Dáil Éireann debate -
Friday, 11 Jun 1926

Vol. 16 No. 9

SUPPLEMENTARY FINANCIAL RESOLUTIONS. - IN COMMITTEE ON FINANCE.

MINISTER for FINANCE (Mr. Blythe)

I move:—

(1) That the provisions of Resolution No. 3 of the Financial Resolutions agreed to by Dáil Eireann on the 4th day of May, 1926, shall be deemed always to have had effect in relation to income tax chargeable in respect of any profits or gains other than those falling within Case III. or Case V. of Schedule D of the Income Tax Act, 1918.

(2) It is hereby declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution shall have statutory effect under the provisions of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1913.

This Resolution is to enable the section which is in the Bill to be covered. As I stated when the original Resolution was introduced, it followed a certain decision in the House of Lords which we believed would be adopted by the Courts here, in the case of Whelan versus Henning. In that case the House of Lords decision only applied to incomes arising from foreign possessions, and it was thought the view they took could not be applied to incomes arising from trades or professions here; but further consideration has led us to believe that it may be so applied and, as a matter of fact, that is the view taken by the British Government. The section that is in our Finance Bill is identical with the section in the British Finance Bill and this supplementary Resolution is introduced for the purpose of covering the section.

I explained that the House of Lords decision was that although tax was assessed on the basis of the three years average, if there was no income in a particular year, and the source of income was in the possession of the taxpayer, no tax would be paid. That would mean that very great inequalities might exist. It would mean that the taxpayer—the particular sort of taxpayer to whom it would apply—would get the advantage of the bad year twice. Deputies will see it more clearly if I quote the case of tax payable on the basis of the income of the preceding year, and that will shortly be the basis that will be adopted instead of the three years average. The British Government have already announced the abandonment of the three years average. We have not felt able to do so this year, because our staff will be sufficiently taxed by the change in regard to double income tax relief. The very carrying out of the change will involve labour on the staff, and we do not feel able to make the other change. Next year it is hoped we also will be able to announce the abandonment of the three years average, and charge tax, in cases where the three years average is now the basis, on the basis of the preceding year.

If we were charging tax on the basis of the preceding year and did not legislate as we are legislating in Section 3, the effect would be that if a man had an income of two thousand pounds last year, and if this year he had no income, he would pay no tax, because he had no income, and if next year he had an income of five thousand pounds he would still pay no tax, because he had had no income in the preceding year. It is also would produce great disparity of treatment between individuals because it might mean that an individual who had an income of ten pounds would be charged tax on two thousand pounds, that being the average, whereas a man who had no income would be charged no tax whatsoever. The section is for the purpose of legalising and reinstating the practice that has prevailed ever since the introduction of income tax.

Professor THRIFT

To what extent is the effect of this section retrospective? The resolution says it shall be deemed always to have had effect.

Mr. BLYTHE

It is entirely retrospective. There is just one matter I would like to mention. One individual brought a case before the Circuit Judge and he got a decision in his favour. We do not believe that decision was right, but we are not appealing in that case; in fact we have withdrawn notice of appeal which was lodged and we are letting the individual who succeeded in getting judgment have the benefit of that judgment.

Question put and agreed to.

RESOLUTION No. 2.

Mr. BLYTHE

I move:—

That there shall be charged, levied, and paid for and upon every licence to act and carry on business as a bookmaker issued under any Act passed or to be passed during the financial year beginning on the first day of April, 1926, an excise duty at the following rates, that is to say:—

(a) on a licence expressed to be in force for one year ... ... ten pounds (b) on a licence expressed to be in force for any period less than one year—two pounds for every day of such period.

Section 3 is the section imposing a licence duty on individual book-makers. The licence fee will be £10. It is proposed to issue licences for periods less than one year at a fee of £2 for every day of such period. We are allowing licences to be taken out for a lesser period than one year because it has been the practice for book-makers from outside the Saorstát to attend occasionally and it is not considered desirable to put a stop to that entirely.

