asked the Minister for Energy in relation to the mining company, Bula Limited, if he will state: (a) the total State investment in the company; and (b) the expected total loss to the State arising from the closure of the company.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Bula Limited State Investment.
6.
The total State investment in Bula Limited is £10,496,000. The out-turn of the State's investment in the company, which is in receivership, depends on the outcome of the receivership and on certain other factors which will not mature for some time.
Can I ask the Minister to clarify whether he anticipates any further expenditure at present?
Because of the receivership situation I am legally precluded from answering that question.
Does the £10.4 million include all interest due to the banks to date?
I did not realise that Bula was of interest in North Kerry. I am of the opinion that the figure would include interest payments.
Can the Minister tell the House if he now agrees that the deal originally done was a disastrous deal, that was £10,496,000 down the drain?
That is not a question.
There has not been a hole bored in the fields around Navan yet.
That is a provocative statement.
You could not provoke the Minister even if you tried. Will the Minister agree that it was a disastrous deal? Can he tell us if the receiver——
The Deputy might provoke me.
It cost almost £10.5 million. Surely that is a disaster for the Irish taxpayer. Can the Minister tell us what is the position in relation to the tenders received by the receiver? Will no move take place pending the High Court action we read about in the newspapers?
The Chair might come to the conclusion that that is subjudice.
There have been some unusual rules about subjudice recently.
I do not think that we as a State have anything to feel proud of in relation to the development of our natural resources. It has not been just this particular aspect of mining but what the State has received from mining activities in this country that has been a disaster. The State should have benefited much more if this country had a mining policy which protected to the full the interest of the taxpayer and the public. I have to admit that the wrangling that has taken place between these two major companies down through the years has been of no benefit either domestically or internationally in any efforts of this Government or of previous Governments to develop our mining resources.
Having admitted that it was a disastrous policy set by a previous Labour Minister in a previous Coalition Government——
I did not admit that.
It is a fact of life. Who drew up the policy in 1975 and who was responsible for the Bula deal?
I am not going to open a debate on that or allow a view on it.
The Minister has admitted that his predecessor's policy has been a disaster.
I am not admitting that.
The deal with Bula was your own making.
I am going to allow a short question from Deputy O'Malley.
Can I ask the Minister on what basis he says that the £10.4 million expended by the State includes the interest due to banks in view of the fact that the £10.4 million is what the State paid out in 1977 and subsequently for its interest in this company?
I have to correct the Deputy. The £10.4 million is not what the State paid out in the seventies. The sum under consideration at that time was £9.54 million. Subsequent sums have included interest to the banks.
I said 1977 and subsequently. In the eighties the Government paid out £.6 million or £.7 million.
I am not going to allow a debate from anybody.
On what basis does the Minister say that that total figure of £10.4 million includes the interest due to the banks?
I was referring to Deputy Foley's question. There are no interest payments to be made. The Department made a number of payments in relation to the banks in 1982 and 1984. I am not aware of any payments which have been requested since 1984. Certainly none have been made.
Why did the Minister say it included interest?
I make the assumption that it included interest because there are no interest payments being requested.
If interest was added, the figure that the State has now expended is, in 1986 terms, in excess of £25 million. That is the figure including interest. The £10.4 million is simply the capital payment which was foolishly made.
That was not the question.
In the appropriation accounts for 1983 and 1984 there are three items of interest, one amounting to £665,000, one for £234,000 and one for £502,000. I would like clarification on that. That would bring the figure up to £10.9 million.
The information available to me is that in 1976 a consideration of £9.54 million was fixed by consultants nominated by the Institute of Arbitrators in London. At that time they placed a value of £39.75 million on the Bula mine prospect. The loans in respect of bank interest due by Bula Limited were as follows: £162,960 in respect of the period 15 September 1982 to 25 October 1982; £502,257 in respect of interest for the three months ending 30 June 1983; £234,318 in respect of the period 1 September 1984 to 30 November 1984 and £56,761 in respect of the period 1 December 1984 to 21 December 1984.