Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 5 May 1926

Vol. 15 No. 10

FINANCIAL RESOLUTIONS—REPORT. - RESOLUTION No. 9.

Question proposed—"That the Dáil agree with the Committee in Resolution No. 9."

Major COOPER

I beg to move:—

In paragraph (1), lines 2 and 3, to delete the words "Thirty-three and one-third per cent." and to substitute the words "five per cent."

The object of this amendment is to reduce the scale of duty from thirty-three and one-third per cent. to five per cent. I put forward this amendment because I think that a duty of thirty-three and one-third per cent. imposed on a new trade, if you like a new luxury trade, is going to kill that trade. The habit of wireless is not yet fully established in this country. I do not think there are any accurate or authentic figures but I am quite certain from personal observation that one does not see anything like the same number of wireless aerials in the suburbs of Dublin as one sees in the suburbs of London. Where one does see them, one sees them on the smallest and poorest houses. Wireless is becoming a luxury of the wage-earner, the man who lives in a house rented at not more than 10/- per week. These are the houses one sees aerials on. Of course there are some indoor aerials and some frame aerials that one does not see, in wealthier houses, but I do suggest that to put a duty of thirty-three and one-third per cent. on a new commodity, a commodity that has not yet come into general use, will check the use of that particular commodity, particularly when it is a tax-paying commodity or a licence-paying commodity. We want our wireless broadcasting station to be self-supporting. I certainly do. I do not think we are going to make it self-supporting by inflicting such a serious charge, a tax of one-third of the value of every article of wireless equipment of whatever kind imported. This, I take it, is a revenue tax and not a protective tax. Though Deputy Sears may tell me that there are the greatest possible prospects for wireless manufacturing industry in this country, I doubt if we have the necessary skilled labour, persons equipped with a sufficient technique in electricity to build up a wireless industry. That being so, I would urge the Minister that for the first year, at any rate, he should take a low revenue duty that will enable him to assess the amount of wireless apparatus imported and that will give him all the information he needs as to the possible expansion of this tax, but that he should not crush the industry by imposing a tax of £33 6s. 8d. on every £100 worth of wireless goods imported.

Mr. GOREY

I want to deal with an aspect of this question which must strike anybody who has taken the trouble to think about it. People in the rural parts of the country can have no benefit whatever from wireless developments except through a valve set. If they have not a valve set they cannot listen in. That is the position of the rural community. Outside some of the large towns there are practically no amusements of any description. There are no educational entertainments, and the people have nothing to do after a hard day's work except to take up some work in their own homes or sit down doing nothing. There are no concerts, no theatres, no cinemas, no music halls, no bands, and they cannot listen-in to the central station as it is not within reach of a cheap wireless set. To put on a tax of 33? per cent. would aggravate still further the extraordinary position in which the rural population is placed. I understand that with a crystal set the central station can be picked up within a radius of 20 miles, and that the cost of that set, including the licence, would be under £10. I am speaking subject to correction as I have no experience in these matters.

Mr. T. O'CONNELL

Two pounds.

Major COOPER

Including the licence.

Mr. GOREY

If that is so the case is more aggravated. I am given to understand that you cannot buy a valve set under £30, so that if 33 1-3 per cent. is added it would make an installation of that kind cost about £40. Is any attempt to be made to cater for the rural population and to give them facilities equal to those living in more populous centres? I think the Minister must take that question into serious consideration and also the advisability of abandoning this duty altogether. The idea that the rural population should help to build up a fund for the development of wireless is an extraordinary proposition. In other words, it means that those who have every advantage are to get every advantage and that those who have no advantages will be left without them. I do not suppose that is the policy. We will soon see what is the Minister's definite policy. It is no argument to say that the tax will bring in so much money, or, to ask: "How will you get revenue if you do not put on this duty?" There are other things from which money could be more justifiably got. I think we have come to the end of all things if it is claimed that it is right to tax everything that produces revenue. By that reasoning robbery will be sufficient justification if it brings in revenue.

Mr. WILSON

That is not the law.

Mr. GOREY

But you can make it the law just as you are making the collection of this tax law. One is as justifiable as the other. I think the two things are on the same plane. Equality is not maintained by the proposal in the Resolution. I seriously suggest to the Minister that the customs duty should be abolished altogether on valve sets. I do not suppose it is the policy of any Government to encourage the people to congregate in the towns and to leave the rural communities. But if they want to enjoy the amenities of life provided by the State they have to do so. If this proposal is carried it means that people in the rural communities cannot have the same services at their disposal as people living in the city. The proposal seems on a par with that of a merchant or a pedlar who goes to a jail where someone is starving, and says: "I can give you food at a price," that price being three or four times its value. The hungry man has no alternative and would have to pay. In the country it is the same. The people have no other means of entertainment, and the Resolution is going on the assumption that, because they are in that position, they will pay no matter how unreasonable or unjust the tax is. The Minister puts himself into the position of Shylock, any tax being justified under the circumstances, because, as a last resort, the man will pay.

Professor THRIFT

When we had this Resolution before us on a previous occasion I said pretty well what was in my mind. I do not want to repeat now what I said then, but I feel very strongly that the urgent and important thing is to popularise this new broadcasting. If we want to popularise and to make it pay for itself we should not impose restrictions on its use. I agree with Deputy Gorey that the desirable thing is to make it accessible throughout the country. I do not think that Deputy Gorey does the Minister justice in that particular connection. I think it is quite obvious that the Minister is also anxious to spread the service.

Mr. GOREY

I admit that.

Professor THRIFT

And that the Minister's aim is to raise a capital sum of money by this duty in order to expend that capital sum in making broadcasting available in the country. It is not the Minister's wish or view in the matter I am calling in question, but it is his method which, I think, is not a wise method. It seems to me that this capital expenditure is only to be provided over a term of years, but the urgent thing is to meet the annual outlay by licence fees.

Mr. BLYTHE

The Deputy is hardly representing what I intended to convey when he talks about a capital sum. I was not thinking of a capital sum. A capital sum could be provided otherwise. My view is that if we put up a number of stations, we are certainly going to lose heavily if we depend on licence fees solely for their maintenance. This tax is with a view to not having a heavy annual charge on the general taxpayers for the maintenance of stations.

Professor THRIFT

That is the point on which we differ. My belief is that if we start these stations in chosen places we shall have them in districts where they will not immediately but very rapidly become self-supporting, so far as the annual costs are concerned, by means of the licence fees. It is to the licence fees we ought to look to pay the annual costs. When we have our system in proper working order in Dublin, I have no doubt we shall find that the licence fees coming from Dublin and district will pay the cost of upkeep—if they do not go further—of the Dublin station. As soon as this is attained—or perhaps earlier—we might proceed to erect a station in another district, where there will be such a number of people paying licences as will pay for the upkeep costs of that station. The annual costs of a small sub-station will not be very much. They will be very much less than those of the main station, and you will not require an extremely large number of licence holders in that district to make it self-supporting. If you want to secure that, sooner or later, you should not handicap the whole industry by this tax. I oppose the tax as a whole principally for that reason, but partly, also, because of the difficulty there is in distinguishing between apparatus used for wireless broadcasting and apparatus used for general scientific purposes. It is almost impossible to prove or show that a particular piece of apparatus used for electrical purposes generally cannot be used, or is not going to be used at some time or other, in connection with a wireless set or for some wireless experiment or purpose. I think it would be almost impossible to separate the two things. If the duty is a small one, that difficulty becomes of less importance. But it still remains a source of trouble and annoyance to all purchasers of scientific apparatus who would have to pay a small duty. It will be inevitable that this tax of 33? per cent. will be paid on articles bought and used for other purposes than wireless broadcasting. This tax is, to a certain extent, not fair on people who have to buy apparatus for other purposes. To my mind, it is also unwise, because if you are going to extend or improve the education of the country you should make a matter of this kind as accessible to the ordinary public as possible.

