asked the Minister for Finance if he will guarantee the exchange risk in the case of borrowing abroad by industrialists and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Exchange Risk.
41.
The Government are already providing significant exchange risk cover for industry through the ICC and the ACC. As I indicated in the House on Wednesday, 16 April, I am not prepared to go further and provide what would be, in effect, a subsidy. Any such arrangement would lead to demands for similar treatment by agriculture, tourism, and other sectors of importance to the economy, so that the application of the scheme would become generalised. The Exchequer is not in a position to entertain such proposals.
I would point out also that under a general arrangement there would be no assurance that projects qualifying for cover would be economically worth-while. Under the schemes operated by the ICC and the ACC, to which I have referred already, the process of evaluation and follow-up gives some prospect that the benefits of foreign borrowing and State exchange risk cover will go to projects likely to yield a lasting return in terms of output, employment and impact on the balance of payments.
Do I take that the newspaper story today suggested and indicated that the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Tourism is strongly in favour of this but will not get the support of the Department of Finance?
I am not prepared to comment on newspaper stories.
Is the Minister aware that all Deputies have received representations from trade unionists employed in certain factories, and the CII, in relation to this proposal? The CII have repeatedly called for this type of proposal which, obviously, has the support of the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Tourism. Will the Minister indicate if there will be a change in Government policy? If so is it not reasonable to assume from what has been published that there is conflict within the Government?
The Minister for Industry, Commerce and Tourism has put his views on the record of the House. If the Deputy refers to the contribution of that Minister during the course of the debate on interest rates here he will find that it is different from the proposals that are referred to and the proposals of the CII. Therefore, it is incorrect to say that those proposals have his support.
Did the Minister say he was not prepared to grant what would amount to a subsidy? I do not know if I am quoting the Minister accurately but I should like to know if that is Government policy or the Minister's policy?
It is Government policy as expressed by me.
Is the report in the newspaper to the effect that there was a document before the Government from the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Tourism in relation to this correct?
It is the business of newspapers to comment and, obviously, when they present some matters as fact they protect their sources. It is not my business to comment on newspaper reports.
Is there a document before the Government from the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Tourism supporting a guarantee from the Government against devaluation of the punt?
There is not.
No such document exists?
No.
Therefore, the report in this morning's newspaper is completely inaccurate?
If the Deputy takes note of the question he asked and the answer I gave to him he will understand the situation.
Is the report completely inaccurate?
I did not say anything about the report. I answered the Deputy's question directly under the terms which I was asked.
There is no document from the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Tourism before the Government looking for a subsidisation of interest rates on moneys borrowed abroad?
There is no proposal before the Government.
There is no report from the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Tourism? Has the Minister a document before the Government supporting the demand for a subsidisation of interest rates on moneys borrowed abroad to protect them against the risks involved in exchange changes?
I do not feel obliged to indicate what might or might not be before the Government at any particular time. Even though I do not feel any such obligation—nor do I think I am required to—nonetheless I have responded to the Deputy in the terms in which I have already answered him—there are no proposals before the Government.