Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 19 Oct 1932

Vol. 44 No. 1

Financial Resolutions. - Financial Resolution No. 7—General.

That it is expedient to amend the law relating to customs.

Minister for Industry and Commerce (Mr. Lemass)

When the various tariffs which were introduced in the Budget were under consideration we found ourselves up against applications for protection from various industries on which it was impossible to arrive at a decision in the time then available. All such applications were postponed and examined in detail later, when more time was available. It is as a result of that detailed examination of applications which offered elements of particular difficulty that these Resolutions are being submitted to the House. Most of the duties imposed are of minor importance in so far as the articles to which they relate are not articles consumed in very great quantities in the country. Some of them, however, can be considered of considerable importance, in so far as they are likely to afford considerably increased employment in the industries affected. In addition to the duties imposed in consequence of that detailed examination of the difficult applications to which I refer, it is also proposed under these Resolutions to effect some minor changes in the duties which were imposed in the Finance Act in consequence of our experience of the working of that Act during the intervening period.

It will, perhaps, be information for Deputies if I indicate the particular category under which the various duties arise. I presume they will desire to have an opportunity of examining them in greater detail and ascertaining information relating to the industries affected before discussing them at length. Any particular point of information desired will be supplied as far as it is possible to do so. The first Resolution contains the Schedule. The duties imposed by it are on coloured knitting yarns, 22½ per cent. with a Preference of 15 per cent. The second is upon any metal which is subject to another duty, and which is imported with an inscription engraved. It is subject to an additional 15 per cent. and 10 per cent., the purpose of the duty being to have increased engraving done in this country. The third relates to date stamps and marking stamps made wholly or partly of rubber or containing parts of such the duty being 50 per cent. with a preference rate of 10 per cent. Resolution 4 concerns springs for mattresses, cushions, settees, and light articles of furniture. The duty applies only to single springs. Assembled springs are already subject to duty. Number 5 deals with spectacles, monocles and other eye-glasses, the duty being 50 per cent. with a preference rate of 33? per cent. Number 6 refers to cuff-links, studs, hinge pins and ear-rings and component parts thereof made wholly or mainly of brass, bronze, or gun-metal, or a combination of any of those metals the duty being 30 per cent. with a preference rate of 20 per cent. Number 7 deals with certain specified articles of gold, silver and electro plate. Number 8 relates to glue and size, the duty being 50 per cent. with a preference of 33? per cent. with a licence clause. The necessity for the licence clause is on a certain type of size not produced here, and which it is necessary to allow to come in. It is not possible to get a definition of that particular size which will permit of its being distinguished from other classes of size which it is desired to make subject to duty. Number 9 relates to fillers and flats for egg boxes imported separately, the duty being 30 per cent. with a preference of 20 per cent. Number 10 deals with pipes made wholly or mainly of clay. Number 11 relates to picture frames wholly or mainly of wood, and pictures in frames made wholly or mainly of wood, excluding pictures which are imported temporarily for exhibition or which are imported for a public picture gallery. Picture frames were heretofore subject to duty as furniture. It is necessary to have this Resolution because certain difficulties arose out of pictures being imported as such, the frames being imported with the pictures and consequently evading duty as picture frames. Number 12 relates to coffin plates of metal.

Mr. Morrissey

Let the dead rest.

Mr. Lemass

At least let them be buried in Irish coffins.

Mr. McGilligan

With plates of metal.

Mr. Lemass

Number 13 deals with sheet lead and lead piping. It is proposed to delete the relevant reference in the Finance Act and to substitute the reference here, 15 per cent. and 10 per cent. Similarly it is proposed to delete from the Finance Act the reference by which a duty was imposed on certain articles of brass and tin. I mentioned when the section was being discussed that we had considerable difficulty in procuring what we desired to have, a specific list of brass articles which it was desirable to make subject to duty. Consequently we went the other way; we imposed a general duty at a low rate exempting articles which should be exempted. That did not work satisfactorily. In any case, during the adjournment we have had an opportunity of going into the question with much greater care, and, as a result, we are able to produce a specific list of brass articles which are and can be made here, and which it is desired to protect. It is intended to increase the duty on these articles in the case of church brasswork to 75 per cent with a preference of 50 per cent., and in the case of other articles to 50 per cent. with a preference rate of 33? per cent., and to remove the duty from other articles of brass.

