andMr. Browne asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce how the price being charged for imported compound fertilisers in this country compares with that in the country of origin; and whether there has been any examination of the situation to determine whether dumping is being practised.

In the 1976-77 fertiliser year the vast bulk of imports of compound fertilisers has been from the United Kingdom. Because of sales methods, which involve discounts and so on from the list prices, the exact levels of sales prices in the United Kingdom are difficult to ascertain. As is the case with home-produced fertilisers, fertilisers imported from the United Kingdom are sold in Ireland at prices below the United Kingdom list prices but it is not possible to say how actual selling prices here compare with those in the United Kingdom.

No formal dumping complaint has been lodged by the Irish fertiliser manfacturers with An Coimisiún Dumpála.

Would the Parliamentary Secretary not agree that there is a strong possibility that dumping exists as appears from the reply which he has given us? Would he agree also that this situation is prejudicial to employment prospects of people engaged in the fertiliser industry in this part of the country and that the sale under false pretences of United Kingdom—manufactured fertilisers in sacks marked "Manufactured in Ireland" should be pursued in the courts by the Department?

Both NET and Albatros were approached in this matter by the Department earlier this month and they indicated concern on the lines mentioned by the Deputy. However, they were of the opinion that it would be very difficult for them to prove dumping within the normal definition of that term. Consequently, they did not lodge a complaint with the dumping commission.

Would the Parliamentary Secretary accept that there has been a 100 per cent increase in the imports of compound fertiliser during the first two months of this year? Can this not be regarded as a huge increase? It is a question of 36,000 metric tons? A situation like this must be causing serious concern to employees in the industry as well as to the industry as a whole. In an increase of this nature there must be a serious element of dumping. Can the Parliamentary Secretary say what action the Department propose taking against the importer of a huge quantity of fertiliser in bags marked "Manufactured in Ireland"?

We are having repetition.

Can the Parliamentary Secretary tell the House the name of the importer concerned and whether he is a person who was appointed by this Government to a very important post?

Any question in relation to the merchandise marking regulations is a separate matter. The questions of Deputies James Gibbons and Browne relate to the price of fertilisers and the possibility of dumping. If they wish to raise such matters they should put down a separate question. As far as price is concerned, the fact that the price of fertilisers sold from the UK into this market are higher than the price Irish manufacturers can sell at may not necessarily result from dumping by the British. There is a significant advantageous factor in regard to British fertilisers because the British manufacturers have the availability of North Sea natural gas, an equivalent of which is not available to Irish manufacturers at the moment. There, there is a price advantage in regard to calcium ammonium nitrate of £15 per ton from the point of view of British manufacturers over their Irish competitors. The product of the Marino Point project which will come in stream in the reasonably near future will give us access to a similar source and will ensure our competitiveness vis-á-vis British manufacture.