I think the House will agree with the Minister that both of the provisions in this short Bill are ones that will commend themselves to the House. With regard to the provision in section 2 extending insurance cover to the export of services, this is something which, I think, the House will have no hesitation in approving of, since it is part of a pattern of the extension of legislation to put the export of services on a par with the export of goods. We have in the House welcomed the various moves in this direction.
The move in the last Finance Act to allow for the remittal of tax in regard to the export of services, the Bill which was before us last week which allows grants to be made by Córas Tráchtála in regard to the export of services, and now this Bill which extends provisions in regard to insurance, are all part of a desirable pattern. There is no need for us to go into detail. The principle has been approved of by the House. It might be no harm to say again that the export of such services is, indeed, every bit as much a benefit to our economy generally, to the expansion of our economy and to our balance of payments, as the direct export of tangible goods.
I hope that the benefits given under the various enactments will be availed of to the full. I should like to ask the Minister whether steps are being taken by Córas Tráchtála or by his Department or by anyone else to bring to the notice of engineers, architects, planners, civil engineering contractors and builders the facilities now available. I do not know if this enactment is the end of the line but, if there are further measures to come, it might be as well to wait until the legislation is complete before something in the nature of an explanatory leaflet or pamphlet with regard to these provisions is circulated to those people. I am sure that the particular bodies who have been consulted in this matter will have heard of the success of their efforts but the Institute of Engineers and the Association of Consulting Engineers have not been directly concerned with this matter and it would be as well if an effort were made on behalf of the Government to make those who may benefit from this aware of the situation.
When we speak of the people who can benefit from this legislation we also speak of people who can benefit the country itself. In each of these Bills that comes along, while we have the same objective, we seeem to have some difference in wording. This Bill is so short that it might be as well to deal with this point now instead of doing so on the Committee Stage. We had in the Finance Act a reference to the engineering services.
In the Bill last week we had reference to the architectural services and it was distinctly laid down as including engineering services. In the Bill before us now the subsection is said to apply to the design and planning services. Can I take it that the cover is the same in all cases, that those who benefit under the Finance Act, those who benefit under the Export Promotion Act and those who benefit under this Insurance Bill are the same category of persons, or are the differing definitions in the three enactments before us related to slightly different groups? Is one group included under one piece of legislation and excluded under another? It is important that we should know what the position is and I would be glad if the Minister would clarify it when replying to the debate. We know that the professions can be jealous of one another and it may well be that engineers are placed first in one piece of legislation, architects in another and planners in another to give primacy to each in turn. If so, this is fair play but I would be concerned as regards the exact limits of definition involved. The principle is one with which we are all agreed.
I remember a few years ago I had occasion to visit an organisation known as Tahal, an organisation responsible for the planning of water resources in the State of Israel. In this particular organisation, which had been given a most onerous task, two-thirds of the work being done was being carried out outside the State of Israel. The organisation which was built up to supply an internal need was now a thriving export industry and was doing more work outside the country than inside it.
I should like to ask the Minister if it is only persons who are practising as private individuals or as partners who are covered by this Bill. What would be the position if the ESB were to make their expertise available to outside countries in the way of the export of services? This is an important point. Perhaps it is because I was at one time a member of the design team of the ESB that I have such a high regard for their capabilities. It was necessary at one time for us to import the knowledge of German engineers to plan the Shannon Scheme. That is no longer so. The engineers, civil, mechanical and electrical, who form the design teams are now so much masters of their jobs, so much masters of their professions, that we could well export their services. It might well be that the planning of the work of the ESB, which must have natural fluctuations, could be harmonised so as to allow for the carrying out of work overseas by these design teams.
It might be important to consider that question in regard to this and other legislation and to examine the position of statutory bodies apart from persons. It is particularly important in regard to this legislation. In regard to the question of industrial grants or remission from income tax it could hardly arise in the case of a statutory body such as the ESB but in regard to insurance cover it could be equally applicable to the ESB or to Bord na Móna which have a highly specialised knowledge. Insurance cover is a particularly important matter and I should be glad if the Minister when replying would indicate whether such bodies would be covered.
I take this opportunity to urge on the Minister and his colleagues that State bodies might be encouraged to consider the export of services in this particular way, always with the proviso that the work which they have to undertake at home should take first priority.
The second provision of this short Bill is in regard to the increase from £5 million to £10 million of the limit which was placed in the Insurance Act of 1961. This is again something of which the House will approve because it covers not only services, of which I have been talking, but also the question of exporting of goods, and this is desirable. The only regrets which Members of the House might have in regard to this is the limitation of this Bill to political risks arising outside the country. We might perhaps regret that the Minister and his colleagues are not as yet able to insure Members of the House against political risks which might arise within the country. How ever, I think we will be content to carry these risks ourselves, and I commend the Minister on the introduction of this Bill.