Mr. T. O'CONNELL

Deputy Thrift has covered most of the ground which I had intended to cover, in supporting Deputy Cooper's amendment. I should like to emphasise the point made by Deputy Gorey as to the unfair incidence of this tax on users of wireless. It seems to me that those who live at such a distance from the station as to necessitate the use of valve sets will be at a very great disadvantage as compared with those who are living in the immediate vicinity of the station. I am afraid, if this tax is persisted in, it will put wireless beyond the reach of a great many people who are anxious to make use of it. Not alone that, but it will have a psychological effect. People will talk about the tax on these wireless sets and, in their minds, the amount will be magnified. They will believe that the high price they have to pay will be due to a greater extent than it really will be to the tax. The man who lives within the crystal set radius of the Dublin station can enjoy the Dublin programme at a cost, including licence, of about £5. A great many people can afford that sum. But they are the people who enjoy most of the other advantages. They are not the people whom one would desire to encourage specially to use wireless. A wireless set would be of greater benefit to the people of an outlying district. To them wireless would be a boon. It would brighten the lives of the residents of lonely districts. If it were a case of getting in a certain amount of revenue—and that is the only case that has been made up to the present—I should certainly prefer, if I had the choice, that the licence of the crystal sets should remain at £1 than that this tax should be put on. It would be fairer if the crystal user had still to pay a tax of £1. He would still have a great advantage over the rural user of wireless, who would have to pay the same tax and who would have to pay a greater price for a set in order to hear the station.

After a careful consideration of the matter. I put it seriously to the Minister that, if it is a question of bringing in a certain amount of revenue for wireless, it would be fairer to continue the licence fee for the crystal set user at £1 than to use this method of raising revenue. At all events, I think it would be better to do that and let things continue for a couple of years until he would see what the position was in regard to revenue. The Minister has said that it is not a question of raising capital expenditure for erecting stations, but it is a question of the maintenance of the Dublin station. I believe, if stations were put up in suitable districts, that in a couple of years the income from the licences would be practically sufficient to maintain these stations, especially if the programmes were extended to meet the varying needs of the population. At present these programmes are limited, but they could be extended to meet needs other than those which they cater for at present. I think the Minister is taking a step in the wrong direction in imposing this exceedingly heavy—practically prohibitive—tax at this stage in the development of wireless. It will be difficult, as Deputy Thrift has pointed out, to collect. Certain things will surely be introduced which will ultimately find their way into wireless sets. For instance, wire is one of the component parts of a wireless set. I do not know how the Minister will make a distinction and charge a tax on that particular type of wire. I oppose the proposal on the general question that it will strike a blow at the development of wireless in the country and for the reason that, in my opinion, the incidence of the tax would work out in an exceedingly unfair way against the rural population.

Mr. WILSON

I was unfortunate, A Chinn Comhairle, in not catching your eye in time, because the two last speakers have taken a lot of my thunder away. As a consequence, I will be obliged to repeat much of what has already been said. I desire to support the idea underlying the statement made by Deputy O'Connell, namely, that rather than penalise the rural dweller it should be insisted that the £1 licence be paid by the crystal set holder. The crisis that has occurred in England at the present time affords one a pretty good idea of the advantage that is to be gained by this country from a general use of wireless telegraphy. Questions arising out of this crisis were addressed to the Minister for Agriculture to-day. If wireless telegraphy were in general use in the country, it would not be necessary to address these questions to the Minister because the information could be communicated to the people all over the country from a central wireless station. By that means market prices and other information of importance to the farmer could also be communicated to him. Information supplied promptly to him in that way would enable him to make arrangements to meet situations like the present one, and would be of the greatest advantage to him in carrying on his business. That is one of the underlying reasons, apart from the educational advantages of wireless, why we are opposed to this tariff of 33? per cent. Wireless has now become a necessary element in civilisation, and in rural areas may be utilised with the most beneficial results When this matter was last discussed the Minister for Finance referred to the furniture tax of 33? per cent., and said that at present we were paying nearly as much in respect of that tax as we will be paying in regard to this new tariff of 33? per cent. on wireless sets. When the Minister comes to reply I would be glad if he would tell us what really we are paying under the head of the furniture tax for wireless. The Minister on a previous occasion referred to this furniture tax and used it as an argument in support of this new tariff of 33? per cent. I am aware that cases, cabinets and other containers used in connection with wireless would be classed as furniture under the present law. I am anxious, however, to get precise information as to what part of the necessary equipment used in connection with wireless apparatus comes at the present time under the furniture tax. I hold, of course, that the argument put forward by the Minister is no argument whatever for the imposition of this new tariff of 33? per cent.

Deputy Gorey stated the position very plainly when he stated that the people in the country were running to the cities. We do not want that. We wish to keep the people on the land and it is our desire to do everything to attain that end. We believe that nothing should be set up that would tend to drive people from the country to the towns. It is our opinion that this tariff of 33? per cent. is going to stop development in the utilisation of wireless amongst the farmers of the country except, perhaps, the very large ones. We are told that there is a development in the use of wireless in the case of hotels, club-rooms, bars and so on We agree that these people have already secured wireless installations, but I ask would it be an encouragement for the general run of farmers to purchase wireless sets if you persist in the imposition of this tariff of 33? per cent.? I say it will not. If we are to wait until the fund that has been referred to is sufficiently strong to provide the people, generally, all over the country with the opportunity of getting in crystal sets, well then I am afraid we will have to wait a very long time. I suggest to the Minister that he would be very well advised to do away with this tax entirely and to give the rural dweller the same opportunity that is now enjoyed by dwellers in the cities.

MINISTER for POSTS and TELEGRAPHS (Mr. Walsh)

The last speaker, as well as some of the previous speakers, proceeded on the assumption that this tax will impede rather than develop the use of crystal sets. If we are genuinely anxious that crystal sets should be at the disposal of every citizen in the country, then we should support the proposal before the House, which aims at providing the necessary finances to bring that situation about. Our present position is, that through capital and current charges we have spent, or contemplate spending during the present financial year, something like £45,000. I am not quite sure of the figure, but it will be in the region of the sum mentioned. It is very unlikely that our income will exceed £20,000. It may, perchance, with a good deal of activity on the part of the Detective Department which must necessarily be set up for the purpose, reach the figure of £25,000, thus leaving a net deficit on the first year of £20,000. With a Bill of that kind facing the Minister for Finance, and taking into consideration, as he necessarily must, the agitation in this House for economy, I would certainly be most reluctant to approach him for further big funds essential for the rapid spread of this service. The proposal here arms me with the necessary courage to do so.

Assuming that this sum of £20,000 is secured through this medium——

Mr. WILSON

That is through Customs?

