Edward Nealon
Ceist:8 Mr. Nealon asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce his views on whether industrial development in Ireland should operate through a system of regional boards appointed by and accountable to a national body.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Industrial Policy.
Gay Mitchell
Ceist:9 Mr. G. Mitchell asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce his views on whether his Department's three year review of industrial performance should be widened in scope to include a review of industrial policy as well.
Pádraic McCormack
Ceist:11 Mr. McCormack asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce his views on whether there should be a shift from grants for home managed industry towards the use of equity by State agencies to meet the financial needs of such companies.
Michael Lowry
Ceist:14 Mr. Lowry asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce his views on whether there should be a shift from grants for home managed industry towards the use of equity by State agencies to meet the financial needs of such companies.
Pat Rabbitte
Ceist:15 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he will outline the Government's response to the report of the Industrial Review Group; if any deadline has been set for the work of the task force which has been established to follow up on the implementation of the recommendations; whether, pending the completion of the work of the task force, the Government intend to act on any of the conclusions of the review group; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Monica Barnes
Ceist:19 Mrs. Barnes asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce his views on whether industrial development in Ireland should operate through a system of regional boards appointed by and accountable to a national body.
Michael Finucane
Ceist:21 Mr. Finucane asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce his views on whether the grant-aid budget for internationally mobile industry should be further reduced.
Madeleine Taylor-Quinn
Ceist:25 Mrs. Taylor-Quinn asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he intends to adopt a wider definition of indigenous industry at overall industrial policy level; and if he will be directing the development agencies to adopt the definition as recommended in the Cullition Report.
Brendan McGahon
Ceist:26 Mr. McGahon asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce his views on whether his Department's three year review of industrial performance should be widened in scope to include a review of industrial policy as well.
Dinny McGinley
Ceist:27 Mr. McGinley asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce his views on whether his Department's three year review of industrial performance should be widened in scope to include a review of industrial policy as well.
Godfrey Timmins
Ceist:36 Mr. Timmins asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce his views on whether industrial development in Ireland should operate through a system of regional boards appointed by and accountable to a national body.
Jim Mitchell
Ceist:37 Mr. J. Mitchell asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce his views on whether his Department's three year review of industrial performance should be widened in scope to include a review of industrial policy as well.
Dick Spring
Ceist:40 Mr. Spring asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce when the task force recommended by the Culliton Review Body, which is to report to the Taoiseach, will commence its work; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Paul McGrath
Ceist:43 Mr. McGrath asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce his views on whether his Department's three year review of industrial performance should be widened in scope to include a review of industrial policy as well.
William Cotter
Ceist:51 Mr. Cotter asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce his views on whether there should be a shift from grants for home managed industry towards the use of equity by State agencies to meet the financial needs of such companies.
Jim Higgins
Ceist:54 Mr. J. Higgins asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce his views on whether the grant aid budget for internationally mobile industry should be further reduced.
Fergus O'Brien
Ceist:55 Mr. O'Brien asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce his views on whether industrial development in Ireland should operate through a system of regional boards appointed by and accountable to a national body.
Michael Noonan
Ceist:56 Mr. Noonan (Limerick East) asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce his views on whether industrial development in Ireland should operate through a system of regional boards appointed by and accountable to a national body.
Edward Nealon
Ceist:57 Mr. Nealon asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce his views on whether there should be a shift from grants for home managed industry towards the use of equity by State agencies to meet the financial needs of such companies.
Patrick D. Harte
Ceist:59 Mr. Harte asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce his views on whether the grant aid budget for internationally mobile industry should be further reduced.
Charles Flanagan
Ceist:64 Mr. Flanagan asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce his views on whether the grant aid budget for internationally mobile industry should be further reduced.
Madeleine Taylor-Quinn
Ceist:70 Mrs. Taylor-Quinn asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he intends to move from grants for home management industry to the use of equity for venture and seed capital as recommended in the Culliton report.
Pat Lee
Ceist:79 Dr. Lee asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce his views on whether there should be a shift from grants for home managed industry towards the use of equity by State agencies to meet the financial needs of such companies.
Mary Flaherty
Ceist:82 Miss Flaherty asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce his views on whether the grant aid budget for internationally mobile industry should be further reduced.
I will take Questions Nos. 8, 9, 11, 14, 15, 19, 21, 25, 26, 27, 36, 37, 40, 43, 51, 54, 55, 56, 57, 59, 64, 70, 79 and 82 together.
