: At Question Time today I raised certain matters respecting the purchase by one of the air companies of a block of the shareholding of Ryan's Hotel and Car Hire Company. The Minister in his reply made it clear that not merely was his consent sought but that he had encouraged this before the company came to their decision. I want to extract some further information from the Minister and to deal with this matter under several distinct and separate heads.
The first heading under which I would like to have some information from the Minister and on which I wish to make some observations is what I might call the commerciality of the transaction on the facts as published. The facts as published are that the air company bought 1,664,000 shares of 1/- each at 3/9d. per share for £312,000. That is, apparently, from the agreement that was field in the Library about 1½ to two hours ago, 20 per cent of the share capital of the company. It means that a company with an Ordinary share capital of £416,000 has been valued in this transaction for £1,560,000. There is after that, according to the agreement, to be a swap of 336,667 Ordinary shares when so allotted by the company to Aerlínte—a swap of those for 687,467 Deferred Ordinary shares owned by Mr. Ryan himself.
The first thing in relation to the commercial facts of the transaction is that I want to tell the Minister that he did not tell us the truth to-day. The Minister said to-day, and I quote his words: "... I had to leave it to the initiative of the air company because it involved the purchase of shares in the Dublin Stock Exchange through the holding company of Ryans". That is not true. What it involved was the issue of new shares at a premium of 2/9d. per share. The Minister should have told the House the true facts. I am not in a position to comment on the commerciality of this transaction as such. I do not know; but I object to the hugger-mugger that goes on by the Minister and the hugger-mugger that went on by the Minister at Question Time to-day. Everybody knows, who has any experience whatsoever of a commercial transaction, that the first thing done after transactions of this sort is that announcement is made in public of the people who have given advice, whether it is from the hotel point of view or whether it is from the financial point of view. The Minister refused to answer me.
I want to make it clear that so far as I am concerned in relation to the commerciality of the transaction I know nothing other than the facts as published and I object violently to the refusal of the Minister at Question Time today to put the proper information at the disposal of the Dáil. The facts speak for themselves. Here is a transaction with an enormous capital tax-free provided for one particular man. It may have been good business on a commercial basis but that is what it involves—an enormous tax-free profit.
The second aspect of this to which I want to draw the attention of the House is the bad reputation that this particular person brought on himself, and indirectly, therefore, on our country, through his misguided and foolish efforts to interfere in the political life of the United States of America. It is immaterial to me whether Mr. Ryan chooses to behave like a pup or whether he does not, but when it comes to the point that he has the Irish national airlines associating themselves with somebody who in a foolish, childish and ignorant way attempts to interfere in the politics of the United States, then it is something of which we must take notice. This intervention into American affairs was first noted in the Irish Press on the 2nd September. It was repeated again, and perhaps in a worse form, in the Irish Times of the 11th September; and yet it was long after that that the Minister gave his consent to this transaction. It was after that the company concerned signed the agreement.
I do not think that the company as such should be associated with such a person. I do not think, whatever about their views on the commerciality of the transaction, that it was wise tactics for our national airline to be associated with somebody who is obviously, as we have seen, persona non grata with a large section of American visiting tourists. It is entirely a matter for Mr. Ryan whether he decides, to spend 25,000 dollars on his intervention into American politics. It is entirely a matter for him whether he is a member of Taca. It is entirely a matter for Deputy S. Lemass whether he wishes to be associated as a fellow-director with a person of that sort. It is not a good thing for the Irish airlines and for Ireland, and on that account alone that the Minister should not have given consent.
