, and by order of the Government, I fail to understand. It is only fair that that matter should be put on record so that we can know exactly where we stand. I know what I am talking about because I took part in the negotiations.

I have said before, but let me repeat, that the one thing the Taoiseach did— and I give him credit for it—was that when a breakdown in the negotiations took place, the Taoiseach called the two parties together again. I give him credit for that. He did that, but before they met, he told both sides that he felt eight per cent was the most that could be given. That was eight per cent flat. In fact, the increase was 12 per cent over £8 5s. 6d., and under £8 5s. 6d., it was a minimum of £1, which is much more than 12 per cent. Those facts should be recorded, because we have heard the Government Party and the Fine Gael Party using that argument when it suited themselves. I think it is right to try to clear it up.

The Minister made a brief reference to price control. I do not know whether the Minister is aware of what has happened and what is happening. A few months ago, I said that what was shown in the mid-February cost of living figure bore no relation to what was actually happening, and that the full effect of the price increases would not be shown until the mid-May figure was available. How right I was, because, when the mid-May figure became available, it showed, no matter how it was covered up, that there has been a very substantial increase in the cost of living.

I know that certain sections of the community are trying to argue that we must have an increase in the cost of living because of the fact that the workers got a 12 per cent increase. Is the Minister aware that some manufacturers are claiming they are entitled to increase the price of their goods by 12 per cent because of the fact that they had to give a 12 per cent increase in their workers' wages. That argument does not hold at all, because if it did, the entire costs of the manufacturers went in wages, and we all know that is not so. In many cases the proportion of the wages as against the cost of the products is as low as ten or 12 per cent. Despite that, some manufacturers insist on charging an extra 12 per cent to the retailers who, in turn, pass it on to the consumer.

I am quite sure the Minister for Finance is reasonably happy about the situation, but whether he will be so happy when the by-election is fought in Roscommon is another matter. He is quite happy because every time the cost of goods goes up, the amount collected in turnover tax is increased. Therefore, he does not feel that anything drastic should be done. Again and again over the past couple of months, and particularly over the past couple of weeks, members of the Labour Party have been trying to persuade the Minister for Industry and Commerce to do something serious about investigating prices. The Minister said he was having certain investigations carried out.

For weeks and weeks, an investigation was carried out into the price of soap, and the people who carried out the investigation came to the conclusion that there was no abnormal increase in the price of soap. I do not know how that investigation was carried out. As Deputy Cosgrave said, it was carried out behind closed doors, and there was no opportunity of finding out what evidence was produced, or was not produced. Anyone who thinks an increase of up to 25 per cent—which is the amount by which the price of soap was increased early on—is not an abnormal increase, has something wrong with his thinking.

The price of quite a number of other items has been increased, and the Minister said he was carrying out spot investigations throughout the country at retail level to find out if people were charging extra as a result of the turnover tax. Price levels were increased fairly substantially after the first couple of months of the operation of the turnover tax, but the really serious increase in prices took place after 1st February, when the retailers and wholesalers felt the mid-February cost of living index figure could not be affected by it. That is why such a steep increase is shown in the mid-May figure.

Despite what many people have said, I believe that price control is possible. I am afraid I could not follow the reasoning behind some of Deputy Cosgrave's arguments. He said it was not effective; he said the only way to keep down prices was through competition and that in present circumstances price control should be introduced because, he said, while you cannot reduce prices——

He said a public inquiry would be valuable.

He went on to say that, but does the Minister not know that a public inquiry such as we had when the Prices Body were in operation would be very useful?

We thought the same thing then.

I am afraid Deputy Cosgrave was not very clear. At least it was not at all clear that was what he meant.

I have been listening to both of you very carefully.

The Minister thinks we are in agreement on that point.

We think you are.

I have been in Cavan recently, and I know what the prices are like there.

Anyway, they will say TDs are costing more down there.

When the Prices Body were in operation and when manufacturers went to increase prices, there was a special hearing. I believe that was effective. I am a trade union official and if I want to seek an increase for my members, I have to go to the Labour Court in public session and justify it. If I do not, the Labour Court will throw the claim out. We see no reason why manufacturers should be allowed to increase prices by as much as ten or 15 per cent without any inquiry being held. So far, with the possible exception of sugar, we have received negative results from all the inquiries held.

One point on which I should like to question the Minister—he may say it has nothing to do with his Department—has to do with apprentices. Perhaps he would consider a system under which apprentices could be covered by insurance. At the present time they are not insurable until they have reached 16 years of age. There has been talk about increasing the school-leaving age. That is all very well when it comes, but at the moment I suggest young apprentices should be covered by insurance even before they reach 16 years. If they enter a trade to train in it, obviously the intention is that they will remain in that type of work for the rest of their lives.

