Vol. 465 No. 5
2 Mrs. O'Rourke asked the Minister for Enterprise and Employment the way in which his Department's early warning system for companies in difficulty or with potential problems operates; whether the system detected any of the recent closure announcements before they were made; whether it had detected any pending announcements; whether the unit is currently active with a company (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9937/96]
An early warning system operates through notifications of proposed redundancies or of difficulties in companies. The notifications are made by companies either to my Department or through agencies of my Department. From time to time information becomes available from other sources, such as press or other reports. The system gives advance warning of difficulties in companies and allows the agencies and my Department to co-ordinate an appropriate response and to initiate any necessary action to help firms to address their problems.
The process works effectively because companies can be assured that their problems will be dealt with confidentially. The Deputy can take it there are rarely circumstances where a closure announcement is made without some advance warning of difficulties in the firms in question. Though the agencies or my Department were aware of difficulties in the recent cases, it does not follow that we would be apprised of a corporate decision to close a factory prior to that decision.
The quality of the information available to the early warning system is, very much dependent on the will of companies in difficulties to make information available. I cannot predict the decisions that will be taken by individual companies in the future. In the final analysis corporate decisions with an impact on employment are matters for the companies.
With regard to the company to which the Deputy refers, I am aware of reports that the parent company has been considering the future of each of its plants in Europe. It is looking at the comparative cost-base of each of those plants. The IDA has contacted the company and I recently met the senior management of the Irish company and representatives of a major trade union concerned. The Deputy will appreciate that my discussions and those of the IDA are commercially sensitive and it would not be appropriate to disclose confidential details. The Deputy may be assured that I, my Department and the IDA will continue to keep in contact with the company and every effort will be made to achieve the best possible outcome for the future of employment at the Irish plant.
Will the Minister explain the role of the employment protection unit in his Department?
The role of the employment protection unit is to deal with such early warning cases and to bring in the various services of the Department and its agencies to support companies experiencing difficulties. The difficulties can range over a wide area and can relate to banks, labour relations and industrial relations. We anticipate how they can best be coped with and assist the company. Many companies have had positive experiences of the protection unit. It is a credit to the officers involved, some with long experience, dating back to when Fóir Teo was in existence. They are bringing a vast amount of experience to bear in assisting companies that are experiencing difficulties.
Would the Minister agree with the rural meaning of the saying: "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush"? There often appears to be a chase after the glamour of new announcements without attention to the grind of keeping the jobs we have. The way in which the loss of jobs at Keytronics and the announcement by the Minister today are being managed is chillingly manipulative. It is as if the people involved are like pawns on a chess board.
The Deputy is taking leave of her reason if she is suggesting there is something manipulative in the approach we are adopting to this. It does less than justice to her usual high standards in approaching debates of this nature.
The Minister's behaviour does less than justice to him.
I do not accept that. We attempt to deal with any company facing difficulties in the best possible fashion. The IDA has worked with Keytronics for a lengthy period in trying to overcome the difficulties to which the Deputy referred. Unfortunately, the very difficult competitive environment in which the company found itself did not make it possible for those efforts to succeed.
If taxpayer's funds were used to support a company that no longer had a viable future the Deputy would suggest they were being used unwisely. We cannot support companies that get into irretrievable difficulties.
However, for towns like Dundalk, we must ensure that the excellent resources, infrastructure and skills of the workforce are used to the best advantage. This often means finding new opportunities for employment for those who have lost their jobs. I see nothing reprehensible in seeking out opportunities for people, especially those in Dundalk where there has been a rise in unemployment. It has been an area in considerable need for priority. I am glad we are able to respond to this priority, which is recognised on both sides of the House.
You indicated this morning that I could raise this matter.
I cannot entertain you, Deputy, at this stage. The Deputy knows we are dealing with priority questions. Standing Orders ordain that only the Deputy who tabled the question can put a supplementary question. I indicated to Deputy O'Rourke that you were not entitled to raise the closures in Dundalk at this stage.
However, not to me.
Only the Deputy in possession may raise it now.
I would willingly give way, but I accept your ruling. Taxpayer's money is often unwisely used in promotions. I have often asked for openness in this regard. There is a lack of emphasis on protecting the jobs we have rather than chasing after what often proves to be illusions in terms of job creation. I urge that the activities of the employment protection unit and the other special units be more forthright in advance of bad news.