Mr. Cosgrave

What are milk pumps?

Mr. Lemass

Part of the machinery used in creameries.

Mr. Cosgrave

Does this refer to milking machines?

Mr. Lemass

Milk pumps made of brass.

Mr. Cosgrave

Does it refer to milking machines?

Mr. Lemass

No. Number 15 is inserted in consequence of what I have said. The relevant reference in the Finance Act will be deleted, but it is necessary to re-enact in the Resolution the part of the Bill dealing with articles made of tin or tin plate. Number 16 is a duty on articles of manufactured woodwork which was imposed in the Finance Act. With certain changes, the entire reference in the Finance Act will cease to operate, and the new section will operate instead. This duty will apply to all plain and dressed timber. It will also apply to mouldings and to margarine boxes, egg boxes and in fact to all types of boxes except pyramid butter boxes. It will also apply to butter kegs and casks, and, in addition, one or two minor exceptions have been made. These are specified in the list in the fifth column, but are of no particular importance.

Mr. Dillon

Is it to apply to component parts of egg boxes?

Mr. Lemass

Yes. No. 17 imposes a duty upon the component parts (excluding road springs) of all wheeled vehicles which, in the opinion of the Revenue Commissioners, are designed, constructed and primarily intended to be drawn by an animal or by two or more animals, and to be used for the carriage of persons or for the carriage of goods or for the carriage of both persons and goods. Under the Finance (No. 2) Act we imposed a duty on unassembled parts. It is now decided to bring unassembled parts under the duty.

No. 18 imposes a similar duty on unassembled iron and steel parts for bodies of motor omnibuses, motor charabancs and commercial motor vehicles. These were exempted under the Finance (No. 2) Act and it is now decided to make them subject to duty.

No. 19 doubles the duty on worked stone. That has been made necessary for a few reasons, the principal of which is that information has reached the Department that exporters of worked marble, who also control to a large extent the supplies of unworked marble, have countered the duties imposed by us by increasing the price of the unworked marble. This duty will operate as a protective measure.

No. 20 imposes 50 per cent. full and 33? per cent. preferential on flock.

Mr. Morrissey

Will the Minister explain what is meant by flock?

Mr. Lemass

Flock is a substance used for filling mattresses. No. 21 increases the duty on roof felting and similar substitutes. The small duties imposed by the Finance Act were countered by the importers reducing their prices and it has been decided consequently to increase the amount of the duty.

No. 22 similarly increases the duty on cordage, cables, ropes and twines, which industry has been making considerable progress.

No. 23 imposes 22½ per cent. full, and 15 per cent preferential duty on undyed jute yarns.

No. 24 imposes a duty of 37½ per cent. full and 25 per cent. preferential upon jute piece goods exceeding 4½ ounces in weight per square yard, but excluding jute piece goods of the following descriptions:—bleached jute piece goods, dyed jute piece goods, carpets, and jute piece goods imported with goods of which they form packing.

No. 25 imposes a duty of 50 per cent. full and 33? per cent. preference on heel plates, of horseshoe shape, made of iron or steel or of both iron and steel for boots and shoes. The necessity for that duty arises out of the fact that a factory for the manufacture of these heel plates is about to commence, but as we have good reason to believe that the announcement of the establishment of this factory would result in very substantial importations of these goods into the country to such an extent as would be sufficient for three or four years' supply and that consequently the factory project would fall through, it has been decided to impose this duty with a licence provision. Under this licence provision, we will permit the normal quantity of these goods to come in until the factory starts production and is able to supply the needs, when the duty will come up for reconsideration.

