Arising from the fact that the Minister has been good enough to accept amendment No. 9, I put it to him that it is logical and in the same spirit to accept amendment No. 13 also. While amendment No. 9 will ensure that the overall schemes are published, it is necessary to give details of these investments. I remind the Minister that, under the 1986 Act and earlier industrial development legislation since the early 1950s, all grants or other investments — loans or equity — which an agency such as these made has to be published in the annual report of that agency.
Deputy O'Rourke and other Members argued on Second State that one should not have to wait until the annual report is published, because these reports are sometimes delayed for a long time. For example, if an investment was made by the IDA on 1 January 1994, the public would not become aware of it until the publication of the 1994 annual report, which might not be published until near the end of 1995 — nearly two years after the investment is made. Even allowing for that kind of delay, the information should be published eventually.
I do not see how the Minister can distinguish a grant given to a company, which has to be published under existing legislation, and a grant, investment or loan given to one of these funds for the advancement of industry and technology in the State. If one has to publish details of a loan, grant or equity investment in a company, how can the Minister justify not publishing it if it is made to a fund or body for the advancement of industry and technology or the development of a particular sector of industry? I do not see how the Minister can distinguish between the two. The need to publish information in relation to these general funds is at least as great as it is in relation to individual companies.
I expressed on Second Stage my concern about investments in these vague and non-specific bodies for which there would be no accountability. I will oppose the section unless the Minister accepts this amendment or something along its lines, otherwise we will have no accountability.
On Second Stage, I also expressed the fear that moneys paid into these vague funds or bodies could be hidden or cloaked in various ways and I gave some instances, which I need not repeat, of how that might be done. Certain people who wanted to acquire substantial investments in their companies could do it more easily through one of these funds, through which it might be difficult to follow the money. A person could then become a beneficiary without the public or the Dáil ever becoming aware of it.
For that reason, I ask the Minister to accept amendment No. 13 to make it necessary to publish these funds, to specify the beneficiaries — the present arrangement does not make this clear — and the use to which the money was put.
I move amendment No. 10:
In page 6, subsection (2), line 17, to delete "the Agencies" and substitute "an Agency".
Without my amendment, the provision does not make sense. The power conferred on Forfás by section 1 shall, in relation to a specific scheme or schemes, be assigned to and exercised by an agency. The two agencies together cannot exercise the power.