asked the Minister for Finance whether he is aware that tourists visiting Bundoran and other seaside resorts in Donegal are subjected to a great amount of inconvenience and annoyance by the Customs at the Border; whether a Mr. Kelly, a native of the Saorstát, motoring from Belfast to Bundoran recently, had to pay £5 5s. 0d. duty on his personal clothing, which had been sent by rail in advance; whether this amount will be refunded to Mr. Kelly on his return from his holiday; and if the Minister will state what are the regulations now regarding personal clothing sent by rail as luggage in advance unaccompanied by a passenger.
CEISTEANNA—QUESTIONS. (ORAL ANSWERS.) - CUSTOMS AT THE BORDER—INCONVENIENCE TO TOURISTS.
I am not aware that tourists visiting Bundoran and other resorts in Donegal are subject to any inconvenience and annoyance by the Saorstát Frontier Customs officers, except in so far as the necessity for complying with Customs Regulations with a view to paying duty, or to satisfying the officers that smuggling is not being attempted, can be regarded as an inconvenience and a source of annoyance. Very wide concessions have been extended by the revenue authorities to tourists visiting the Saorstát, but revenue interests require that Customs formalities shall be complied with.
Personal clothing sent by rail as luggage in advance, unaccompanied by the owner, is liable to duty; but payment is ordinarily waived if the luggage is claimed by the owner when delivery is sought, and the Customs officer is satisfied that it is made up of bona fide personal effects, consisting of used clothing, and that the quantity is not in excess of the owner's normal requirements. Sufficient time has not been available to investigate the particular case of Mr. Kelly. It may be that personal luggage was conveyed in the motor vehicle on the occasion of his visit, and that the clothing in the parcel sent by rail was additional to that brought by motor and appeared to be in excess of Mr. Kelly's requirements. However, I will have full inquiry made and will communicate the result to the Deputy.
This is a very important matter affecting tourists. Would the Minister state, when he refers to concessions with regard to luggage, whether we are to understand definitely that luggage in advance, unaccompanied by the passenger, when claimed by the owner and recognised as worn wearing-apparel is not dutiable?
The concessions appear to be: admission of motor vehicle without payment of duty, provided the tourist is making only a temporary stay in the Saorstát and admission of clothing and apparel without payment of duty provided it is worn clothing or apparel, personal to the tourist, and not excessive in quantity, having regard to his requirements.
Will the Minister state if the money will be refunded if those conditions are complied with when he is leaving the Saorstát?
The Minister undertakes to have full inquiry made and to communicate the result to the Deputy. I am afraid I cannot go beyond that.
Who is to be the judge as to "reasonable requirements?" Is it not obvious that an American tourist, touring Europe, will carry with him a great deal more luggage than a person who is only going across the Border for the week-end? Is the Customs officer to be the judge of what is reasonable or what is not?
I could not say.
Would the Minister say whether the concessions he has referred to apply to family luggage? I am aware of many families who propose to go to seaside places in the Saorstát and the imposition of duties in those cases would be very serious.
I am not really aware of very much in connection with this matter and I would ask the Deputies to put down their questions. The Minister for Finance is engaged in the Seanad and it was necessary that the questions should be answered on his behalf.
I would like to draw the Minister's attention to the urgency of the matter, in view of the enormous number of visitors expected to come to the Saorstát during the summer. It seems to me that the news spreads like wildfire about the trouble they have in getting into the Saorstát.
Would the Minister intimate to the Minister for Finance that this would appear to be in conflict with the assurance he gave in Committee on the Financial Resolutions, that the utmost amount of liberty would be given to passengers in connection with their luggage?
The utmost amount of liberty, consistent with due enforcement of the Customs regulations.
I suggest that this matter might be discussed on the adjournment. To permit of that, I beg to give notice that I will call attention to the matter on the adjournment.
I was going to suggest that, although questions are not ordinarily allowed on Friday, if the Minister for Finance were present to-morrow, questions could be put to him on this question.
It might be more satisfactory to have a discussion rather than to have the information elicited by way of question.
Perhaps arrangements could be made for a discussion on the matter some time to-morrow.
I would be perfectly satisfied if the Minister promised that he would fully investigate the matter. I know that the officials are doing their duty courteously and well. Even though this man paid five guineas, he told me that he had his money's worth in courtesy from the Customs officers.
If the Minister would make a statement to-morrow, it would be of public importance.
I will take Deputy Johnson's notice in the ordinary way and the Minister for Finance may be able to arrange to make some statement on the matter.