No. 2 Resolution differs only in so far as the duties imposed are specific and not ad valorem. On vinegar there is a duty of 2/- per gallon full and 1/6d. per gallon preferential. The duty on custard powders of 60/-per cwt. full and 45/- per cwt. preferential is not a new duty but a transforming of an emergency duty into a permanent duty. On filled Christmas stockings, snowballs, Easter eggs, and similar articles there is a duty of 3d. each full, and 2d. each preferential, in addition to any other duty that may be chargeable.

Mr. Anthony

The Minister is putting a tariff on snowballs and Easter eggs. Does he propose to put anything on election eggs?

Mr. Lemass

Is the Deputy applying for a tariff on election eggs? We are willing to afford all reasonable protection.

There is a duty on sausage meal of 1½d. per lb. full and 1d. per lb. preferential. The duty on compositions made of plaster of paris in sheets or slabs is doubled. There is a duty upon sparking plugs of 1/6d. each full and 1/- each preferential rate. There is also a duty on empty sacks and bags made of jute. The full duty is an amount equal to 37½ per cent. of the value of the article or 1½d. on each sack or bag whichever is the greater. The preferential rate is an amount equal to 25 per cent. of the value of the article or 1d. on each sack or bag whichever is the greater. It is intended to permit the importation of unconditioned secondhand sacks where such importation is done by a conditioning firm in the Saorstát. It was found impossible to provide for that in specific words because of drafting difficulties, and consequently the licensing provision is here. It is also intended to exercise that licensing provision to ensure that no firm utilising sacks and bags will be left without supplies. There is in this country one very large and highly efficient jute factory but it is not at the moment fully equipped to supply the whole requirements of the country. A type of machinery is being installed there to produce goods which in the past and at present are mainly imported. Arrangements to supply the full requirements of the country are at present being made. In the meantime there might be a shortage in which case the licence provision will be operated to meet the shortage.

Section 3 increases the duty upon shirts and collars and the component parts and accessories of same, on silk embroidered handkerchiefs and the component parts and accessories of such handkerchiefs, on all underclothing of silk including crêpe de chine, spun silk and Japanese silk intended for use by women, girls or children.

The Fourth Resolution deals with harness, and leather manufactured into harness.

Resolution Five deals with the imposition of duties which were announced in July last on bread, biscuits, buns and cakes imported into Saorstát Eireann. When the announcement of the intention of imposing those duties was made reference was made to the fact that there was some possibility of the supply of bread in Donegal by the bakers existing there proving inadequate. We satisfied ourselves that in every other part of the Saorstát a supply of bread was available, but there was considerable doubt as to the position in Donegal. The position in Donegal has not substantially altered in the meantime, A new bakery is being constructed and some extensions are being made in others in respect of existing bakeries, but there is a deficiency in the productive capacity. Consequently to put a duty or an imposition on bread immediately in Donegal might mean that there would be a shortage of bakers' bread. That might not be a serious thing in itself unless it came suddenly because in Donegal a large part of the bread is home baked, and, more than likely, the people would be able to supply their needs from home baked bread. It is proposed to impose the duty there as from next Wednesday, and in operating it to take power to issue licensing provisions to enable importers in Donegal to secure whatever quantity of bread may be necessary, while arrangements are being made to meet the requirements of the county from other parts of the county or from other parts of the Saorstát.

These are all the main changes that are being effected. I explained the circumstances and the necessity for changing the words. If Deputies desire any additional information or to discuss the proposal at greater length the opportunity will arise upon the General Resolution which can be postponed to a date which may be considered convenient to the main Resolutions when they come before us on Report Stage.

Mr. Morrissey

Would the Minister consider, in order to assist Deputies and people in the country, the necessity of issuing a list of goods that are not being tariffed if there are any such?

