asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he will make a statement on the present position of the car assembly industry and on the possibility of large-scale unemployment.
3.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Car Assembly Industry.
2.
asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce the steps he is taking to protect the jobs of workers in the motor assembly industry in view of the large numbers recently laid off.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 2 and 3 together.
The present position of the car assembly industry is that a number of firms have either laid-off workers or have gone on short-time. This situation has resulted from a decline in the market demand for motor vehicles, and, in the case of one firm, from the cancellation of a franchise for the assembly and distribution of vehicles.
The safeguarding of employment of workers in the assembly industry has both short-term and longer-term aspects. As to the short-term position, I have made it clear to all parties concerned that I will not permit vehicles to be imported in fully-built-up condition at the expense of a loss of jobs in the assembly of those vehicles here. My Department have also initiated discussions with the assembly firms with a view to securing their voluntary co-operation in the present difficult situation through the exercise of restraint in the use of their rights to import assembled vehicles under the special scheme for the motor assembly industry, as modified by the terms of our accession to the EEC.
As regards the longer-term position, I would refer the Deputies to the reply given on 28th November, 1974 to Question No. 63 as reported in the Official Report, Volume 276, columns 577 to 579. That reply had reference, among other matters, to the setting up of manufacturing operations which will provide alternative employment for workers engaged in assembly firms. I am happy to say that one such project has commenced production and is exporting, and another project is expected to commence production in the near future.
Will the Minister state how many jobs the two projects he mentioned have provided or will provide in the immediate future? There have been three closures in motor assembly firms in Dublin and the total number of redundant workers is between 1,300 and 1,400 in Brittains, McCairns and Reg Armstrong.
The Deputy is mixing separate matters. With regard to his question about the number of people, by mid-September, 1975 in one of the projects 200 people will be employed and, when full production is reached in 1977, 500 people will be employed. In regard to the second diversification project, the number envisaged is 130 new jobs, making a total for the two projects of 630 jobs at full production. The first 200 are being recruited at the moment. The reason I wanted to separate the two categories is that one category of unemployment is because of short-time working due to a downturn in the market. The category that has arisen from a dispute between a manufacturing company and an assembler here is quite another category of unemployment. It is occurring because of that dispute, in circumstances where in the past the products in question have enjoyed a very substantial market here, at one point more than one-third of the Irish market. That is a separate problem. Hopefully the dispute can be resolved and then there is no threat to the jobs of the workers. It is a question of a dispute between firms and efforts are being made to resolve it.
Surely the Minister will agree that the difficulty that has arisen between Brittains and British Leyland in England about the supply of components, as was reported, is because Brittain (Ireland) Limited are unable to pay for parts they are importing. Their financial difficulty is, in turn, caused by the general downturn that has affected McCairns and Armstrong. Basically it is the same problem and there is no immediate prospect of re-employment for the 900 men from Brittains unless the Minister can come up with something. Has he anything for them?
I think the Deputy genuinely misunderstands the position. He has said the basis of the dispute is money that is owing because of a downturn in the market. I do not want to offer a judgment on the relations between the two firms, but it is much more complicated and is of longer origin than the present downturn of the market. It is not primarily based on the non-marketability of the end product. That is the first point. Since the Deputy is mistaken about the basis of the dispute, the second point I should like to make is that it is more desirable to try to get a resolution of that dispute so that the products which in the recent past enjoyed more than one-third of the Irish market should be widely available. That is the desirable outcome and it is the outcome being pursued at the moment.
Is the Minister seeking to imply that the 900 men who have been let go by Brittain (Ireland) Limited will be taken on again by another company to whom British Leyland may give a franchise? Can the Minister guarantee that the 900 men will go back? If British Leyland can negotiate a franchise with another group in this country, is it not likely that the labour force taken on will be much smaller than the existing labour force?
The Deputy is in a hypothetical area. I cannot give guarantees——
The 900 people thrown out of work are not in a hypothetical position.
I cannot even give a guarantee that those British products will be made available on the Irish market.
Would the Minister say that falling sales have resulted in some of the short time in the motor car industry?
Yes.
Would the Minister say that a reduction in VAT in regard to the motor industry——
That is a separate matter.
With all respect——
The Chair has ruled. That is a separate matter.
There are 900 people out of work and the Minister has no solution.
Would the Minister at least make representations to the Minister for Finance on this aspect?