I do not want to say very much. I only want to ask a few questions. Has the Parliamentary Secretary got any information with regard to the fabled thousand men that are going to be disemployed if this tariff is not put on? What are the facts in connection with it? The extent of the claim made by the Minister for Industry and Commerce was that the thousand men who were employed in the artificial manure industry would not probably be kept for as long a period if this tariff were not imposed. What evidence had the Minister then and what evidence has come to hand since? I disputed his contention then and I dispute it now. There was no complaint in the industry at all with regard to unemployment. Have any circumstances arisen since whereby you would be justified in putting this extra charge on agriculture? This charge amounts, in my opinion, to something very nearly approaching £200,000. That sum is to be given to the artificial manure manufacturers of this country and taken out of the pockets of the agricultural community. Has anything happened since this was introduced? Has not the position changed? Is not the Parliamentary Secretary conscious of the change that has taken place consequent on this economic war? Is not the Parliamentary Secretary aware that the capacity of the agricultural community to purchase manures has been considerably lessened since then? Does it not strike the Parliamentary Secretary that there will be no phosphates at all used next year or that there will be very little used? Does he realise that the quantity will be reduced by 50 per cent. and possibly nearly 100 per cent.? Is there any dispute with regard to the total of the imports that have come in this year. We were told that in the first three months of this year 5,000 cwts. more artificial manures were imported than in the previous year. The year has now expired and phosphates coming into the country must be totalled. What is the total now? Is it anything in excess of the 32,000 tons that normally came? Some great play was made about the fact that for the first three months of this year the shipments of phosphates to this country were something higher than usual— a little more than the normal. What were the shipments for the whole period? The Minister ought to be able to have the figures.
Finance Bill, 1932—From the Seanad (resumed—recommendation No. 9).
I have opposed this tax since its introduction, because it is inflicting a grave hardship over a large area in my constituency. I am convinced that this is the most unjust tax that has ever been introduced in the Dáil. In my constituency a large area of land requires annually to be manured in order to maintain business for the farmer. For the last ten years we have bought fertilisers in County Limerick in bulk. I have been, to a great extent, the medium through which the distribution of fertilisers has taken place. I can say that during the ten years I have purchased imported fertilisers at 15/- to £1 a ton less than we would pay if we were purchasing the home - manufactured stuff. If this tax were in force last spring, when I purchased 500 tons of superphosphates, it would mean that instead of every 100 tons that I did buy I would be able to purchase only 80 tons.
The Minister, in defending this tax, told us that he had the advice of the Department of Agriculture. During the last ten years the Department of Agriculture has taken samples of the manures we purchased. I can say truthfully that the manures were at all times in excess of the standard required. If the Department of Agriculture suggested the imposition of this tax, then it is not serving the country as it should serve it. It was further stated by the Minister that farmers purchased the home - manufactured manures, but they did not do so for patriotic motives. I can say that I was inclined to give a preference to the home-manufactured article and I offered to pay a superior price to the agents of the home-manufacturers to the extent of 3/- a ton, but there was nothing doing.
Since I came to the Dáil I have listened to Deputies on both sides of the House presuming to advocate the farmers' case. I say that this is the most unjust tax that was ever inflicted on the people. The farmer who goes into the Division Lobby to vote for this tax on imported fertilisers is not serving his constituents properly. I appeal to the Minister, even at the eleventh hour, not to inflict this hardship on the farming community. If the Minister fails to do the right thing, then I appeal to farmer Deputies on the back benches to stand by their constituents and insist that this injustice will not be done.
This is the first occasion on which I have intervened in a debate in the Dáil. I claim to represent as many farmers in the County Limerick as does Deputy O'Shaughnessy. I can say without any hesitation that the farming community are entirely opposed to the importation of manures, particularly when that importation is to the detriment of the home-manufactured article. Deputy O'Shaughnessy is not representing the true feelings of the farmers in County Limerick when he says that they are not prepared to make some sacrifice in the present economic crisis. The farmers of this country have obtained a butter bounty and I think it is only just that they should be called upon to give a little in return. I may say that we are prepared to give some little return for the butter bounty we have got. We are prepared to support home manufacture. We are anxious to give Irish manufactures a chance, at least in County Limerick.
In preparation for this debate I read with great care the very long discussion which took place here previously. I assume the decision of the House in this matter on a former occasion was taken with full knowledge of all the arguments which were then delivered. I listened very carefully to the debate yesterday and to-day to see if anything new would be said. I have not heard anything new said. So far as I can see, the position is exactly the same. The speeches which were made on the Second Reading and on the Committee Stage, and which were repeated in the Seanad, have been repeated here again; there has been no change whatsoever. The reasonableness of the arguments put forward can be judged by the speeches we have heard.
This thing, according to somebody, is going to cost £200,000. The same Deputy says that there will be no phosphates used. How it is going to cost £200,000, or even 200 cents, if there are no phosphates used, I am hanged if I can understand. One statement or the other is absolutely, stupidly false. Either the statement that no phosphates are going to be used or that this tax upon phosphates is going to cost £200,000 is stupidly false. I think such statements are a fairly good criterion of the whole position. We were told that it is a most unjust tax. I have heard that statement in relation to every single tax that has come up here. I heard it in relation to income tax, to the tax on tea, to the tax on everything. We have simply had a repetition of speeches made here on other occasions. No new facts or considerations were put before the House. Therefore, I ask Deputies, with full knowledge of the case upon which they previously rejected this proposal, to reject it again.
