We are opposed to the voting of this money, in the first place, because we object on principle to the establishment of a Tariff Commission of this kind at all. I do not intend to deal with that matter at any length now as, presumably, I would not be in order in doing so. We think that the economic circumstances that exist in this State require the establishment of machinery for the consideration of applications for protection of an entirely different nature to that created under the Tariff Commission Act. We are opposed to the Tariff Commission not merely on principle but also in practice. We think that the existing body has proved itself extremely dilatory and, in so far as it is dilatory, incompetent in its work. The attitude of the members of the Commission towards applications for tariffs appears to be that it is their duty to make a case against the application except where the case for it is so clear that it cannot be opposed with any show of common-sense at all. In other words, the bias of the members of the Commission appears to be definitely free trade. Their attitude is similar to that of the Minister for Finance, namely, that tariffs should not be imposed except where the case for a tariff is overwhelming. That attitude is wrong. It should be in favour of protecting Irish industries except where it can be shown that the steps proposed in regard to any application would be more disadvantageous than advantageous to Irish industry. We expressed the opinion before that this body was established to impede rather than to facilitate the imposition of tariffs. It has worked out that way.
The Minister did not tell us what applications are now pending or in the process of being heard by the Commission. I would be glad if he would do so and also if he would indicate the various stages of decomposition which the different applications have reached. I would like if he would tell us when he expects to have the report on the application of the coach builders. As he is aware, it is almost four years since that application was made. It is certainly over three years since it was referred to the Tariff Commission, and the loss in wages to Irish workers occasioned by the delay in reporting on the application has been estimated at over £1,000,000. In reply to a Parliamentary Question a few minutes ago the Minister for Finance admitted that the report on the application of the coachbuilders had been further delayed by the fact that the members of the Tariff Commission were appointed to conduct the Grain Inquiry. At the time that the Minister was proposing to establish the Grain Inquiry the fact that the appointment of these members would have that effect was forcibly pointed out from these benches, but the Minister took no notice. We now find that the unemployment and the wastage of capital occasioned by the Commission's delay will be continued for another period. There is work available in this country for almost 2,000 additional workers in the coach-building industry, if that industry is given an opportunity of developing here. Deputies are no doubt aware that we have the facilities for developing that industry, but for three years it has been steadily declining while its representatives have been appearing before the Tariff Commission and pleading in vain for a speedy decision on their application. Those engaged in the industry estimate that the loss in wages to Irish workers last year alone, due to the fact that protection was not afforded, was £400,000. There is not a tremendous amount of money available for the payment of wages to Irish workers, and such loss is particularly serious in present circumstances.
I think that the Commission would be well advised either to scrap the Commission altogether and to get back to the position that existed before its establishment or to do as we suggest and establish not one but two Commissions so that the work could be expedited. I would also be glad to know if the Minister would tell us the position in regard to the application for a duty on wrapping paper and whether there was any prospect of the report being available in a short time, within six or twelve months. The Minister should also inform us of the progress of the Grain Inquiry. Although there is no provision for that inquiry in the Estimate, the fact that members of the Tariff Commission are also conducting the work of the Grain Inquiry is impeding the work of the Commission. The progress made in regard to the Grain Inquiry will indicate whether anything can be done next year or whether all the time of the Commission is to be devoted to dealing with special inquiries. No matter what the answer of the Minister is, we are dissatisfied with the result of the Commission's work and will vote against the Estimate.