Mr. SHAW

On the Second Reading of the Finance Bill I stated that as I only took exception to the section, I would not insist on a division on the main Bill. In connection with the supplementary Financial Resolution now moved, I purpose taking the same attitude. I stated on that occasion that the persons for whom I spoke were not unreasonable and were agreed that revenue could be obtained from racing, but that it should be such as the industries of racing and thoroughbred bloodstock could bear, and I still maintain that. The following alternative proposals suggested as a compromise will show that that is the spirit in which they are made:—We suggest: 1—That at meetings where the "tote" or pari-mutuel is operated a 5 per cent. tax be charged, 50 per cent. of the net receipts to be refunded to the race company for the purpose of increasing the stakes to be run for. 2—The proposed tax of 5 per cent. on all bets made with bookmakers on race-courses to be reduced to 2½ per cent., and half the net revenue to be likewise refunded towards the increase of stakes. Although we have made that suggestion we still believe that even a 2½ per cent. tax on turnover will take sufficient money out of racing at least to seriously injure it. 3—The proposed tax of 5 per cent. on starting-price betting to be reduced to 2½ per cent., the revenue obtained to be used for the State. 4— The proposed tax of 5 per cent. on bets made at coursing meetings to be withdrawn owing to the serious injury that would be caused to this national sport, and the fact that the net revenue obtained would not more than cover the cost of collection; also, to the fact that very many coursing meetings heretofore run in the Free State will be transferred to the "free of tax" State of Northern Ireland.

If the Minister agrees to these suggestions it will leave me in the position to decide my attitude in connection with the amendments standing in my name for the Committee Stage. I might mention that with the exception of the Deputies who supported my attitude in this House, as well as Senator Parkinson and Senator MacLoughlin, who rendered invaluable assistance both here and outside, I have not consulted the stewards of the Turf Club or any other interested parties with regard to this offered compromise. My reason for not doing so was that I received no assistance whatever from them in the matter. I hope, therefore, that as we have endeavoured to meet the Minister half-way he will endeavour to meet us half-way in the very reasonable proposition that I am putting up.

Mr. BLYTHE

What the Deputy has said applied, I think, to Resolution No. 4 which is the resolution dealing with that matter.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

The Deputy dealt with the three resolutions. I allowed that because, of course, in a sense Nos. 2 and 3 are introduced because of No. 4. I think it would be better take that matter on Resolution No. 4.

Mr. WILSON

Would it not be necessary to define what is a bookmaker?

Mr. BLYTHE

There is to be a Betting Bill which will deal with that.

Mr. JOHNSON

Would what comes into a subsequent Act be of any use in the interim?

Mr. BLYTHE

In the resolution you have a reference in advance to the Betting Act: "There shall be charged, levied and paid for and on every licence to act and carry on business as a bookmaker issued under any Act passed or to be passed," etc.

Resolution 2 put and agreed to.

RESOLUTION 3.

Mr. BLYTHE

I move:—

(1) That an excise duty of twenty pounds shall be charged, levied and paid on the registration and also on every renewal of the registration of any premises in any register or premises maintained under any Act passed or to be passed in the financial year beginning on the 1st day of April, 1926, providing for the registration of premises in which the business of bookmaking is carried on.

(2) That the duty mentioned in this resolution shall be charged and levied on and shall be paid by the person who is entered in such register as the proprietor of the premises in respect of the registration or renewal of the registration of which the duty is chargeable.

This resolution imposes an excise duty in respect of premises registered.

Mr. JOHNSON

I would like to have some information from the Minister as to what he believes will be the effect of this resolution. It has been represented to me that the registration of premises in towns and cities is likely to be demoralising: that is to say, the effect of registration will be to add to the number of people who live, move and have their being in and around bookmakers' premises: that it will bring these premises into the region of respectability and generally will tend to fix the habit of betting amongst people who ought to be more beneficially engaged and that in a general way the effect of the registration of premises in towns as bookmaking establishments is going to have a detrimental effect upon the social habits of the people. I wonder whether the Minister has considered this question of registration from that point of view and whether it will, in effect, lead to the legalisation of ready-money betting and make every place that is licensed a place within the meaning of the Act so that ready-money can be taken from anybody in the form of bets. That is the case that is put up to me by people who are not squeamish at all about betting or the effects of betting. I would like to know whether this matter has been discussed with the Minister for Justice, and what the view of the Ministry is in regard to that aspect of the question of the registration of bookmakers' premises.