Mr. WALSH

Yes, or apart from other revenue, I feel that I would be justified in asking the Minister to supply me with the necessary funds to equip three extra stations, each with power equivalent to that of Dublin. With four stations properly located I am assured by my engineering department that practically everybody in the country would be within the radius of crystal power. There may, of course, be a belt of country where valve sets will still be necessary, but these will be limited belts. I want to assure the House that the greater parts of the country, and the overwhelming part of the population should, within the next ten or twelve months, be brought within the ambit of crystal power, provided moneys are placed at my disposal. When people talk of differentiating between town and country I cannot see it. My object is to see that there would be no differentiation.

Mr. GOREY

Why does not the nation, then, provide the facilities? Why do you want the individual to do it?

Mr. WALSH

We are taking steps to provide them through the people who are directly concerned. I said here on a previous occasion—it formed the basis of a joke—that he who called the tune should pay the piper. There is nothing unfair in that: nothing unjust in asking that the citizen who desires the amenities of radio should pay for radio, or that his next-door neighbour, who may have no particular grádh for wireless music or wireless news, could take very strong exception to the fact if he was called upon to foot the bill.

Mr. BAXTER

Are we not footing it at present?

Mr. WALSH

I am not aware that you are, but going on the assumption that the wireless station is a losing concern, then all will contribute something. We are taking steps to ensure that it will not be a losing concern, and nobody will pay for wireless except those who use it. That is not an unreasonable proposition. If a man wants music or entertainment we say he must pay for it, and his next-door neighbour, who does not want this entertainment, must not be asked to pay.

Mr. GOREY

Who paid for the wireless station?

Mr. WALSH

Those who pay for the wireless sets, and nobody else, that is on the assumption that the station pays for itself. If it does not pay for itself then the taxpayer must make up the deficiency, but we are taking steps so that the uninterested taxpayer will not have to pay for it. There is no question whatever of trying to differentiate against the rural user. That is admitted. It cannot happen. If the rural user is brought within the crystal circle he would then be in precisely the same position as the urban user, and he would get his crystal set for 15/- or £1, just as the urban purchaser gets his, so that there would be no difference. If it happens that he is on the edge of the circle, or in one of those small, unprovided spaces, then, unquestionably, he has a grievance, but the number of people who will have grievances of that type will be comparatively small. This question of a tax on imported wireless is not a new one. It was introduced in the first instance prior to the establishment of the wireless station. I was in favour of that, but it was not agreed on. My Department took my view, but the Committee took another. Nor was this country alone in collecting a tax on imported wireless. A tax of the kind is collected in a great many other countries, and therefore there is nothing new in collecting a wireless tax here. Further, I do not see any great difficulty in doing so, and there is certainly no more difficuly than in collecting any other tax the Minister imposes. The suggestion that we wish to provide amusements for urban dwellers at the expense of rural ones is certainly a most extraordinary one. I am not prepared to suggest to the Minister that he should spend the comparatively large sum of money necessary for the erection of three more wireless stations, and commit himself to a large annual outlay in connection with these stations until I am satisfied that there are good prospects of a reasonable revenue.

Mr. GOOD

Might I ask the Minister to state what is the actual revenue from the existing sets? He told us there is a revenue expected of £20,000. I take it that is revenue from the Customs charges. What is the revenue from sets?

Mr. WALSH

I said the revenue for the current year from existing sets, after the Bill is passed, will be in the region of £20,000, and that by a special effort we may bring it to £25,000.

Mr. T. O'CONNELL

In licence fees alone?

Mr. WALSH

Yes. I should have mentioned that I discussed the question of 10/- or £1 licences with certain Deputies who are interested in wireless activity, and they agreed, or rather argued, that in the case of crystal sets users the fee should be 10/-. I was rather reluctant to reduce the fee to 10/-, in the absence of the prospect of a self-supporting station, but I took that plunge and I was prepared to chance it believing that the revenue which is now suggested would materialise. Otherwise I would not have favoured that reduction. I wish to point out, further, than it is a distinct advantage to the crystal user to get the benefit of 10/- a year off his licence fee, and in addition by paying the 5/- import duty for a single import—a nonrecurring item—he is certainly getting an advantage.

Mr. JOHNSON

Could the Minister say when consulting Deputies on the 10/- fee that he put it in association with the other proposition of 33? per cent. duty? Was one coupled with the other?

Mr. WALSH

No, not in discussing the question with the Deputies, for the obvious reason that I would be giving away certain secrets, but I had it in mind.

Mr. JOHNSON

Does it not vitiate the whole conversation to ask for judgment on half the evidence?

Mr. WALSH

I do not think so.

Mr. HEFFERNAN

Does the Minister calculate that an additional sum would be received in Customs duty on the wireless sets apart from the £20,000 in licence fees? Would there not be a certain sum received in respect of Customs duties?

Mr. WALSH

There might be, but so far they have not reached my Department.

Mr. HEFFERNAN

Does it not come to the same thing?

Mr. WALSH

Yes, we can look it up.

Mr. BAXTER

I ask the Minister to answer Deputy Heffernan's question in full. We make the point that as things are at present all the taxpayers are contributing money towards the cost of the wireless station, and only a few are able to benefit from that expenditure. The State is still responsible for a possible loss in the running of that station, and the Minister has told us that he is taking steps to see that this station will be no longer run at a loss, and that the users of the station will pay for the running of it. When the Minister makes that statement does he suggest that the users, or possible users, in the rural districts if they are to benefit from the station will have to pay 33? per cent. on their valve sets? Is he taking that into account when he says that the users of the stations in the future are going to pay for the station? By what means is the Minister going to make the station pay for itself? Is he going to increase the licence fee of the people who have sets, or may have sets in the future, or does he intend that the station shall pay for itself not alone by licence fees but by the revenue that will accrue from the imposition of the 33? per cent.?

Mr. WALSH

It is proposed that the revenue accruing from the 33? per cent. shall take its part in paying for the working of the station, and the service.

Mr. BAXTER

For the service?

Mr. WALSH

Yes.

Mr. D'ALTON

Might I interrupt just for a moment? The Minister for Posts and Telegraphs again alluded to the revenue accruing from 33? per cent. But that is not recurrent. That will only come in for the first year. The Minister is assuming that it will be a recurring income, but when a user gets a set he will not require a new set for six, seven or perhaps ten years.

Mr. BLYTHE

It is estimated that we will get that much every year. We will get £20,000 per year. I think that is a conservative estimate.

Mr. WILSON

How many users does that represent?

Mr. WALSH

It is difficult to say.

Mr. BAXTER

The more one talks on this the more foggy everyone seems to get. It is evident that the Minister himself has not an approximate idea of what the yield from the tax will be.

Mr. BLYTHE

I have told it— £20,000.

Mr. BAXTER

How is the £20,000 arrived at? How much from the Customs and how much from revenue licences?

Mr. GOOD

The £20,000 is from the Customs Revenue?

Mr. WALSH

Yes.

Mr. BAXTER

That is to go in part in defraying the expenses of running the station or the erection of new transmission stations. Is that what we are to understand?

Mr. BLYTHE

It is to be used for the purposes of wireless broadcasting. I said nothing about using it for the building up of a capital sum. I did mention a fund, but what I did mean was an annual spending fund.

Mr. BAXTER

That gets us on another stage. The Minister for Posts and Telegraphs told us that the position with regard to wireless in twelve months will be such that they will bring it within the range of crystal set users over the greater part of the country. Following that statement, is the Minister prepared to say that the people round the country within the next twelve months are going to buy valve sets?

