andMr. O'Keeffe asked the Minister for Agriculture whether, in the light of paragraph 117 of the 13th Report of the Joint Committee on State-Sponsored Bodies, he will make finance available to ensure that a factory (details supplied) in County Cork remains in operation until a suitable alternative is available.

While I have no funds available to me to subsidise this loss-making enterprise, I have assured the interests concerned that I will do everything I possibly can to see that alternative employment is available when existing operations cease.

With reference to the figure given by the Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach, that is not the latest figure available. The latest figure is for February.

I have never made allegations against you, Sir, and I do not intend doing so now. You are trying to do your job fairly but, with respect, you move too fast. You are endeavouring to rush through questions without giving the Opposition the opportunity of asking supplementaries.

The Chair would point out to the Deputy that in 23 minutes we have dealt only with eight questions.

I recall the House spending an hour on 15 questions. No apology is needed for such a situation when dealing with a question such as neutrality, for instance.

The figure I have given is correct.

Would the Minister of State please resume his seat?

Though the latest figure in respect of unemployment is available, the Minister is not prepared to let us have it.

I have given the figure.

Question No. 9.

The reply to the question was:

While I have no funds available to me to subsidise this loss-making enterprise, I have assured the interests concerned that I will do everything I possibly can to see that alternative employment is available when existing operations cease.

I must frame my supplementaries on the basis of a reply which I had difficulty in hearing.

On a point of order, this is a question in which I have a particular interest also but I have not been able to hear the reply.

I thank the Deputy for his support.

I do not mind reading the reply for the third time. It is:

While I have no funds available to me to subsidise this loss-making enterprise, I have assured the interests concerned that I will do everything I possibly can to see that alternative employment is available when existing operations cease.

Is the Minister aware that the Joint Oireachtas Committee on State-Sponsored bodies which, incidentally, is chaired by a member of the Minister's party and on which that party have a majority, produced a report with the comment that it makes no sense for this company to close the plant until such time as alternative employment opportunities have come on stream? Assuming that the Minister has read the report and based on that comment, may we take it that he is totally ignoring the report if he fails to make finance available to keep the company going until the alternative employment opportunities are available?

I am not ignoring the report, but I can say clearly that the co-operative concerned have accepted the decision made in this case and are working with all interested parties on the question of a replacement business. I might add that it will not be until July or September of 1981 that some of the jobs will be affected.

Would the Minister agree that the members of this co-operative have not accepted the closure and that, unless planting instructions are issued now and finance made available to ensure that the planting season is got under way, this factory will be allowed die by this Government? In the circumstances is the Minister prepared to review his decision and to ensure that finance is made available to keep the plant going until, as recommended by the Committee, alternative job opportunities come on stream?

What I have said is that the co-operative concerned are having discussions with the company in question and with the IDA regarding a replacement industry. The position is that those discussions are continuing.

The Minister is evading the issue.

Will the Deputy please allow Deputy Hegarty to ask a supplementary?

Because of the smallness of the enterprise and of the likelihood of an upturn in that type of market and, having regard also to the length of time it has taken to build up the necessary skills there, would it not be worthwhile for the Government to carry the factory for a year especially a year of economic depression? I have some long experience of that industry and this experience is not related to politics, As Deputy O'Keeffe has pointed out, the time for planting is now. Since there is the likelihood of an upturn in the market, would the Minister not agree to having the necessary finance made available to allow the planting to go ahead?

The possibility of the co-operative continuing in the type of business that is conducted there now is not ruled out. As I have said, discussions are taking place with the company and with the IDA.

This must be the final supplementary on this question.

Would the Minister not accept that, if finance is not made available immediately, planting instructions cannot be issued and, consequently, the factory will die? Is there not a duty on the Government to provide the necessary finance to allow the plant to continue in operation until alternative employment opportunities arise? If the Minister fails to make the finance available, he is signing the death warrant for this factory.

The Minister will do no such thing. I will not accept what the Deputy has said.

Is the Minister not prepared to accept the recommendation of the joint committee?

The company are having discussions with the IDA.

I have called Question No. 10.

Is it the Minister's intention to ignore that report totally?

Will the Minister answer Question No. 10, please?

Because of the unsatisfactory nature of the Minister's reply, I wish to raise the subject matter of this question on the adjournment.

The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.