I think this is the operative section of the Bill. I am like the Minister from the point of view of ideology. I am not a doctrinaire supporter of public enterprise against private enterprise. Like the Minister, when private enterprise fails I would support public enterprise. A beginning was made in establishing the Shannon Scheme and the establishment of the sugar beet factories. But my concern is that we should not get ourselves into the position that such an enterprise would appear to be something which means spending more and more money possibly for less and less results. It is worth while remarking that although the Minister, myself or any of the two principal Parties of the State are not committed to public enterprise, the State here is actually more socialistic than Britain which had a Socialist Government for a number of years. I am entirely in favour of this kind of factory in Haulbowline or anywhere else that is suitable, particularly from the point of view of providing variety of employment for our people, employment not only in agriculture but in industry. A variety of employment would mean a variety of interests, a variety of culture and a general improvement. The Minister is right in saying that the money is being invested as share capital and the company are not supposed to pay interest. At the same time, invested capital nearly always gets a return. Perhaps the Minister would say whether the company, in the circumstances in which they have not to pay interest on capital, are making suitable provision for depreciation, because it is presumably in a business where depreciation is heavy. I presume that suitable provision is being made in that regard.
So far as I am concerned and so far as we are all concerned we would hope that this enterprise would be successful and that the Minister's hopes—because that is all they are— for its success in the difficult circumstances that seem to be almost certain to arise will be realised.