Mr. BLYTHE

Certainly. Everybody knows that nothing leads people more rapidly to getting valve sets than having crystal sets installed. The people who can afford it get a valve set after they have got accustomed to the crystal set.

Mr. T. O'CONNELL

Which is first?

Mr. BLYTHE

The crystal set.

Mr. JOHNSON

Dublin first, and then they want to listen to London and Paris.

Mr. BLYTHE

Exactly.

Mr. BAXTER

The Minister for Finance now says that the installation of a crystal set will mean following up that by the installation of a valve set. But while the crystal set is going to be in use during the next twelve months, if you are depending on the £20,000 of revenue to come from the people who will install the valve sets, the Minister will have to wait until the people first put in the valve sets. In that event how will you get the £20,000 revenue?

Mr. GOREY

Leave that to the Minister.

Mr. BAXTER

I want someone to disentangle this.

Mr. BLYTHE

No one is entangled except the Deputy.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

There is a tendency on the part of Deputies to make a case by way of questions in order to enable them, by reason of the replies, to make their case stronger. Deputy Baxter must first make his case, and let the argument go on by way of debate and not by way of question and answer.

Mr. BAXTER

Down the country very few sets, comparatively, are installed, and very little is known of wireless broadcasting. The cost of these sets to a good many people who desire to have them will be prohibitive, and the taste for wireless will be restricted because of the want of knowledge. I was making the point—the Minister for Finance may be a little amused, but the point still stands— that if we are going to have transmission stations erected here and there they will enable crystal set owners to have wireless in about twelve months all over the country. We are to wait certainly for the erection of these stations before they will purchase wireless sets. The sets the people are going to purchase at first are going to be crystal sets. The Minister tells us that the installation of crystal sets means, in many cases, the installation later on of valve sets. If the Minister is waiting for his revenue until the valve sets are installed, he will first have to wait until the crystal sets are installed, and the crystal sets will not be installed until the transmission stations are erected. I cannot see where the £20,000 of revenue is going to come from this year or how it is going to come. On that alone, I think there is a case made for not insisting on the imposition of this duty this year. No matter how you look at it, the point is that the State has borne the expense up to the moment of the erection of the station that exists. It is paying the loss, if there is a loss. The whole State is paying it. If people are benefiting, and great numbers are excluded, the people who are benefited have already their sets. There is no duty imposed on these sets. The Minister informed us that there was some duty put on as furniture. I do not know how much, but I assume that it was considerably less than 33? per cent. of the cost of the set. The position now is, and no one can dispute it, that the rural dweller is put in an unfair position as compared with the people of the cities. This position will prevent the installation of these valve sets in many places in town and country where the people were considering the installation of them. These people will now wait before installing their sets until the transmission stations are erected. There will be many hundreds and many thousands of people who would procure sets and come in quicker if the duty were not imposed. Now they will not get the valve sets because of their want of knowledge of wireless, and that will be due to the fact that even valve sets will not be procured by many people who would procure them if this impost were not put on. In halls and such places in the rural districts there has been going on for some time the consideration of the installation of sets. I hold that the imposition of this 33? per cent. duty will absolutely prevent such installations taking place, and if these people have to wait for another twelve months before putting in the sets the revenue that will accrue from this imposition is going to be a good deal less than the Minister suggests. All the good that would come, educationally and otherwise, to the users of wireless will be kept back for twelve months longer and the development will be withheld. That is unfair if you want wireless sets used in the homes.

Mr. WALSH

I do not think the Deputy has followed me very closely. I said on a previous occasion that I intended proceeding at once with the erection of the Cork station, soon after with the erection of the Western station, and then, perhaps, with a Northern station. There is no suggestion that the three stations will be erected slap bang at one time. The intention is to get ahead now if we have the necessary means.

Mr. BAXTER

The Cork station, if it is erected, will serve only a small area; it will serve crystal set users only in that district. Taking the development of wireless broadcasting in the Saorstát as a whole, it will be held up for at least twelve months. If you want to cultivate a taste for wireless, if you want to give people an opportunity of experiencing it, you must offer some encouragement. A taste for wireless can only come when it is possible for the people to possess wireless sets. There may be people in the country prepared to spend £30 on a set, but that will not apply to many. I have no doubt a taste for wireless could be cultivated if one or two people in an area had sets and others in that area had an opportunity of listening-in. You are going to restrict even the possibility of that if you impose this duty. The result will be that later on when you erect stations the numbers you will have applying for licences will be hundreds and thousands less than would otherwise be the case. I suggest that you should withhold this impost for at least another Budget.

Mr. CONNOR HOGAN

I desire to support the amendment moved by Deputy Cooper. I am in agreement with the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs in so far as he objects to having this charge for wireless placed on the public funds. In view of the other social services which are needed, it is undesirable at the present time to have the taxpayer, through the State, bearing the greater portion of the charge. I am with the Minister in the suggestion that the charge ought normally and naturally fall on the person who enjoys wireless reception. The question arises whether the money which we are asked now to raise by taxation will be used to the best advantage. The point as to whether we ought to consent to his proposals is another and a different matter.

If I understand the Minister correctly, he proposes to erect three further stations in the country. Why should he erect three more stations? Does not that seem to be an uneconomic proposal? Would not one high-power station, centrally situated, serve a much better purpose? Already we have an indication in the Estimates of the intention to erect a station in Cork. That will mean two wireless broadcasting stations erected on the sea-coast. It is true that they will be situated in populous areas, but nevertheless I am of opinion that a great part of the wireless waves will be lost; the full benefit of reception will not be enjoyed by residents in the Saorstát. All the waves that go seawards are lost, and you have only a semicircular area around each station in which Saorstát residents can receive what is broadcasted. The radius of reception would be about ten or twelve miles. I am not an expert on this matter, but I understand that the radius would be something like that.

If the station were more centrally situated, people could receive over a much larger area. With a centrally situated station, an area twice as large can be covered, giving good reception. If you have a high-power station naturally the radius will be extended to a greater extent and a wide territory can be brought in.

There is a further matter I would like to touch upon. Will the stations it is intended to erect be merely relaying stations, or will they broadcast individually? Will they have a wavelength of their own? In that event where is it proposed to secure the talent? If it is the Minister's intention merely to use them as relaying stations, it evidently appears to be an uneconomic thing not to have a high-power station.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

Deputies cannot discuss the general question of broadcasting stations; they can only discuss the proposed Customs duty on wireless apparatus. Deputies can go this far: they can say, "Is this the right way to find money for the purpose of increasing the facilities for broadcasting or for broadcasting users?" They must not discuss the question of what should be done with the money if it were available.

Mr. GOREY

I rise to a point of order. The question of broadcasting has been raised in the sense of what the citizen owes the State and of what the State owes the citizen. I hold that the State should do its duty by the citizens as a whole and not by any particular portion residing in or around Dublin.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

The Deputies on the Farmers' benches want to make a particular point about rural users, but the only way in which the question of what is going to be done with the money is relevant is this: that the revenue which will be gained from the proposed imposition of these taxes will be used for the benefit of listenersin. How it is to be used is another question. If Deputies will consider the matter for a moment they will see that otherwise we might get into a debate that might last a long time. This is a matter which will arise on the Broadcasting Bill and which will, to a certain extent, arise also on the Estimate for broadcasting stations, for which the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs must answer.

Mr. CONNOR HOGAN

I understood they had a cut-and-dried scheme and that they were making an effort to find the money. Naturally, we fell on the scheme they put up.