Another aspect of this is that Aerlínte was set up for the purpose of operating an airline. When the House was told it was being set up they were not told that it was going to be a hotel business. The Memorandum of Association of every company, or every commercial company, is drawn as wide as possible for the company concerned. What the Memorandum of Association authorises a private commercial concern to do and what it is proper for a State sponsored body to do are two entirely different things. The Minister for Transport and Power had a duty to this House and to the country to come to the House, and seek the authority and consent of the House before moneys invested by the taxpayers for one purpose were used for another. The Minister has sought to justify his neglect to do that by the fact that Aerlínte were previously involved in the Intercontinental Hotels. That was an entirely different case. That was not a case where anybody was being paid a large capital tax-free gain. That was a case where Aer Lingus came in with Pan American Airways, with another air line and other people for the purpose of erecting something new and there was no question of any capital profit to anybody involved. Everybody was just putting into the general pool the cost of the building of particular hotels, hotels which were being used specially and for the purpose of bringing a different type of American clientele here and which were not going to compete at all with existing Irish hotels. That was one of the cases made by the Minister of that day, that the Intercontinental type of business customer would not be in competition with other existing hotels.
So far from that being the case in this instance the whole purpose of this transaction is to ensure that Ryan's company will be in competition, not merely in relation to hotels but in relation to car hire also, with every other hotel and car hire company in the country. It was particularly for that reason that there was an obligation on the Minister to disclose the facts to this House and to get authority and consent from this House before he gave his consent to the deal.
We can remember what happened when the same thing was done in another State-sponsored company, when that State-sponsored company set up a subsidiary without authority from this House with money that had been originally intended for another purpose by this House. Then there had to be a very costly inquiry and, after that very costly inquiry, a great deal of cleaning up of the stables in that subsidiary company set up without any authority from this House.
As I have said, this is a transaction which is going to mean that this company will be in direct competition with many other hotels and car hire firms in the country. It is interesting to note also that this company got a special letting in the Bord Fáilte or the airline office building—I cannot remember which—in New York. This is the only car-hire firm that is getting a letting in that office in Broadway, as the Minister himself is aware. This is creating a precedent which is contrary entirely to the manner in which An Foras Tionscal deal with grants, to the manner in which the Industrial Development Authority deal with grants. In neither case can a new industry get a grant if it is going to be in competition with an existing industry, a very proper provision. The taxpayers' money will not be used against the taxpayers. The primary principle of that has been completely abrogated and completely taken away in this case.
If the Minister was so interested in getting this particular type of development Córas Iompair Éireann, when they were formed, were authorised to take over rail, road and hotel services. He had already another State-sponsored body to his hand in this particular type of business. If, as he said himself, he was anxious to provide this sort of thing, it would have been simple enough to get another State-sponsored body to do it. He did not take that course and he must take the responsibility, not the Boards of either company. Their examination was a different thing. He must take the responsibility for having neglected, first, properly to publicise the details of the transaction and, secondly, when he was giving his consent he should have known that it was his bounden duty to come to this House and declare the whole facts, that if he did not declare the whole facts then he was acting in contradiction and contravention of the national interest.
When we go into public life we are bound to accept that being in public life does not allow us to do things that perhaps could be done quietly if we were private citizens. A State-sponsored body and the Minister for Transport and Power are in that position. They are much more so in a case where an enormous capital profit is being handed over to a person who is the managing director of a concern of which Deputy Seán Lemass is the chairman. If there was absolutely nothing wrong about the transaction— and the facts will ultimately disclose that in their own due time—if there was nothing wrong whatever about the Minister's part in this transaction, then he had a bounden duty, because of the public figure involved, to come to this House and to lay his cards properly on the Table of the House, to come to this House and to tell the facts. Instead of that it was all done in an attitude of hugger mugger, hugger mugger even up to Question Time today, hugger mugger which can only mean that the people will believe that there was something in the transaction which the Minister wanted to hide and I believe there was. I believe that the Minister knew that he was wrong in doing this, knew that he was wrong in allowing taxpayers' money to be used to compete with other taxpayers, knew that it was wrong to give a monopoly of this sort to Ryans in car hire and in hotels and on that account he wanted to get it all done, copper-fastened and fixed up before anybody in this House had an opportunity of criticising it in public.