There has been reference to the care and maintenance of St. Patrick's Mines. Would the Minister say whether the advertisement published recently resulted in any inquiries in this respect—is there anybody interested in the mines or are we likely to have to continue to pay substantial amounts for the care and maintenance of the mines for years to come?

The Minister referred to the efforts being made by Minister Teoranta to get under way. Will he tell us whether or not this industry, at present operating with the help of substantial State subsidies, is seriously affecting the future of existing grassmeal factories? Is the Minister aware that one such factory, which had been in operation for many years, has been forced to close down, that another one is on the way out and that a number of other similar undertakings are likely to go out of existence? In order to clear the air, would the Minister let us know whether it is intended that the State should continue to subsidise the manufacture of grassmeal by this industry to the detriment of existing grassmeal factories?

Are we for private enterprise or against it?

I did not know the Minister was a true blue socialist. I am glad to learn he is leaning in that direction. We have always said from these benches that if private enterprise is not able to do the job, then the State should step in and take a hand. Here we have a reversal of it: the State is helping to put these industries out of existence. I am interested in this mainly because one of these factories is in my constituency. I should not like to have it closed down because it is giving very good, well paid employment. I submit the Minister should take a long, serious look at this situation. If it were only a question of assisting this industry to get under way so that it would subsequently complete in the normal way, there would be no objection, but if there is to be a continued subsidy for the purpose of undercutting industries that have existed for some time. I object to it as a very bad idea. It is as well the Minister should know of our attitude to Minfheir Teoranta at Geesala in the west of County Mayo.

Mr. Browne

North Mayo.

The Minister's brief says west Mayo.

If Deputy Browne says north Mayo, I take his word for it.

I agree with Deputy Cosgrave that some of the CIO subcommittees have been doing excellent work. They set about a most unenviable task and have set an example which it would be advisable for a number of Government Commissions to follow. They were given a job and they got down to it. In some cases their recommendations seem to have been misinterpreted. I refer again to an area in my constituency where a new factory was about to start, with Irish directors and Irish money. Foras Tionscal were asked for a grant. The grant was not a very big one, only £18,000. If they had sought £180,000 and used a strange sounding name, they would have got a better hearing.

Being ordinary Irish people, they gave the facts and asked for £18,000. They had got a very substantial export order for their products. They went about the thing in a proper way and were engaging in a type of manufacture not already done in this country. I understand the CIO report was used as an excuse to prevent those people getting the grant they sought. I made some inquiries and found the explanation was that CIO had said there would have to be some system through which these factories would be made more effective. It was said that the export of produce of those factories would increase by 300 per cent by 1970.

I do not know whether existing factories are supposed to be able to increase their production by such a percentage or whether there is to be a type of factory to manufacture this product, but since this firm had guaranteed that all their output would be exported, I consider it most unfair they should be refused a grant by Foras Tionscal. This happened in a town where there is very little industrial employment. I should be very glad, therefore, if the Minister would tell us if he agrees with the Foras Tionscal interpretation of the CIO report.

It is all right to say that even though they have a big export order they would not be able to export everything because, if they produce seconds, the seconds must be sold in this country. I do not agree. I am sure there may be a certain market for those abroad, too. That seems to be the only argument now made against them. The extraordinary thing is that when the Minister was making his opening speech he referred to some industries which were doing quite well and had got a lot of money from the State. One of the industries he mentioned as being entirely for export was that concerned with broiler hatching eggs. I think I know the particular industry to which the Minister was referring. They got a substantial State grant. They are now supplying most of the broiler people in this country with chicks. The Minister says it is for export only. It looks as if what is sauce for the goose is not sauce for the gander.

If an exception is to be made in one case, it should apply all around. It is very disheartening. We find people able to get substantial grants on the guarantee that they will export all their produce, and yet they are flooding the home market. Immediately afterwards somebody, who can, in fact, be forced to carry out the guarantee, is refused a grant. The Minister should have a look at this particular application. The extraordinary thing is that if a grant is not available here, these people can go to Northern Ireland and not alone will they get a grant but they will get a factory. From there they will be able to export to England and we will lose them.

I am sufficiently worried about employment in my constituency to say that a matter of this kind should be dealt with in a different way from the way it has been dealt with so far. We know that substantial grants have been given to industries that did not last very long. I do not want to go into their history. It should be sufficient to mention one such as Flatley's. If my colleague, Deputy M. P. Murphy from west Cork, were here, I am sure he would regale the Minister at length on what was promised about west Cork and what came out of it. A very considerable grant was given to that firm. Where were those people before they got the money and where are they now? It makes very interesting reading to find out what actually happened in that case. We find people, who apparently have very little background anybody could be proud of, finishing up with £90,000 of the taxpayers' money and going out of business in a short time. Yet we find people who are making a genuine effort to start a business being refused on what I consider to be very flimsy grounds.