Mr. Lemass

There are quite a sufficient number. If you take the goods imported into this country free last year you would find a very large list in relation to goods upon which tariffs were imposed since this Government came into office. The Deputy would find that, apart from tariffed articles, three-fifths of the goods of the country are not subject to any tariff percentage.

Mr. Morrissey

That is not my point. I am asking for the information of the House, and for getting nearer to the exact position, whether the Minister will consider issuing a list of goods imported into the country which are not subjected to tariffs.

Mr. Lemass

No.

Mr. McGilligan

Would the Minister say whether these series of Resolutions generally represent remission more than imposition of duty? There is a balance between the two.

Mr. Lemass

There is a balance, but on the whole there is imposition of duty.

Mr. McGilligan

The balance is more in relation to the imposition. With regard to sausage meal I would like to know if it is a fact that a certificate is given to certain people to introduce into the country, free, a cheap type of casing?

Mr. Lemass

Not that I am aware of, but I have no jurisdiction in that matter.

Mr. McGilligan

Why not? Surely a licence cannot be issued without the Minister giving his permission. That is the duty of the Minister.

Mr. Lemass

I am afraid I do not get the Deputy's point.

Mr. McGilligan

My point is that if there is anything liable for duty under the Resolution it can only be exempted by a certificate from the Minister.

Mr. Lemass

No.

Mr. McGilligan

If the Minister wishes to license remissions it is his duty to do so.

Mr. Lemass

I would not like to say that.

Mr. McGilligan

Supposing the Finance Bill contained power to the Minister to grant remissions in certain cases may I take it that where a duty is imposed by the Statute the Department carries out that duty and not the Minister himself?

Mr. Lemass

The licensing powers we have secured under the Finance Act have been very freely used, but in particular cases where either we find that items are being brought in subject to a duty but which it was not intended to make subject to a duty, or where a license provision was inserted because it was not possible to get a definition of the article we wanted to exempt, then the Department were given general jurisdiction in regard to the matter. That applied particularly in the case of cellulose, which is a paint used in manufacture. It is impossible to get a definition that will include every object. We have a duty on paints. We desire to protect those made here. If restrictions had to be set out on all such cases the thing would be impossible.

Mr. McGilligan

The Minister decided on categories more or less and leaves specific examples to his Department, but the Statute imposed duties on the Minister which he should have carried out under the Statute.

Mr. Cosgrave

Would it be possible for the Minister to compile a memorandum of duties, setting forth some explanation for the reason of the retention of the taxes where they are made and for the imposition of the taxes where further impositions are made? There is an item, for instance I think it is in No. 15 or at the end of No. 14, where it says that a duty of 1/- shall be charged or levied on the following articles:—"Any religious objects of which the value does not exceed one shilling." Is that retail or wholesale?

Mr. Lemass

Wholesale, I take it. There is no change operated by that particular reference. It is necessary because we are dealing with the general duty on brass and tin articles.

Mr. Cosgrave

Later on the Minister has some remission in 15 (t). It is stated that the duty shall not be charged upon crucifixes. If these crucifixes are gold or silver are they to be subject to a charge? There is a tax on gold or silver.

Mr. Lemass

Unless it is laid on wood. Number 16 only deals with articles of wood.

Mr. Cosgrave

No matter what the value would be? I have seen a crucifix lately which was worth £2. Would that be free of charge?

Mr. Lemass

If it was of gold or silver.

Mr. Cosgrave

But it was of wood pure and simple.

Mr. Lemass

If it was on wood it would be subject to a duty.

Mr. Cosgrave

But Resolution 16 contains an exemption in (t).

Mr. Lemass

Of the duty on crucifixes.

Mr. Cosgrave

But if of gold or silver they would be subject to a tax.

Mr. Lemass

No.

Mr. Cosgrave

What about the previous one in which there is a reference to any articles of gold or silver—manufactured articles?