AN CEAN COMHAIRLE

It is the scheme for getting the money that the Deputy must fall on.

Mr. CONNOR HOGAN

I am remembering also the matter of the incidence of taxation. Already we have put up a station in Dublin, and a number of people, by no means poor people, have installed crystal sets. The station was put up at the public expense. It is the intention to lower the annual licence on crystal sets to 10/-; in other words, this will benefit the favoured few in Dublin who are by no means the poorer of the population but are people who can very well afford to pay a reasonable charge for reception. The intention is to lower the licence fee and give them wireless programmes at a cheaper figure and at the public cost.

In order to set up further stations we have to penalise, to the extent of this 33? per cent. tax, the rest of the community. Anybody who in future requires a wireless set must pay this duty. Down the country it is absolutely impossible to receive outside of ten or fifteen miles from Dublin. I think the proposal is most unfair. If we want to spread wireless, to popularise it, as Deputy Thrift said, we ought not to impose prohibitive charges or put on duties which will prevent people who otherwise would be users from becoming users. I hope Deputy Cooper will seek a division on his amendment. I mean to vote for the amendment if he does.

Mr. JOHNSON

I would like to have some more figures in regard to this question. The justification for the proposal seems to lie in the statement of the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs that he dare not—and would not have the hardihood in face of the campaign for economy—to go to the Minister for Finance and ask him for capital to enable him to put up other stations besides the Cork station unless he had in hand an assurance from the Dáil that there was going to be an income derived from imports. That is the position as stated by the Minister. If he can be assured that there is going to be a duty on these imports which will bring in, according to the Minister for Finance, a revenue of £20,000 a year, then he is prepared to ask for capital amounting to £22,000, based upon the Estimate, to erect these four stations.

As I say, I should like to have a Budget statement on this matter. The suggestion of the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs is that, by the erection of those four stations, he would have an immense increase in the number of crystal set users. Pretty well everyone in the country would be in a position to hear wireless programmes by the use of a crystal set and, in consequence, the crystal set would be in demand all over the country. The Minister for Finance goes a little further and says that, having accustomed the people to using the crystal sets, they would go on to the valve sets and, of course, that would help to increase the revenue. The change over from crystal to valve sets does not increase the number of licence-holders. It means you abandon your crystal set. On these two statements, the £20,000 a year income on this Customs duty means an import of £60,000 worth of apparatus at the ports, and assuming that the difference between the port price and the selling price is 100 per cent., we have £120,000 worth of apparatus sold to the public per annum. If you have got 2,000 people each buying a valve set per annum at the price of £20, that is a port price of £10, we have £20,000 of valve sets, but then we have to assume that we are to have £40,000 of crystal sets at £1 port price. That brings us £60,000 worth of apparatus at the ports per annum. Forty thousand users means 40,000 licence-holders, and that means at a pound each £40,000. At the proposed rate it will mean a drop of £20,000 in the revenue from licences. I cannot see from those figures where the justification is for this hesitation on the part of the Minister. The price of the Cork station is £5,500. Four times that would be £22,000. The case as presented does not seem to me to justify the imposition of this 33? per cent. duty as a revenueproducing operation.

As I say, I think it would be very necessary for us to have presented a Budget statement of how £20,000 is likely to be arrived at and what is going to be the effect of the duty, and how the reduction to the ten shillings for crystal set users is going to affect the revenue, because, presumably, it is not intended to make the business more than cover expenses. If these figures of estimated revenue are well founded, there is the immediate justification there would be, certainly, for any business enterprise to expand. Twenty-two thousand pounds is required for the erection of those stations, and there will be a considerable drop in the price of the licences for crystal sets You should hesitate to spend £20,000 or £25,000 as capital expenditure on working these stations, assuming, for additional cost per annum, say, a thousand a year. Why, in face of that as a prospective charge, you hesitate when you are assuming that 40,000 people annually will buy crystal sets, I should like some further explanation.

Mr. NORTON

The text taken by the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs in connection with this discussion has been that he who calls the tune should pay the piper. The proposal is to levy a duty of 33? per cent. on imported wireless apparatus. In the case of a 2-valve or 3-valve set, that is going to hit the user. When the Minister says that he who pays the piper should call the tune, he should remember that in the case of the valve user there are more stations than the Irish stations. Britain and foreign stations are piping and the valve user gets his set largely for the purpose of hearing British and foreign stations, and the cost of supplying him with broadcasting will not be any greater than the cost of supplying a crystal set user. I think it would be most unfair to ask the valve user to pay a higher amount in taxation on his set than would be paid by the crystal user. The Minister for Finance said that valve sets usually succeed crystal sets, and, of course, that is so. People having experience of the well-known sameness of the Dublin programmes are anxious to hear other programmes, from other countries. They buy a valve set for the purpose of doing so, and now it is proposed that the more they desire to hear other stations the more are they going to be taxed. I think, seeing that it only costs the same to provide broadcasting to the valve user, as for the crystal set user, that if there is to be any tax on wireless apparatus it should not be any higher in the case of a valve set user. I think, with Deputy Johnson, that we have been groping in the dark on this matter. I do not think we have had any reliable evidence that there is going to be a deficit or that at the end of 12 months we will be in the position the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs outlines to-day. I think the wise thing, in the absence of better information, is not to enforce a tax until we are convinced that a tax is necessary.

Mr. JOHN GOOD

The problem which we are discussing appears to be one of two questions. The Ministry require £20,000 additional to run the broadcasting service. The proposal put up by the Ministry is that they will continue to charge twenty shillings for valve sets and that they will reduce the charge for crystal sets to ten shillings and also that they will put an import duty on all wireless products of 33? per cent. The proposal on the other side, I take it, is that a flat rate of 20/- be charged upon all wireless sets, whether valve or crystal. These are the two questions before the House. With regard to the flat rate, the Minister for Finance and the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs have expressed an opinion against it. They seem to think that the user of a crystal set should only be called on to make a smaller payment than that charged, to the user of the valve set. Might I remind the Ministers, however, that even with a chain of four wireless stations the larger number will be served by these stations only through the medium of valve sets and not through that of crystal sets?

Mr. WALSH

A crystal set with one valve would come within their radius.

Mr. GOOD

It would be a powerful crystal set that would cover a range of fifty miles. Furthermore, if the Minister would plant on the map the four stations in the areas which he proposes he will find that there is an immense area outside the fifty mile radius.

Mr. WALSH

There is not.