The Minister referred to the number of projects being started, the number under consideration, the amount of money involved and so on. He seems to be basing his figures on the potential employment. He gave us information concerning the grants made by Foras Tionscal for industries outside the undeveloped areas during the year ended the 31st March, 1964. He said:

Grants amounting to nearly £1 million were approved bringing the total grants approved for such projects to £6,700,000. Of this latter sum, grants totalling £3,300,000 were paid to 31st March, 1964, leaving outstanding commitments of £3,400,000. The total capital investment in these projects amounts to almost £29 million. It is estimated that these projects, which are mainly in the export field, will employ about 16,000 persons.

Again, this is the potential employment, which bears very little relationship to the true figures.

Will somebody try to get an estimate of the number of people who have been actually employed in new industries over the past 12 months? I know it is not an easy job to do so, but I think it can be done. Last year a man who does a very useful job in Meath making hurley sticks, which are in very short supply, found he was not able to meet the demand and asked for a grant for the purpose of extending his business. Do you believe me when I tell you he got from Foras Tionscal a letter asking him if he would be able to guarantee that he could export to Common Market countries the produce of his factory? I would love to see every country in Europe playing hurling. I share the Minister's fondness for it. But I think that was drawing the bow a bit too far. The person who made that application was perfectly satisfied he would not be able to export hurling sticks to the Common Market countries. He did not get a grant.

The Deputy is making a lot of charges. If he could give me a copy of the letter written, I would like to have it.

I will give the Minister the original letter. I am sure he will be as amused as I was. But the man who got it was not amused. He could not see the humour in it. I have a second case of a man carrying on a substantial business in various types of timber work. He employs about five people. He had not the necessary capital for expansion and he applied for a grant. Again, he just did not get it. They did not ask him to export field gates to the Common Market countries, but they did not give him any money. I honestly believe that people who are making an effort to expand their business and give good employment should get more encouragement than simply the stereotyped reply saying that under certain regulations they do not qualify for a grant.

As far as I am personally concerned, I find the Minister on top of his job. He seems to be able to answer most of our questions. Maybe he does not answer them to our satisfaction, but at least he answers them courteously. That is the most we ask of any Minister of State.

One is pleased to note that the Minister can record progress in his Department during the year. Industrial activity has taken a great jump forward and export figures constitute a record. In 1963, we achieved an increase of £21 million in the export of manufactured goods. This has been a tremendous help, especially to our balance of payments problem. But, above all, there is the employment given to our workers. I listened to Deputy Cosgrave's speech. I expected, as a result of the recent Fine Gael Ard-Fheis, to have heard something more constructive. Frankly, the speech was a very tame one. One would have to search very hard to find any new ideas in it. He referred to the number of Boards dealing with industrial development in this country and said that it probably could be dealt with in some different way. I rather take the view that all of these boards come directly under the Minister for Industry and Commerce and they are merely departments advising people. Three, and possibly four, of them have that function. That is very necessary.

We would have expected some positive policy in the field of planning and control from Fine Gael. We hear the word "planning" used quite extensively from the Fine Gael benches but there is no evidence outside that that they have any plans, good, bad or indifferent. Indeed, I am not surprised at this at all. It would be quite a record, judging by the progress that the Minister's Department is making in the field of industrial development, if any Party in this House, or any Party in this country, could come in with something that would best what he is doing.

The figure the Minister gives for industrial expansion and the rate of growth of gross national production in this particular field is quite good. Last year it was something as high as 7 per cent. That is no mean achievement in this particular field. Deputy Cosgrave was not able to bring in any plan that would take the colour off that achievement.

I listened carefully to Deputy Tully. Again, we hear from the Labour benches the usual spate of unfounded complaints levelled against every Department. They are all without foundation. We heard the remark that manufacturers said they would give the 12 per cent increase in wages but they would increase their products by 12 per cent. This, of course, is completely untrue. The very idea that anybody would even think of increasing their products by 12 per cent merely because they increased wages by 12 per cent is just laughable.

Deputy Tully is quite glib at this type of political remark at any time. They are not for the benefit of this House but for outside consumption and one can let them pass for that reason. He went on to say that after the introduction of the turnover tax manufacturers increased their prices ten or 15 per cent. Again, this remark was unsubstantiated and backed by no evidence, good, bad or indifferent. That is typical of Deputy Tully. He takes the Minister to task for something vague, something unfounded, and expects the Minister to give him an intelligent answer. That is an entire farce.

One can remark on the lack of any comment by members of the Opposition about the Government's policy on the Second Programme for Economic Expansion. There was no comment as to whether industrial employment would be found for some 78,000 people by 1970.

Further consideration of Vote postponed.

Barr
Roinn