Vol. 402 No. 7
12 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce the expected publication date of the triennial review of industrial policy required under section 6 of the Industrial Development Act, 1986; the reason the report has not been published in view of the fact that he informed Dáil Éireann on 15 February 1990, that it would be completed within a matter of weeks; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I regret that, because of the pressure of other commitments, it has not yet proved possible to have the report on the second triennial review of industrial performance published.
I expect to be in a position to publish the report in the very near future.
I put it to the Minister that the reason for the inordinate delaying the publication of the report is that there is a fundamental dispute at the heart of Government on its findings. I have no objection to there being an argument in the Government on the direction of our industrial policy as it probably deserves it. When the Minister admits that, will he say whether it will be brought before the House and time allowed for us to debate its findings?
There is no such dispute as the Deputy suggests.
All palsy-walsy again?
I am happy to assure the Deputy that relationships within the Government are excellent.
For the time being.
There is no such dispute. The review has been completed in the historical sense and what I am looking at and about to complete — because I have now cleared my mind on the matter — are some of the steps which would be taken for the future arising out of the review.
Will the Minister agree that it is vital to be given time in the House to discuss this important review? I say that in a positive and constructive way because the structures in Dáil Éireann fail to provide an opportunity to debate and discuss policy documents of such importance to our economy. Will the Minister do everything in his power to ensure that we get an opportunity to debate the document in this House?
I would very much welcome a debate on the document in the House but it is often very difficult to discuss matters in the House because of competition from other areas. For example, as the Deputy is only to well aware, I am most anxious to have the Companies (No. 2) Bill, 1987, passed but the number of times in which it can be ordered in the House is, unfortunately, very limited.
I look forward to this report in the sense that it will present a macro view of policy as it operated for the past few years. However, I am interested in the Minister's views on specific areas and I will mention one on which I should like him to comment. A factory, grant-aided in the past couple of years, never really functioned properly and its location is such that it cannot be sold. Therefore, the IDA, which invested something like £52,000, a modest figure in relation to the number of investments they have made, cannot now recoup their investment even though the factory never functioned properly.
The specific matter to which the Deputy refers is worthy of a separate question.
In the context of this triennial review, will the Minister undertake to carry out specific investigations into investments which have been made over the past few years because what I have mentioned is a perfect example, although it was before the Minister's time? We refer to it as the "blank cheque" policy which has been in operation since 1987 and I have two examples——
We cannot afford the luxury of giving examples.
Will the Minister investigate a number of specific cases?
I advise Deputy Cotter to raise these matters in a more formal manner.