Mr. GOOD

On this, as on other subjects, the Minister does not see eye to eye with me. His proposal is to give a preference to crystal set users and to charge this import duty. Might I remind the Minister that in opposing the flat rate charge he is not upholding the basic principle on which his own Department is run. If he were to apply the same principle which he is applying in the case of crystal sets to the postal service, what would be the effect? We who live in the city have to pay for the delivery of a letter in remote parts of the country, posted in College Green or elsewhere, a flat rate of 2d. If he gives the users of crystal sets in a particular area an advantage, let him apply the same principle to the postal service. Then it would have very much more force with Deputies than it appears to have at present. I am strongly in agreement with Deputy Thrift, that considering the fact that wireless to-day is in its infancy and with a great future before it, it should not be taxed and burdened at this particular stage with an import duty. I believe that that principle is unsound. It is unsound from many points of view because, as a Deputy has pointed out, nobody can tell when wireless apparaatus is imported whether it is for the installation of wireless or for ordinary electrical purposes. That, in my opinion, carries us into difficulties. By way of illustration of some of the difficulties experienced in connection with some of our other duties, I may mention that I heard of the case of a man who imported a wireless set and the Customs authorities wanted to charge a furniture tax on the box which surrounded the wireless installation. In this particular case the authorities were troubled by the fact that the box had what is known as knobs on outside for the working of the installation inside. Having considered the situation for three days, the authorities came to the conclusion that it was an electrical equipment and not furniture, because the knobs were on the outside. That is one of the difficulties in connection with this duty, but, apart from such difficulties, it is, in my opinion, unwise to tax this important industry which is really only in its infancy. If there is any country where wireless can serve a great purpose in the way of educating people and bringing those in scattered districts into touch with city life I think it is this country. I also think that everything that can be done to encourage the development of the wireless industry in this country should be done, but I am convinced that the method proposed by the Minister is not a step in that direction and, therefore, I will oppose the tax.

Mr. BLYTHE

I am proposing this tax because I agree with Deputy Thrift that the important thing is to popularise wireless. I think that the one way to do that is to extend the facilities for crystal set users. Wireless will not be popular in this country until everybody can hear our wireless programmes on a crystal set. It will take more than four stations to achieve that. You may, with a small number of stations, get the bulk of the country within the range of most crystal sets, but I believe that once the State has taken up the wireless business it will be its duty to provide for everybody with crystal sets, just as everybody has to be provided with postal facilities. A considerable number of people can, and will, buy valve sets, but the small farmers, the labourers, and the unskilled workers in the towns will not buy these valve sets unless prices come down very much. I think that the thing we must have particularly in mind is to bring wireless within the reach, so far as we can, of the poor people of the country. It is for that reason that I favour the reduction of the crystal set licence fee to ten shillings. If at any time it was proved that there was money to spare, I would then say that the other licence fee should come down to the same extent. In the meantime, the thing to be done is to try as far as possible to provide wireless facilities for those in every part of the country who can only afford crystal sets. That means new stations and fresh expenditure—recurrent expenditure which will not, so far as we can see, be met out of licence fees for a considerable time. On the other hand, while it is very desirable to extend the service and bring it within the reach of everybody, I do not think it is desirable that the general taxpayer—the person who may not use wireless—should be burdened with the charge. So far as possible, the cost of providing wireless should be met by those who use wireless.

Mr. GOREY

If the service is meant for everybody the charge should be met by everybody.

Mr. BLYTHE

I do not think you will ever reach the time when everybody will use it—certainly that will not occur for a very considerable time. The suggestion that this will bear heavily on the rural population is, I think, not true. Wherever you have stations you will have valve sets purchased. There will be more valve sets in any area which is a crystal set area than in any corresponding area which has not a station, and in which there are not crystal sets. The people of Dublin, and the people of Cork who will be the next to be brought within the crystal set range, will contribute more to this £20,000 which we are seeking to get out of the Customs duty than the rural people will provide. Developments are taking place in wireless and there will be a continual purchase of valve sets. In the present state of our finances, it seems to me that the alternative to finding the money out of the use of wireless for the extension of wireless is simply to go slow—not to extend the number of stations until the revenue from licence fees has gone up to such an extent as to meet the annual cost. If we pursue that policy, it will be a very long time before the great majority of the people can avail of wireless through crystal sets.

I do not think that any very great difficulty will be found in distinguishing between material imported for the use of wireless and for other purposes.

There may be certain articles as to which difficulty will arise, and certain articles which will escape duty, but ordinarily the ambiguous type of article will come in free, unless it is being imported by a wireless dealer, and even if it is being imported by a wireless dealer, if he satisfies the Commissioners that it is imported for another purpose, then it will be exempted. This is the type of problem with which the Customs authorities have to deal in respect to every class of goods, and I do not think that any very great difficulty will be experienced.

Professor THRIFT

Will the seller of insulated copper bell wire be entitled to say that he had to pay duty on that wire, and, therefore, be at liberty to charge a higher price than before?

Mr. BLYTHE

The Deputy will have to give notice as to any individual article. If he does give me notice I will answer him all right. Unless the article is going to be used for wireless, duty will not be chargeable; any of the administrative difficulties that arise can easily be overcome. The whole question of the financing of wireless is one on which firm figures cannot be given at the moment. For instance, we do not know what the cost of running the Dublin station will be. The station is still undeveloped. Programmes will have to be extended and new features will have to be introduced. There are many features one finds elsewhere not yet available in the Dublin station. There will have to be considerable extension of programmes, and it is probable, if we have a number of stations, they cannot be entirely relay stations. We might have three or four relay stations. If we were going beyond that we should have to provide another station or two from which a separate programme would be sent out, if not every night, at any rate from time to time.

If we do not develop programmes and provide variety there is no doubt but you will have discontent. You will be obliged, in some way, to find money for these programmes. The desirable thing at the moment, to my mind, is to take what will be a fairly permanent source of revenue from those who are interested in wireless and apply it to extending facilities. The extension of facilities, we know, will bring increased revenue; but the very extension of facilities will call for additional charges. As I said, if there was money at any time available, I believe that all licence fees should be reduced to ten shillings. The collection of licence fees will not be at all easy. With the perfection of instruments it may become very difficult in the future, and very costly. If people had instruments that do not involve the setting up of outside aerials, in my opinion, ultimately the collection of licence fees will be impossible, and the cost of broadcasting will have to be found otherwise. You certainly cannot be continually going into people's houses to see if they have wireless sets. While people, generally, have aerials you can detect the matter easily enough, and impose a fine, and collect a substantial revenue, but the time will rapidly come when, unless the fee is small, something like a half-a-crown, it will be impossible to collect licence fees. The cost of collection would be far too great. Deputies really, when considering the question of paying for the cost of wireless service, should bear that in mind. I have been in a house where there was a set. The police might visit that house and fail to discover it there. There was no aerial, nothing except a quite nicely-designed piece of furniture to indicate the presence of a wireless apparatus in the house.

Major COOPER

Did the Minister ascertain whether the licence had been paid?

Mr. BLYTHE

I was informed that it had not been paid, but that they would pay it later. Nobody need fear that Customs' revenue will dry up. As a matter of fact it will not. The increased facilities will mean naturally that people will buy valve sets. Changes in design, and improvement in valve sets, will lead to old sets being replaced by new. I think we may take it that for a very considerable time there will be substantial revenue from this particular source. Some small fee can always, I suppose, be collected. If the fee is small people will not take the risk of a fine. Some small revenue can always be hoped for from licences, but I do not think that substantial revenue can be hoped for for any considerable length of time from licences, and unless we tax some sources such as those, there will be no alternative to placing broadcasting as a charge upon the general public, just in the same way as the charge for the police is placed. There may be a good deal to be said in defence of that, but I do not think at present we have reached such a stage as that that could be contemplated.

Amendment put.

The Dáil divided: Tá, 32; Níl, 39.

Tá.

