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.