asked the Minister for Industry, Trade, Commerce and Tourism the number of projects that have been approved for assistance by the National Enterprise Agency in the past 18 months; if he is satisfied with the progress of the agency; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - National Enterprise Agency.
2.
In mid-1983 I asked the National Enterprise Agency to progress their existing activities for an interim period pending the formal establishment of the National Development Corporation. I am satisfied with the progress made by the agency since then.
To date the NEA have made a small number of investments in addition to commissioning some consultancy work. A subsidiary company — Irish Health Services Development Corporation Ltd. —was established in March 1984 to facilitate the development of the export potential of Irish health services. The agency have also approved for seed capital investment a small number of strategic research projects with commercial potential. Two further projects in the high technology area have also been approved recently for investment by the agency.
Will the Minister agree that after 18 months activity the record is not encouraging? Will the Minister tell the House if, in the absence of projects being identified by the National Enterprise Agency, the National Development Corporation of which we have heard so much in recent times will be any more successful than the NEA has been in the last 18 months?
I do not accept at all that the National Enterprise Agency has been unsuccessful. It has suffered from political uncertainty over the last three years in that a number of Governments succeeded one another and they had different views about the role of the National Enterprise Agency. In July last I decided that pending the introduction of the legislation setting up the National Development Corporation the National Enterprise Agency should be reactivated — it was already in existence — and should continue with its work. I have in my possession a review of the projects they have invested in, are on the point of investing in or considering for investment. Given the relatively small staff resources available to them they have identified some very interesting and useful projects. Naturally, I cannot go into this in detail with the Deputy because some of these projects are not at the stage where they are in a position to announce the investment although I expect to be making some announcements of investments by the NEA later this month. I would be happy to arrange a discussion for the Deputy with the National Enterprise Agency if he wishes to have a more informal briefing on the position. I am reasonably happy that they are doing good work.
I accept the Minister's offer and I will be only too delighted to meet them. I believe that the National Enterprise Agency had a very good role to play.
The Deputy should put a question.
I am not going overboard.
Question Time has developed and taken on a pattern of questions from Deputies, statements by a Minister and then comments on the Minister's answers by Deputies. That is not what Question Time is about.
Arising out of the Minister's reply will he agree that the uncertainty about recent Governments was contributed to by his own Coalition Governments?
That is what is known as argument.
The Minister said the reason it has not been successful was because of political uncertainty.
I do not agree with that.
The Coalition scrapped it in 1981 and I reactivated the agency in 1982. We were on the point of appointing a new chief executive which the Coalition did not approve of and 18 months later there is still no chief executive.
They have one.
If the Government had any serious interest in jobs they would not have left that agency with a staff of two or three, particularly when they were involved in the important area of job creation.
The Deputy is misinformed about the position. As I indicated earlier they had suffered in the past from uncertainty but in July 1983 I reactivated the agency and arranged for it to have an executive who is working on terms I indicated to the Deputy yesterday. He is very active and has a team of expert executives assisting him. Quite a substantial number of valuable projects have been brought to a mature stage by the National Enterprise Agency. They have made some investments already and I indicated them in my reply. I am confident that the agency can play a very valuable role between now and the time it is incorporated in the enlarged National Development Corporation. Their work will continue up to and after that time.
Will the Minister tell the House if the agency have spent their budget for 1982 and 1983? That will determine their success rate.
They did not spend their budget in those years but I had made arrangements in July 1983——
The Minister's statement says it all.
——whereby they will be able to make such investments as are wise. I do not believe, and I do not think the Deputy in his more sane moments would believe that it is the object of an agency to spend the budget regardless of whether or not there are good projects to invest in. I have always advised the National Enterprise Agency to invest wisely but not necessarily to spend the budget merely to justify getting a similar budget next year.
Will the Minister say the same to the National Development Corporation?
Of course I will say the same to that body. One should make only wise investments of public funds.
The Minister should not bother to start them off.
Before calling the next question I should like to invite the Deputy and the Minister to read that question, the reply to it and the supplementaries that followed in conjunction with Standing Orders and tell me what they think about it.
I am glad the Chair directed that statement to both sides.