Mr. BLYTHE

The matter has been discussed with the Department of Justice. The position at the present time is that in almost every village in the country you have bookmaking establishments and you have a continuous evasion and disregard of the law. You have the position in which it is quite impossible to suppress a practice that is illegal. We feel that on the whole it is desirable that what cannot be suppressed, what the whole community more or less indulges in, should be legalised, regulated and controlled. The bookmaking premises will be registered after inquiry in all cases by the police as to the suitability of the premises. They will not be allowed to be located in certain situations. The congregation of people will not be allowed on betting premises. Nothing will be allowed except the carrying on of the actual business of bookmaking. A man whose premises are licensed will not be allowed to carry on roulette or games of that sort on them. He will simply have premises where people can go in and record their bets and be given their dockets, and at which they can call in due course, in the ordinary public way, to receive anything that may be due to them as a result of the race. We do not believe that that is going to do anything in the way of increasing betting or to fix the habit of betting.

Anyone at the present time who wants to make a bet can easily find the means of doing it. I understand that there is no difficulty anywhere for people who want to lay a bet to find a channel through which the bet may be laid. We do not think any ill result will follow the licensing of premises to which people may go without any evasion of the law and without committing any crime and put on their stake. These premises will be controlled. People will not be licensed to carry on betting who have shops or public-houses. We believe that in the future the ordinary licensed bookmaker will co-operate with the police in preventing the carrying on of surreptitious bookmaking establishments. A person paying his licence duty and tax would naturally be resentful of people carrying on betting on premises in respect of which no tax was being paid. There will be supervision of these registered premises. As regards juveniles, they will be prevented, just as they are prevented from being served with drink on licensed premises, from going to these registered premises for the purpose of betting. With the registration of premises the practice of betting can be regulated, and instead of having detrimental effects the social effects will be, I think, somewhat beneficial.

Mr. JOHNSON

Would the Minister say whether it is contemplated that betting on registered premises will only be allowed in respect of horse racing or coursing, or whether a registered place may not become a mere betting school? For instance, if the premises registered were used for playing the game of "house"——

Mr. BLYTHE

That would not be allowed.

Mr. JOHNSON

I think the margin of difference is very, very small. You will find it difficult to avoid the registration of premises for the chance picking out of a number or the chance picking out of a horse. Perhaps these are matters that can be raised more correctly on the Bill that is to regulate these things. I think, however, they are matters that the Minister ought to bear in mind in framing his Bill.

Mr. BLYTHE

We propose to prevent the congregation of people on premises registered for betting. An offence of that kind would be a cause for the cancellation of the person's licence or a refusal to renew.

Mr. WILSON

Will you prevent music on these premises?

Mr. BLYTHE

I have not considered that.

Mr. DAVIN

Is it proposed to limit the number of persons who can be on the premises at the one time?

Mr. BLYTHE

I do not know whether you could state a number, but if people were found to congregate and remain there the police could object to the licence being continued. We would not allow the event in respect of which bets were made to be decided on the premises. The event will have to be decided elsewhere.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

Deputies will understand that the excise duty proposed in this resolution is in the nature of a tax. Therefore, it must be introduced in this way by means of a financial resolution, and put into the Finance Bill which deals with taxation. A Bill to deal with the machinery will, of course, be necessary, and on that all these questions will properly arise, but it is necessary to proceed in this way to levy an excise duty.

Resolution 3 put and agreed to.

RESOLUTION 4.

Mr. BLYTHE

I move:—

(1) That there shall be charged, levied, and paid out on and by every bookmaker who makes, lays, or otherwise enters into any bets on or after the 1st day of November, 1926, an excise duty of five per cent. of the amount of every bet entered into by him on or after the said 1st day of November, 1926.