Mr. Lemass

Oh, no. There is a specific list.

Mr. Cosgrave

"Articles made of gold, silver, electro-plate, brass" and all these things, "and which articles are liable to duty under any other enactment and having engraved thereon at the time of importation lettering of the nature of inscriptions."

Mr. Lemass

I think the Deputy is referring to No. 7.

Mr. Cosgrave

I am referring to No. 2.

Mr. Lemass

No 2 only refers to engravings and the value of the engraved work.

Mr. Cosgrave

If there is an engraving on a gold crucifix it would be subject to duty?

Mr. Lemass

Yes.

Mr. Cosgrave

How then is it worked out as free of duty on another page?

Mr. Lemass

Perhaps I am misleading the Deputy. Where an article is subject to duty and is imported with an inscription engraved on it, then in addition to the duty which has to be paid on itself, a duty has also to be paid on the inscription. The additional duty goes on the inscription. If there is an article imported that is not liable to duty it can be engraved all over and there is no additional duty.

Mr. McGilligan

Are we to assume all that from Reference No. 2? I should like the Minister to read that reference. It says:—

Articles made of gold, silver, electro-plate, platinum, copper, brass, bronze or gunmetal, which articles are liable to duty under any other enactment and have engraved thereon at the time of importation lettering of the nature of inscriptions.

It does not say "if liable to duty."

Mr. Lemass

That is the meaning of it.

Mr. McGilligan

That is what is intended?

Mr. Lemass

Yes.

Mr. McGilligan

The Minister said that the duty imposed would be the value of the engraving, but it is an additional duty, by reason of the engraving, on the value of the article itself that is meant?

Mr. Lemass

It is on the value of the article.

Mr. McGilligan

The engraving is not assessed for duty itself?

Mr. Lemass

Quite so.

Mr. Dillon

Did I understand the Minister to say that the duty applied to the component parts of cubicle egg-boxes?

Mr. Lemass

Quite.

Mr. Dillon

Is the Minister aware that the Department of Agriculture recommends the use of foreign timber for egg boxes?

Mr. Lemass

There is nothing in that particular duty which would prevent the use of foreign timber. That only applies to manufactured boxes or the cut parts.

Mr. Dillon

Provided the unfortunate egg exporter who is already half strangled by Government interference is prepared to pay a further duty on the component parts of 50 per cent. Perhaps the farmers of the country will have something to say about that.

Mr. McGilligan

Is the Minister saying that while the Department of Agriculture recommends the use of these articles made outside he is going to impose a duty on these people?

Mr. Lemass

I am not aware that the Department is doing anything of the kind.

Mr. McGilligan

The Minister is not aware; perhaps he would ask his colleague, the Minister for Agriculture.

Mr. Lemass

Deputy McGilligan should be quite clear that he is quoting Deputy Dillon correctly.

Mr. Dillon

I asked the Minister if he would inquire if that is so.

Mr. Lemass

The Deputy was talking about foreign timber. I am talking about egg boxes.

Mr. Dillon

I am talking about the component parts of egg boxes.

Mr. Lemass

I am quite certain the Department of Agriculture is not recommending the use of foreign-made articles when they can be made here.

Mr. McGilligan

The timber cannot be obtained in Ireland.

Mr. Lemass

They were made here before the Deputy or I was born, and will be made 100 years after he is dead.

Mr. McGilligan

There were thousands of things made here before I was born, such as rush candles, that will never be made again.

Mr. Dockrell

The Minister mentioned under Reference No. 16 planed flooring boards and mouldings. I take it sawn timber is free.

Mr. Lemass

Sawn timber is free. Timber that is merely sawn is free.

Mr. Dockrell

No matter how it is shaped by sawing, it is free; but when it comes to be planed it is dutiable. That is the acid test.

Mr. Lemass

Yes, planed and dressed.

Mr. Dockrell

Are you quite sure of that?

