asked the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Energy if he will make a statement on the future of the bus and rail coach building industry in Ireland, with special reference to its location and the reasons therefor.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Bus and Rail Coach Industry.
8.
The Irish market for coaches, whether railway or road, consists primarily of the requirements of CIE. I am informed that a coachbuilding industry based exclusively on meeting home market requirements would not be economic in the longer term. I understand that CIE have reached an advanced stage in negotiations with commercial interests in regard to the establishment of industrial projects in Ireland to build coaches for CIE and for export. The question of grant assistance for one of these projects is at present under consideration. In the final analysis the location of these manufacturing projects is a matter for decision by the promoters themselves.
Would the Minister accept that there is a very strong case for State involvement in a coach-building industry? Would he consider setting up again a State coach-building industry at Inchicore in Dublin?
Regarding these two projects, the IDA are examining the possibility of providing grant assistance to one of the plants. I would not be in a position to give an answer on the general question.
Why was the site at Inchicore rejected in favour of the site at Shannon when there is a tradition of bus-building at Inchicore and when the skilled work force is available in that area?
I have given as much information as is available in my Department.
Has the Minister any views on the fact that a traditional bus-building operation at Inchicore on an adequate site has been abandoned suddenly in favour of Limerick? Has he any views on that as Minister of State?
My views relate to the question before me and the answers I have given.
Is the Minister aware that there is a fully trained work force at Inchicore?
In view of the fact that we have in this Inchicore story an instance of the public sector shedding a profitable and well-running part of its operations to the private sector, which then succeeded in closing it down, would the Minister tell the House whether active consideration is being given to doing what Deputies Mitchell and O'Connell have suggested, namely, getting CIE to reopen this business themselves?
I am not aware of any such activity but it is not under my Department.
Is the usually absent principal Minister not responsible for the IDA and for industrial development generally?
Not for CIE.
CIE have an industrial dimension to their operations. Surely the Minister or his ghost here are aware of whether CIE will reopen the plant or not. That is what we want to know.
A 14½-stone ghost. As far as the reopening is concerned, I have already outlined the situation. With regard to the railway coaches side of the organisation, negotiations have been proceeding on a joint venture project between a foreign company and CIE for both the CIE requirements and for the export potential. The availability and payment of an IDA grant is being considered for this project. That is as far as I can go.
CIE loses about £30 million a year and surely a relatively small rescue operation would be the answer here.
Would the Minister not agree that the closing of Van Hool has left a considerable number of skilled craftsmen unemployed and another considerable number in superfluous employment in CIE in Inchicore and would he not agree that the obvious place for any future coach building would be in Inchicore? If the answer is "No" what is the merit in going elsewhere?
The location of any manufacturing project is a matter for the promoters.
God.
Is the Minister aware there is a pool of skilled men in Inchicore and would he make it his business to review present policy to ensure that we absorb the skills of these men?
I will bring the interesting points made by the Deputies to the attention of CIE.