Tá
- Aiken, Frank.
- Allen, Denis.
- Bartley, Gerald.
- Beegan, Patrick.
- Blaney, Neal.
- Boland, Gerald.
- Boland, Patrick.
- Bourke, Daniel.
- Brady, Bryan.
- Breathnach, Cormac.
- Briscoe, Robert.
- Browne, William Frazer.
- Carney, Frank.
- Carty, Frank.
- Clery, Mícheál.
- Colbert, James.
- Cooney, Eamonn.
- Corry, Martin John.
- Crowley, Fred. Hugh.
- Crowley, Tadhg.
- Curran, Patrick Joseph.
- Davin, William.
- Derrig, Thomas.
- De Valera, Eamon.
- Dowdall, Thomas P.
- Everett, James.
- Flinn, Hugo V.
- Flynn, Stephen.
- Fogarty, Andrew.
- Gibbons, Seán.
- Gormley, Francis.
- Gorry, Patrick Joseph.
- Goulding, John.
- Harris, Thomas.
- Hogan, Patrick (Clare).
- Jordan, Stephen.
- Kelly, James Patrick.
- Kennedy, Michael Joseph.
- Keyes, Raphael Patrick.
- Kilroy, Michael.
- Kissane, Eamonn.
- Lynch, James B.
- McEllistrim, Thomas.
- Maguire, Conor Alexander.
- Moane, Edward.
- Moore, Séamus.
- Murphy, Patrick Stephen.
- O'Grady, Séan.
- O'Reilly, Matthew.
- O'Reilly, Thomas J.
- O'Rourke, Daniel.
- Powell, Thomas P.
- Rice, Edward.
- Ruttledge, Patrick J.
- Ryan, Robert.
- Sexton, Martin.
- Sheehy, Timothy.
- Sheridan, Michael.
- Smith, Patrick.
- Traynor, Oscar.
- Walsh, Richard.
- Ward, Francis C. (Dr.).
Níl
- Beckett, James Walter.
- Bennett, George Cecil.
- Blythe, Ernest.
- Broderick, William Jos.
- Brodrick, Séan.
- Byrne, John Joseph.
- Collins-O'Driscoll, Mrs. Margt.
- Conlon, Martin.
- Cosgrave, William T.
- Davis, Michael.
- Desmond, William.
- Dillon, James M.
- Dockrell, Henry Morgan.
- Doherty, Eugene.
- Duggan, Edmund John.
- Esmonde, Osmond Grattan.
- Finlay, Thomas A.
- Fitzgerald, Desmond.
- Fitzgerald-Kenney, James.
- Good, John.
- Gorey, Denis John.
- Hennigan, John.
- Hogan, Patrick (Galway).
- Keating, John.
- McDonogh, Fred.
- Minch, Sydney B.
- Mongan, Joseph W.
- Mulcahy, Richard.
- Myles, James Sproule.
- Nally, Martin.
- O'Leary, Daniel.
- O'Mahony, The.
- O'Shaughnessy, John Joseph.
- O'Sullivan, John Marcus.
- Roddy, Martin.
- Thrift, William Edward.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in recommendation No. 11:—
First Schedule. Ref. No. 35. Fifth column. To insert the words "Whenever the Minister for Finance, after consultation with the Minister for Industry and Commerce, is satisfied that any rowing boat or gear appertaining thereto, which in the opinion of the Revenue Commissioners is constructed, designed and intended for racing purposes, is not obtainable or likely to be obtainable in Saorstát Eireann, the Revenue Commissioners may by licence authorise any person, subject to such conditions as they may think fit to impose, to import the said article without payment of duty either, as the Revenue Commissioners shall think proper, without limit as to time or quantity, or either of them, or within a specified time, or in a specified quantity."
This recommendation refers to racing boats. I understand that only a small number of them are imported into the country and representations have been made that there is not at the present moment the actual technical skill and equipment for making these racing boats of that particular quality. The Government is prepared to agree to the exemption of these boats, but not as a permanent thing. The intention is to give the exemption for this year, and it will be up to boating clubs and others who are interested in this matter to co-operate in seeing that it will not be necessary to do this on another occasion. A concession is being made in this matter, but it is in that spirit and in that spirit the acceptance of the recommendation is recommended to the Dáil.
I should like to point out to the Parliamentary Secretary that this industry is in its infancy in Athlone, on the Shannon, for one place, and that he should carefully consider fostering it.
I am very glad to hear that. We did not know that, and every effort will be made to foster the industry. It is with a considerable sense of responsibility that this particular concession is made. It is made for the purpose of tiding over any difficulties that might arise during this year, but we hope that it will not be necessary to make the concession for a second year.
I move "That the Committee do not agree with the Seanad in recommendation No. 12":—
Second Schedule. To delete Ref. No. 3, including relevant references in columns 2, 3, 4 and 5.
Recommendation No. 13 is governed by the decision on No. 5.
Recommendation declared rejected.