asked the Minister for Industry, Trade, Commerce and Tourism if he is satisfied that the freedom of services that now exist in so far as the provision of insurance is concerned resultant from EC directives is in the best interest of the consumer; and if he is satisfied that insurance companies traditionally operating in Ireland are not placed at a commercial disadvantage because of the new arrangements.

There is no EC directive in force relating to freedom of services in insurance, which in the context of the Treaty of Rome means the freedom for an insurer to write insurance in another member state without having to establish there by way of a branch or subsidiary.

I take it therefore that the Deputy in referring to EC directives is referring to the EC Non-Life Directive of 24 July 1973 (73/239 EEC), the EC Life Assurance Directive of 5 March 1979 (79/267/EEC), which were implemented here in 1976 and 1984 respectively. Both these directives relate to the freedom of EC insurers to establish by way of branch or subsidiary in another member state of the community.

I am required under these directives to grant an authorisation to EC life or non-life insurers wishing to establish here, once they meet the requirements of the relevant directive. I am specifically excluded by the directive from examining an application for authorisation in the light of the commercial effect on existing insurers in the market. The new entrants to the Irish market have obviously had an impact but by and large the existing insurers appear to be meeting the challenge. As for consumers, I have no reason to believe that the entry of new insurers had militated against their interests.

Does the Minister of State agree that the advent of some insurers into the Irish scene over the past few years has had a debilitating effect on the progress made by native insurers and that they have cut their premiums substantially in order to compete with these outside insurers and that they have lost a considerable share of the market? This is the reason the insurance business is in such turmoil and crisis.

For the information of the Deputy, since 1976 six head office and 13 branch office authorisations have been issued to non-life insurers. For life assurers, seven head office and no branch office authorisations have been issued. With regard to the Deputy's statement, I am aware there have been price wars under certain headings which have led to a difficult situation for some companies. However, this has been relieved somewhat by the companies themselves who realise that price cutting has had some damaging effects on their profitable position. This is evident in the manner in which they are now approaching the market.

Will the Minister of State agree with me that Deputy Flynn's question shows the typical timorous protectionist attitude that has the commercial sector damned? Will the Minister of State encourage the Irish companies instead of whinging and whining about competition on their doorsteps, to avail of the freedom of establishment which EC membership gives and to move into the other countries and grab some of their insurance business?

The Deputy is now making a comment.

I am in sympathy with what Deputy Kelly has stated.

I may be accused of many things but being timorous is not one.

Have I got the floor or has Deputy Flynn got the floor?

Will the Minister please continue?

We must accept that competition is important in the insurance industry as it is in other industries. It has been to the benefit of the public and Irish companies. The directives Deputy Flynn thought existed but which do not exist may come into operation in future years. That will pose competitive problems for existing insurance companies. They will have to measure up and understand that we are in a highly competitive situation in the EC.

Provided there is fair trading.

At the same time, it also offers opportunity. There is nothing stopping Irish insurance companies from going to the international market and selling their services. In that connection I should like to mention Irish Life.

I will allow a final supplementary from Deputy Flynn who put down the question. After that I am moving to the next question.

Will the Minister of State agree that as the licensing authority he has failed to protect our own insurers and newcomers have been allowed to take on all the soft risks, thereby making it impossible for our own insurers to maintain their market share? It is also an historical fact that just before bad news is announced in this House on budget day Deputy Kelly usually arrives in to get himself psyched up by making derogatory remarks about other people in the House.

Most of the Deputy's interventions require no comment from me.

I will not be timorous with the Deputy.

The Deputies should not allow themselves to become distracted. They should stay in order.

As the supervisory authority in charge of the insurance industry I have an obligation to insure that the companies remain viable——

And the Minister has failed.

I am not failing in my duty in that regard. We have obligations under the EC and we must meet these obligations and not be timorous. If we do not face up to competition in the service industries such as insurance we will have difficulties in years to come and the insurance industry should be aware of that.

Let the Minister talk about our rights in the EC.

We have the same rights as any other country.

8.