• Earnán Altún.
• Pádraig Baxter.
• Seán Buitléir.
• John J. Cole.
• Bryan R. Cooper.
• Sir James Craig.
• Séamus Eabhróid.
• John Good.
• David Hall.
• William Hewat.
• Connor Hogan.
• Séamus Mac Cosgair.
• Tomás Mac Eoin.
• Risteárd Mac Fheorais.
• Risteárd Mac Liam.
• Patrick J. Mulvany.
• Tomás de Nógla.
• William Norton.
• Tomás O Conaill.
• Liam O Daimhín.
• Tadhg O Donnabháin.
• Eamon O Dubhghaill.
• Mícheál O Dubhghaill.
• Donnchadh O Guaire.
• Mícheál O hIfearnáin.
• Seán O Laidhin.
• Domhnall O Mocháin.
• Domhnall O Muirgheasa.
• Tadhg O Murchadha.
• Pádraig O hOgáin (An Clár).
• Pádraig O hOgáin (Luimneach).
• Liam Thrift.

Níl.

• Richard H. Beamish.
• Earnán de Blaghd.
• Séamus Breathnach.
• Séamus de Búrca.
• Máighréad Ní Choileáin Bean
• Uí Dhrisceóil.
• James Dwyer.
• Michael Egan.
• Desmond Fitzgerald.
• Thomas Hennessy.
• John Hennigan.
• Seosamh Mac a' Bhrighde.
• Donnchadh Mac Con Uladh.
• Liam Mac Cosgair.
• Pádraig Mac Fadáin.
• Patrick McGilligan.
• Eoin Mac Néill.
• Seoirse Mac Niocaill.
• Liam Mac Sioghaird.
• Pádraig Mag Ualghairg.
• Martin M. Nally.
• Michael K. Noonan.
• Peadar O hAodha.
• Criostóir O Broin.
• Seán O Bruadair.
• Conchubhar O Conghaile.
• Eoghan O Dochartaigh.
• Séamus O Dóláin.
• Peadar O Dubhghaill.
• Eamon O Dúgáin.
• Aindriú O Láimhín.
• Séamus O Leadáin.
• Risteárd O Maolchatha.
• Séamus O Murchadha.
• Pádraig O hOgáin (Gaillimh).
• Máirtín O Rodaigh.
• Seán O Súilleabháin.
• Mícheál O Tighearnaigh.
• Caoimhghín O hUigín.
• Seán Priomhdhall.

Tellers:—Tá: Deputies Cooper and Baxter. Níl: Deputies Dolan and Sears.

Amendment declared lost.

Mr. JOHNSON

I move:—

In paragraph (1) to delete all words from "and on," line 7, to the word "manufactured," line 10 inclusive, and substitute the words—"but excluding all component parts and accessories other than cases, cabinets and other containers of such apparatus."

I think that this amendment will help the Ministerial Party to retrieve themselves. The effect of the amendment, of course, would be partially protective and as a consequence it would enable the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs and his supporters to put into effect at least some of their purposes and ideas. It would also meet the objections that Deputy Thrift and others have raised as to the difficulty that would be created by the imposition of a tariff of this kind upon parts which may or may not be used for wireless purposes. I think it is clear that there will be a very great deal of inconvenience to traders and to purchasers of this class of goods if some of the articles can be used for different purposes. The object of the amendment is to confine this tariff to the completed apparatus. It would as a consequence leave out the parts, and by that means would enable the Minister for Posts to encourage the assembling of parts and the completing of the apparatus in this country, thereby satisfying some of his aspirations, and at the same time would also assist in making easier the purchase of apparatus which may be used for other contraptions, shall I say, as well as for wireless. It would undoubtedly have the effect of reducing the income from this tax, but to that extent the arguments that were used on the previous motion will suffice and I need not repeat them. In a general way it may be said that this amendment would effect a good portion of the object sought to be achieved by Deputy Cooper and in addition would satisfy and meet the case that the Minister for Posts has made, supported by so large a number of his own Party, to protect and help to develop an Irish industry, the assembling of parts and the making of wireless apparatus.

Mr. BLYTHE

This is not in the form of a direct negative, but in effect the result would be the same as if the resolution were defeated, because it would leave us with less revenue from wireless than was got prior to this Budget. Heretofore on those instruments which were so constructed as to be liable to furniture duty we got revenue at the rate of about £1,000 per annum. If the amendment were passed I doubt if we would get as much as that. It would certainly mean the separating of parts of wireless apparatus so as not to make the apparatus liable to the duty, which would be charged only on the case, where the case was liable to the duty. That would not be as at present, because where the case is such as to make it liable to the furniture tax, duty is now charged on the whole thing. As far as the effect of the amendment is concerned I think it is a direct negative, though it is not so in form.

Mr. JOHNSON

I may say that the purpose of this exclusion of "all component parts and accessories other than cases, cabinets and other containers of such apparatus" was to leave the position in respect of the furniture tax exactly as it is, but the phrasing may be faulty.

Professor THRIFT

Would the Minister give us any information as to how he proposes to proceed in order to discriminate as to whether articles are required for wireless or not? Take, for example, the ordinary kind of electric battery that is used for flash lamps. The very same thing is used in many wireless sets. How will the Revenue Commissioners know whether that article is to be subject to the duty as part of a wireless set or not? I am sure the Minister does not intend to impose this duty on every person who operates a flash lamp, for example, and yet I do not see how it can possibly be avoided.

Mr. BLYTHE

There is not much practical difficulty in that. At present a nut or a bolt may be used for a motor car or for something else, but we do manage, in the main, to charge those which are used for motor cars and exempt those which are not. It may happen that a motor nut or bolt escapes, and it may be that some wireless apparatus will escape, but in general we will not find any great difficulty in doing it.

Professor THRIFT

Does the Minister propose to proceed by schedule?

Mr. BLYTHE

No, we will not proceed by schedule. It is obvious in the first instance that if the article is imported by a wireless dealer it is for wireless purposes. If it is not imported by a wireless dealer we can let it in. Perhaps some circumstances might occur to bring suspicion upon it and then we would make inquiries. But in practice there is no difficulty found in dealing with the component parts of motor cars.

Mr. JOHNSON

Has the Minister considered the position of some of these universal repositories here which sell everything—ironmongery of all kinds?

Mr. BLYTHE

They practically never import. They get articles from somebody who is an importer here.

Amendment put.

The Dáil divided: Tá, 25; Níl, 37.

Tá.

• Seán Buitléir.
• John J. Cole.
• Séamus Eabhróid.
• David Hall.
• Connor Hogan.
• Séamus Mac Cosgair.
• Tomás Mac Eoin.
• Risteárd Mac Fheorais.
• Risteárd Mac Liam.
• Patrick J. Mulvany.
• Tomás de Nógla.
• William Norton.
• Criostóir O Broin.
• Tomás O Conaill.
• Liam O Daimhín.
• Tadhg O Donnabháin.
• Eamon O Dubhghaill.
• Mícheál O Dubhghaill.
• Donnchadh O Guaire.
• Seán O Laidhín.
• Domhnall O Mocháin.
• Domhnall O Muirgheasa.
• Tadhg O Murchadha.
• Pádraig O hOgáin (An Clár).
• Pádraig O hOgáin (Luimneach).

Níl.