(2) For the purpose of this Resolution the amount of a bet shall be the sum of money which by the terms of the bet the bookmaker will be entitled to receive, retain or take credit for if the event the subject of the bet is determined in his favour.

This, I suppose, is the contentious resolution. I must say that I welcome the tone in which Deputy Shaw spoke. Heretofore so far as I could discover there was a disposition simply to oppose any tax on betting. We were told that various bookmakers were willing to promise considerable sums by way of a licence on bookmakers, but not to agree at all to a tax on betting. As a matter of fact, at one stage in the discussions, when I mentioned the idea of a 2½ per cent. tax I was told that 2½ per cent. was as bad as 5 per cent.

With reference to the specific point that Deputy Shaw mentioned, it is not proposed in the Betting Bill to take power to set up the totalisator against the wishes of the owners of the premises. It is not proposed that we should take power to go to racecourses and set up the totalisator there. As a matter of fact, in the draft of the Bill I think a specific clause is in to say that the consent of the owner of the premises must be got. It follows, really, from that that arrangements as to terms on which the totalisator will be conducted, if the State is to conduct the totalisator, will have to be made with the owners of the courses. On the other hand, if persons like stewards are given the licence on certain terms to conduct the totalisator, terms will have to be settled and perhaps different terms in individual cases. The conditions in different courses may require different terms. In that case I would not contemplate putting into a Bill that certain sums out of the totalisator profits or tax should be paid over to the race committee. At present the racecourses do derive a certain revenue from the bookmakers and they would certainly have to have some revenue corresponding to that. They would certainly have to have payments made to them from the totalisator. I think that is a matter that should be left to arrangement.

Deputy Shaw suggested that we should only have a tax of 2½ per cent. on bets made on racecourses and that we should give half the revenue to the committee or the racecourse executive for increased stakes. I indicated at one stage that, if we were having a 5 per cent. tax, I was sympathetic to the idea of returning half the tax obtained on racecourses to the committee for the purpose of increasing stakes. It is rather a different proposition to say that the tax should be reduced to 2½ per cent. and that half of the 2½ per cent. should be given to race executives. That would leave a very small revenue, I am afraid, from actual racing here, for the State. I have always been willing to consider the case of the racecourses here, but, as I said on the last day, I have so far been kept at arm's length; there was nothing but an unbending opposition to any tax on betting. As I said, the statement was made to me that a 2½ per cent. tax was as bad as a 5 per cent. tax.

There was no real attempt to supply figures to me that would enable me to come to a decision on the matter. I will say this—that such information as has been placed before me and such information as I have been able to gather, since the tax was first proposed, indicates that the original estimate of revenue of £150,000 to £200,000 from a 5 per cent. tax was a conservative estimate, or probably an under-estimate. If information is put before me, and if the people concerned are prepared to meet me and discuss the matter that there is going to be a tax on betting as distinct from a tax on bookmakers—if that happens between this and the Committee Stage or the Report Stage of the Bill—I am prepared to give sympathetic consideration to the proposal that the tax should be 2½ per cent. on racecourses. I would like to have figures put up indicating more clearly than I can know at the present time what the revenue is likely to be from it. I certainly do not want to injure Irish racing. I do not want, even, to take the risk of injuring Irish racing and if I am met fairly in the matter by having facts placed before me, I am prepared to give sympathetic consideration to the whole matter. But we have not been able to get it because there was a determination, as far as I could see, to defeat the idea of a tax on betting. There was a suggestion that seemed to be impracticable and unsatisfactory for a stiff tax on book-makers.

With regard to the idea that there should be no tax—as I think I gathered from the Deputy—on coursing, I do not think I could agree to that. I do not see that any form of betting could be excepted from the tax. As I said before, I see the economic importance of horse racing. I see that horse breeding cannot be carried on in a satisfactory way unless there is racing. Consequently, I am not anxious to take any risk of injuring Irish racing and indirectly injuring the horse breeding industry. But coursing seems to me to be quite a different matter. I do not think it has any economic importance at all. I see no reason for any concession in regard to coursing. Certainly no argument has been put up to me by anybody that coursing is of any economic importance. Perhaps arguments could be put up. I am always willing to consider arguments. As I say, Deputy Shaw's speech to-day is the first sign that the people who are interested directly in racing were prepared to meet us reasonably and prepared to discuss practical propositions, and I hope to submit any facts that are at their diposal. There would be certain difficulties in having a five per cent. tax on betting off the course, and a 2½ per cent. tax on the course. There would be attempts at complete evasion and attempts at partial evasion, if we had two rates. We would have people, perhaps, who would not be prepared to take the risk of complete evasion but who would be inclined to take the lesser risk by paying a tax at wrong rates.