The report of the Industrial Policy Review Group was published on 10 January last. The Government welcomed the report and supported the broad thrust of its recommendations. To ensure that its recommendations are followed up with all speed the Government established, as recommended by the review group, a task force on the implementation of the recommendations. The task force have commenced their work and have already held two meetings. The task force will be working closely with the relevant Government Departments on the implementation of the report's recommendations and any further measures which the task force consider will enhance the scope for development and employment in the industrial sector. The task force will report to the Government on the progress made in the implementation of the measures and recommendations.
As regards the recommendations of the group which relate to my Department and their agencies, I can say that, in general, I have a very positive approach to them. There are some 29 such recommendations in all and there may be others arising out of the work of the task force. I am considering, therefore, those matters raised by Deputies in the questions that I have mentioned, as well as the other recommendations addressed to me. I wish to consider all those recommendations as a single, coherent policy or approach and, for that reason, I do not intend to comment for the present on any particular recommendation taken singly or apart from the others. Nonetheless Deputies can be assured of the positive spirit with which I am approaching them.
In common with views expressed on all sides of the House and outside it, I consider the report of the Industrial Policy Review Group to be the most important document for the appropriate change and reform of industrial policy for many years. I spoke in those terms here on 26 February last. I spoke then, also, on the need to address the wide range of obstacles to growth in our economy which were identified in the report. I said that I am determined, therefore, that this report should be acted upon. I assure the Deputies that I will do all that I can to ensure that this is the case.
Will the Minister agree that the Culliton report is a unit in itself? If we achieve the jobs, as outlined in the report, then every recommendation in it would have to be acted on; we cannot do it selectively.
I agree with the Deputy. I made that point and he is right. Picking out bits here and there will not work. It will all have to be taken into account and that is why it is so important that the Government as a whole accept it. They have done that and this House also accepted it when they accepted the Government amendment to a recent motion on this general topic.
Having regard to the fact that the Culliton report identified that 25,000 people will be coming on the labour market between now and the year 2000 and that recent performance suggests that we are getting about 5,000 net new jobs, will the Minister state whether he has made any calculation, — or if any calculation is available to him, on the basis of what Deputy Barry said about a comprehensive approach being taken to the Culliton recommendations, of the impact in the immediate two to three years ahead in terms of amelioration of our unemployment problem?
The Culliton report made it very clear that there is no quick, easy solution. It makes it clear, almost in the first page, that the implementation of their recommendations will not solve the problem. I accept that and there is no point in deluding ourselves into thinking that it will. However, it is the best approach and will lay the most solid foundation for the future. In reply to the next question I will be giving detailed figures in relation to job creation, manufacturing, services and other jobs.
I can give an accurate figure for the gross creation. We can project that reasonably well. However, the net figures are a different matter. I would quibble somewhat with the Deputy's bottom line net figure of approximately 5,000. I think it is rather higher than that. Of course, it is made to appear much worse than the reality by the constant loss of agricultural jobs at a much higher rate over the past few years.
Will the Minister take a personal interest in the decision in regard to mathematics courses in the regional technical colleges and the Dublin Institute of Technology which will lead to a loss of approximately 200 courses in exactly the type of areas recommended in the Culliton report? I know Deputy O'Rourke, a former Minister for Education, understands what I am talking about. This type of decision will deny many young people the opportunity to pursue more practical careers.
I am at a loss as regards the specific educational matter to which the Deputy has referred.
It was raised last night.
It is a separate question.
I can assure the Deputy that if my Minister of State is responsible for this unsatisfactory state of affairs I will reprimand her.
(Interruptions.)
In reply to an earlier supplementary question from me, the Minister said the comprehensiveness of the report was important and that the Government have accepted the entire report. I presume that means the Government intend implementing all the recommendations in the report.
We will endeavour to do that.
That is the difficulty. I have a difficulty with a number of the recommendations but two in particular come to mind. The first is the recommendation that the ESB should not be compelled to buy peat from Bord na Móna in the future and the second is that the compulsory take of 35 per cent from the Cork Whitegate Oil Refinery should not be continued in the future.
I am aware that they are sensitive and difficult matters. However, there are a number of other sensitive matters.
I have given just two examples.
These are the days when we have to learn to grasp nettles, and I hope all these matters will be faced up to over the next few years. I am not making any predictions about individual recommendations. The Deputy will have heard my reply that I do not want to deal with individual ones now; we want to try to take global approach to it.
The Minister said that the report was being dealt with comprehensively. This implies that all the recommendations will be acted upon. If all the recommendations are acted upon, then the Whitegate Oil Refinery will have to think about its future. Hopefully, it will not have to close but it will have to think of its future. Consideration will also have to be given to the social effects on the midlands of the recommendation not to compel the ESB to take peat from Bord na Móna in the future to generate electricity.
I am afraid we are deviating.
There are other ways of selling the peat. As I said in my reply, I do not want to deal with individual recommendations as one could put forward arguments about them all.