• Earnán de Blaghd.
• Séamus Breathnach.
• Séamus de Búrca.
• Máighréad Ní Choileáin Bean
• Uí Dhrisceoil.
• James Dwyer.
• Michael Egan.
• Desmond Fitzgerald.
• Thomas Hennessy.
• John Hennigan.
• Seosamh Mac a' Bhrighde.
• Donnchadh Mac Con Uladh.
• Liam Mac Cosgair.
• Pádraig Mac Fadáin.
• Patrick McGilligan.
• Eoin Mac Néill.
• Seoirse Mac Niocaill.
• Liam Mac Sioghaird.
• Pádraig Mag Ualghairg.
• Martin M. Nally.
• Michael K. Noonan.
• Peadar O hAodha.
• Mícheál O hAonghusa.
• Conchubhar O Conghaile.
• Eoghan O Dochartaigh.
• Séamus O Dóláin.
• Peadar O Dubhghaill.
• Eamon O Dúgáin.
• Aindriú O Láimhín.
• Séamus O Leadáin.
• Risteárd O Maolchatha.
• Séamus O Murchadha.
• Pádraig O hOgáin (Gaillimh).
• Máirtín O Rodaigh.
• Seán O Súilleabháin.
• Mícheál O Tighearnaigh.
• Caoimhghín O hUigín.
• Seán Príomhdhall.

Tellers—Tá: Deputies T. O'Connell and Morrissey. Níl: Deputies Dolan and Sears.

Amendment declared lost.

Professor THRIFT

I move:—

In paragraph (3), line 19, to insert after the word "purpose" the words "or is imported by or on behalf of a school, college or other educational institution for educational purposes."

I was rather encouraged in putting down this amendment by a remark of the Minister when these motions were up before. This is not in any way an important amendment as regards revenue. I am sure the amount of revenue that would be lost if this amendment were adopted would be very small. But it is quite an important amendment for those who are interested in scientific education and educational establishments. I can assure the Minister that they would be very much affected if some such amendment as this were not adopted. I do not press for the particular wording, but I do press the point that educational institutions should not have to pay this duty on scientific apparatus they require for electrical work. It would be practically impossible to get electrical apparatus which could not be used in some way for wireless. The Minister need only consult anybody who has anything to do with the teaching scientifically of electricity to have that statement corroborated. I do not propose to spend much time in arguing the question because I feel sure that the Minister will tell me either that the amendment is unnecessary, because it is covered by sub-sections (3) and (4) —though I do not admit it is—or that he is ready to accept it. The Minister said the resolution might be amended later to deal with the needs of educational institutions.

Mr. BLYTHE

I do not accept the amendment as it stands, but I accept the principle. I have heard from various sources—those who made representations included the Minister for Industry and Commerce who, I suppose, was representing the view of the National University—that it would be a hardship if educational institutions were to be taxed on electrical apparatus. The reason I do not propose to accept the amendment as it stands is that it is on this resolution the charging section of the Act must be based. The charging section cannot go outside the scope of the resolution and, in amending the resolution, the wording of the amendment would require to be carefully considered. However, I can undertake to introduce a section or sub-section in the Act to give effect to what the Deputy desires.

Professor THRIFT

On that undertaking, I ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Major COOPER

I am glad the Minister has accepted the principle of the amendment. I suggest that he should stretch his definition so far as to include schools of wireless telegraphy. There is now a definite profession of wireless operator. I am not sure if there are any schools of wireless telegraphy in the Free State but, as we have set up a school of navigation, it would be very desirable that we should have a school to train wireless operators. It is now a definite career for boys who are anxious to see the world and to follow a scientific career. I suggest to the Minister that he should consider these schools in the framing of his section—schools which are making definite provision for the training of operators, and who are not taking up the work by way of amusement or luxury. I would ask the Minister to make his definition sufficiently wide to cover that class of school.

Mr. BLYTHE

I see no difficulty about that.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Question proposed—"That the Dáil agree with the Committee in Resolution 9."

Professor THRIFT

In connection with sub-section (4), I would like to draw the attention of the Minister to the definition. I think it is a very unsatisfactory definition. I have not put down any amendment, but I think the definition would cover a great deal more than the Minister wishes to cover. The definition says that the signal must be produced electrically and transmitted, without the aid of a wire, from the place where the signal is made to the place where it is received. May I draw attention to the fact that the wording does not seem to be quite right. The word "and" is used in one place and the word "or" in another. I think it ought to be "and" in both places. It would then refer to signals made in one place and received in another. The point, however, is that the signal is to be one which is electrically made and transmitted from the sending place to the receiving place without a wire. That covers a great many signals that are not in any way connected with wireless telegraphy or broadcasting. Take, for example, the electrical horn of your motor car. It has no connection with broadcasting. The signal is made electrically and it is transmitted from the motor horn to the ear without any wire. Take then the flash-lamp. It may be used as a signalling instrument; it may be made electrically and the signal would be transmitted without the aid of a wire from the sender to the receiver. Take another example, which is becoming more common—megaphoning. You can signal by means of megaphonic apparatus, which is made electrically, and the signal is transmitted from the megaphone through the air to the ear of the receiver. I do not know if the Minister means to include it. In that case, it might be argued that the signal was really transmitted with the aid of a wire from the place the sound was made to the megaphone. But the matter is not by any means clear in the Resolution and I think it ought to be made clear. There are two objections to the definition as it stands, and, though I have not put down an amendment, I think the Minister ought to consider them. One of the objections is that it is too wide. The other is that, if it is intended to include certain things, it is not absolutely certain that it does include them; and if it is intended to omit those things, it is not absolutely certain that they are left out. The megaphone is what I am referring to in this connection.

Mr. BLYTHE

It was not intended to include the megaphone or the other instruments mentioned. If it seems necessary, on consideration, to put in reassuring words, we will add them to the section. The definition we have here is based on the definition in the Wireless Act of 1904

Professor THRIFT

It is very unsatisfactory.

Major COOPER

They knew very little about the matter then.

Question put.

The Dáil divided.

Tá, 34; Níl, 26.

Tá.

Earnán de Blaghd.Séamus Breathnach.Séamus de Búrca.Máighréad Ní Choileáin BeanUí Dhrisceóil.James Dwyer.Desmond Fitzgerald.Thomas Hennessy.John Hennigan.Seosamh Mac a' Bhrighde.Liam Mac Cosgair.Pádraig Mac Fadáin.Eoin Mac Néill.Seoirse Mac Niocaill.Liam Mac Sioghaird.Pádraig Mag Ualghairg.Martin M. Nally.Michael K. Noonan.

Peadar O hAodha.Mícheál O hAonghusa.Criostóir O Broin.Seán O Bruadair.Conchubhar O Conghaile.Eoghan O Dochartaigh.Séamus O Dóláin.Peadar O Dubhghaill.Eamon O Dúgáin.Aindriú O Láimhín.Séamus O Leadáin.Fionán O Loingsigh.Séamus O Murchadha.Máirtín O Rodaigh.Seán O Súilleabháin.Mícheál O Tighearnaigh.Seán Príomhdhall.

Níl.

Earnán Altún.Seán Buitléir.John J. Cole.Bryan R. Cooper.Sir James Craig.Séamus Eabhróid.John Good.David Hall.Connor Hogan.Séamus Mac Cosgair.Tomás Mac Eoin.Risteárd Mac Fheorais.Risteárd Mac Liam.

Patrick J. Mulvany.Tomás de Nógla.William Norton.Tomás O Conaill.Liam O Daimhín.Tadhg O Donnabháin.Eamon O Dubhghaill.Mícheál O Dubhghaill.Donnchadh O Guaire.Domhnall O Mocháin.Tadhg O Murchadha.Pádraig O hOgáin (Luimneach).Liam Thrift.

Motion declared carried.

Tellers:—Tá: Deputies Dolan and Sears. Níl: Deputies Wilson and C. Hogan.