I have not any information at present that would justify any consideration for the proposition that bets off the course should only be taxed at 2½ per cent. As I understand it, this particular betting that goes on in towns and villages away from the racing gives no support at all to racing, and is of no advantage at all to racing, and no damage at all would be suffered if it were to happen that that sort of betting were reduced to a very trivial amount. In fact, I think, there would be distinct advantages. On the matter of racecourses, I have already indicated willingness to meet the case put up. As Deputy Shaw has now put up a case, I can say to him that, if he would see me in the intervening days before a stage is reached that the Bill cannot be amended, I am prepared to meet him in the most sympathetic way.

Major COOPER

May I ask the Minister one question? When he is dealing with this question of betting on and off the course, how is it proposed to deal with bets made on Irish race-courses on English races? That not infrequently happens, when there is a big race on. Is such a bet to be taxed at 2½ per cent. or 5 per cent.?

Mr. BLYTHE

My idea is that those bets should be taxed at five per cent.

Major COOPER

It will be rather confusing.

Mr. BLYTHE

That is one of the difficulties indicated. I think regulations can be made.

Mr. SHAW

I will use my best endeavours with Senator Parkinson and any other person to procure figures to bear out the statement we have made on several occasions that a five per cent. tax is excessive, and that a 2½ per cent. tax is possibly even more than racing can bear. I believe that a 2½ per cent. tax would yield more than a 5 per cent. tax, because a 2½ per cent. tax would allow racing to go on, whereas a 5 per cent. tax, I believe, and every man who has any knowledge of the subject in Ireland believes the same thing, would cause racing to cease inside nine months. This matter will be fully discussed on the Committee Stage. I do not think there is any necessity for me to say much further than that we are very definite with regard to our claim to have 50 per cent., at least, of the money that is provided out of the totalisator or the pari-mutuel refunded to the race committees for additional stake. The racehorse owner in Ireland is a man who, at the present time, is supplying all the sport, the amusement tax and everything else, in connection with racing, and there is no doubt at all about it that he is the person who gets the least out of it. A horse in training in Ireland at the present time, costs at least £6 a week. You take a horse to a meeting for a £50 stake. When the entry, railway freight, and other expenses are totted up, I can assure you that there is very little out of it, even if the horse wins the race. If this 2½ per cent. is allowed, stakes can be increased and the owner can, at least, be given a chance.

With regard to coursing, I am very sorry that the Minister has not given me any encouragement in that case. The only answer I can make to him is that we will have to go up to the North of Ireland and have the coursing meetings held there. Any person who read to-day's newspapers could have seen that in Westmeath yesterday the coursing club decided that if the tax was imposed on coursing they would take steps in that direction. They have already sent a deputation to Northern Ireland to procure a suitable place to run the very successful meeting which was held there last year and which is known as the Belsize Cup.

The Minister has met us—I do not know if I could exactly say fairly, but he has at least given us some hope of being able to prove the facts that we have suggested. I would ask him, in conclusion, to reconsider his decision about coursing. I have made what is, in my opinion, an unanswerable case about coursing. I have explained that there are thirty-two dogs in a stake. After the first draw, there are sixteen dogs left. They are drawn again, and there are eight left. After the next draw, there are four left, and then two. There remains eventually only the winner. Whoever is the lucky owner of that dog will have to pay 25 per cent. to the Government, and not 5 per cent., if he invests in the first course and continues investing until the stake is disposed of. That constitutes, in my opinion, an unanswerable argument. I also put up the case that, where the dogs are from two counties, the partisans of one county are pitting their money against the people from the other county. The supporters of the winning dog receive the money belonging to the partisans of the opposing dog's county, with the result that the Government will get 5 per cent. on every course from the two dogs—winner and loser. I gave racing nine months to live under the proposed arrangement, and I give coursing one month.

Mr. GOREY

I do not know where the Minister gets his information with regard to coursing, nor do I know where he gets his information with regard to racing. He seemed to pause a little with regard to racing. We, in the South at least, are not Puritans and we are not afflicted with a Puritan mind. If it be urged that horse-racing and the breeding of thoroughbreds deserve encouragement, I should like to remind the Minister that he will get no licence-fees from horses. He draws an annual licence-fee from greyhounds. I would like to remind him that there is a considerable trade between this country and England and America in greyhounds. I refrained from speaking about this matter, because the first thing that would be said by Minister, and, perhaps, by some members of the public, would be that I am an interested party. I am an interested party. I frankly admit that. For that reason, I have refrained from saying much about coursing, and I do not propose to say much now. But I might inform the Minister that I have sold six dogs this year to America, costing as much as two racehorses. Other people—small people, and not the people who own thoroughbred studs—are dependent, to a great extent, on the breeding of good greyhounds. More than ten greyhounds have been sold out of this country for £400 each quite recently. If the Minister does not regard this as an asset I think he is badly misinformed.

Coursing is the sport of the poor people. It is the sport of the peasant and it is a very mild form of sport. Does the Minister desire that the plainer element of the community be denied their sport? He seemed to be more favourable to racing. His mind appeared to be absolutely directed against coursing. There are very few lords or people with incomes interested in coursing or trying to make a living out of the breeding of greyhounds. Quite a lot of money is invested in greyhounds. A lot of money has been invested within the last ten years in the hope that this enterprise would be a national asset. Might I remind the Minister that some people invested £2,000 in greyhounds and tried to bring decent blood into the country. They have succeeded in that, with the result that Irish greyhounds to-day can compete with any greyhounds in regard to price. They are commanding prices in London and elsewhere equal to the best in the world. That is due to the enterprise of a few people. I hope the Minister will extend the invitation he has given to Deputy Shaw to the representatives of coursing to hear their case. If he does, I am sure they will be able to supply him with facts and figures which he is not at present in possession of.

This is a personal matter with me, and I have refrained, therefore, from entering into it. But when I listened to what amounted almost to sneers and jibes on the part of the Minister, I was forced to stand up and give him some slight indication of the position. When he spoke about a tax on the betting in respect of coursing, I said the other day that it did not matter. That is true to a very large extent. The class of people who engage in bookmaking at coursing meetings are not very liberal in their odds. There is not very much money, perhaps, involved. At the same time, this drain will be sufficient to put an end to all betting on coursing and, if it does not kill coursing within a month, it will certainly kill it within three months. The Minister would do well to extend the facilities he has offered to the representatives of racing to the representatives of coursing.

Mr. P.S. DOYLE

I should like to ask the Minister if he has given any attention to the system of betting known as jockey-coupon betting. There is an extensive trade done in that line, and I think it should come within the scope of the tax.

Mr. NOONAN

I think the Minister has met the situation fairly with regard to horse racing. I should like, however, if he would give more attention to the point raised by Deputy Gorey. Coursing meetings are organised by the peasant and poorer class and, if there is a tax put on coursing, it will become extinct in a very short time. The introduction of the totalisator to race courses will, undoubtedly, be a great advantage, and the liberal offer made by the Minister, in the way of subsidising stakes, will go a long way in making this tax a very popular one. In this matter, the Minister is like the man who speculates to accumulate. The people have been heavily taxed on other matters, and I think it is a wise policy to attempt to get a tax-return from racing. However, I would urge the Minister to adopt a different attitude towards coursing meetings.

Mr. JOHN DALY

I agree with the views expressed by Deputy Gorey——

Mr. BAXTER

In regard to game cocks.

Mr. DALY

I hope the day is not far distant when game cocks will be allowed to fight in this country and get a death according to their nature, rather than having the head wrung off them by a cook. In my own district, greyhound-breeding is an industry. Very close to me at home a man bred a litter of pups, which he can sell at seven guineas each. The farmers have reason to be jealous, because he will make more out of these pups than they would make out of a litter of bonhams. Again, as Deputy Gorey has pointed out, this is the poor man's sport. It is the sport of the clerk and of the business man and of every other class who go out to the meetings on Sundays. Poor people who otherwise would be tempted to kill a hare in order to make a few shillings will not touch the animal on account of coursing. They all meet upon Sundays. It is a splendid thing to see them meet and select the best dogs at the meeting.

If this betting tax gets as far as the coursing field, I agree with Deputy Shaw that, if not in a month, then in three months, or in six months, you will have coursing killed. It would be a pity if the Irish Cup should go up to the North of Ireland. You could hardly call it an Irish Cup then even though it were won by an Irish dog. When the Minister for Finance gives this matter cool consideration, I hope he will be as well disposed towards coursing as he is towards racing. Then you have a lot of poor bookmakers concerned. They have a grievance. Of course, you have honest men and rogues in every occupation. The means of living may be taken from these book-makers and their families may be left starving. They have decent families too—some of them. For that reason, I would ask the Minister for Finance to reconsider the whole matter, as far as coursing is concerned, and not to impose this tax on the poor man and the poor man's sport. If he has a good dog to-day that may bring him £300 or £400 in a few years, he may have to scrap him simply because the industry and the sport will become extinct.

Mr. DAVIN

Will the Minister say what proportions of the £200,000 of estimated revenue from this tax will be derived respectively from racing and from coursing?

Mr. BLYTHE

I have no material that would justify me in attempting to analyse the figures in that way. I do not know anything about the matter that Deputy Doyle mentioned regarding jockey coupons. I have given no consideration to it. With regard to coursing, I stated that the tax on betting was decided on as a luxury tax. We raise our taxation mainly from necessities. We tax the very poorest people—even people who are destitute —in regard to the clothes they have to buy and the sugar they have to consume. We, even indirectly, tax them, to some extent, on the rent of their houses, by means of income tax procedure.

We tax all the poorest people of the country on their necessities, and we impose a tax where anything in the nature of a luxury can be found that will yield a revenue. It is desirable that the tax should be on a luxury rather than on a necessity. It was because of that belief and that feeling that we decided on a tax on betting. Having decided on a tax on betting, the reason that we felt inclined to give some concessions in favour of horse-racing was that we were satisfied that horse-racing was essential to the success of horse-breeding, and that horse-breeding is an important industry. Consequently, while we were imposing a luxury tax, we did not want that tax to fall unjustly on an industry.

Mr. GOREY

The same applies to coursing.

Mr. BLYTHE

I do not say that. I am willing to meet anybody connected with coursing and to give consideration fairly to any facts he may put up. It does not strike me, and I do not think that it will strike the ordinary citizen, that there is any great economic value in coursing, but I am willing to see the facts, as Deputies put them up, and give them fair consideration. I trust, however, that Deputy Daly is not going to suggest that gamecock fighting should be exempt from the tax.

Resolution put and agreed to.

Mr. BLYTHE

I would like to ask for leave to postpone Resolution 5. The resolution and the section of the Bill provide for the delivery from bond in even dozens. We find that the practice in the trade has been to withdraw cases containing 128 bottles, which is not an even number of dozens, so that I am afraid a slight amendment will be necessary, and I accordingly ask leave to postpone the resolution.

Resolution No. 5, by leave, not moved.

Resolution ordered to be reported.

The Dáil went out of Committee.

Resolutions reported.

Mr. BLYTHE

I move:—

Go mbeidh sé mar Threoir don Choiste ar an mBille Airgid, 1926, go bhfuil sé de chomhacht acu socrú do dhéanamh ann do réir na Rún Nua Airgid.

That it be an Instruction to the Committee on the Finance Bill, 1926, that they have power to make provision therein pursuant to the Additional Financial Resolutions.

Motion put and agreed to.