Mr. Lemass

Yes.

Mr. Cosgrave

Would the Minister consider the preparation of a memorandum explaining these various alterations? We have here about 40 pages of Resolutions.

Mr. Lemass

Most of them are only verbiage.

Mr. Cosgrave

The bulk of them deal with the various alterations, and it might possibly shorten the debate if some explanation of the alterations that have been made—something more explicit than what is contained here—and as regards the exemptions or impositions were given. For instance, on the particular page to which I refer it is not quite clear what the actual intention is. The Minister said in answer to Deputy McGilligan that the word "if" should have been inserted but it is not.

Mr. McGilligan

That is what he meant.

Mr. Lemass

If the Deputy means that we should issue a statement as to the precise nature of the changes achieved by each particular reference then I would consider having that done, but if he means a memorandum setting out precisely the articles subject to duty, the state of the industry and so on, that would involve very considerable labour. I would consider the preparation of a memorandum setting out in relation to Reference No. 16, which re-enacts the duty on the woodwork, the various changes and what exactly these changes are.

Mr. Cosgrave

There must have been a case made out in each Department in respect of each tax and there is no reason why it should not be given to the House.

Mr. Lemass

These are reasons which could be given here orally.

Mr. Kelly

Am I to understand that under Reference No. 16 brooms, brushes, churns and toys, are all exempt from duty?

Mr. Lemass

They are exempt from this duty but each one of them, with the exception of toys, is subject to duty under other Acts.

Mr. McGilligan

That is where a memorandum would be useful. Machinery is subject to duty under other Acts but we have also parts of machinery which are subject to duty under this.

Mr. Lemass

It would be very difficult to have a general definition of machinery.

Mr. McGilligan

Surely if it is difficult for the Minister with his staffs it is doubly difficult for people outside. Surely it would be possible to put a warning note opposite such articles "See such and such an Act."

Mr. Little

I should like to ask on behalf of some people in Waterford whether there is a duty on apple barrels?

Mr. Lemass

Not by this Resolution.

Mr. Good

I should like the Minister to furnish some explanation of what woodwork is included and what is exempted under Reference No. 16. I have been reading through it and I am not quite sure whether scaffolding poles or telegraph poles are subject to duty or are exempted.

Mr. Lemass

I would remind the Deputy that the schedule to the Finance Act reads as follows:

Articles manufactured wholly or partly of wood or timber (not including planed or dressed wood or timber, mouldings, staves, sleepers, scaffolding poles, telegraph and telephone poles, plywood and veneer, imported as such).

We have deleted the words "planed or dressed wood or timber, mouldings, staves," so that the schedule now reads: "articles manufactured wholly or partly of wood or timber (not including staves (other than staves for butter casks, kegs and barrels) sleepers, scaffolding poles ..." I stated specifically that they are not included.

Mr. Good

The Minister surely can see that a person, in order to be in a position to know whether such an item as I have referred to is subject to duty or not, would need to have the two schedules before him.

Mr. Lemass

No, it is to avoid that that we are doing it in this way. When the Act, giving effect to this Resolution comes into force, the particular part of the Act that I have referred to will go out of force. We are re-enacting the entire reference with the changes that we desire in it. The duty will apply to all manufactured articles of wood, of any kind, except the articles specifically excluded.

Mr. Good

Whether sawn or planed?

Mr. Lemass

All manufactured articles, "whether wholly or partly of wood."

Mr. Good

Let us suppose, for argument's sake, that one got portion of a barrow. It would be sawn, but it might be held at the same time to be a manufactured article.

Mr. Lemass

Portion of a barrel?

Mr. Good

Portion of a barrow. I do not know whether it would be subject to duty or not, and I am not quite sure that the Minister knows.

Mr. Lemass

I am certain it would be subject to duty.

Mr. McGilligan

If only sawn?

Mr. Lemass

Wood that is merely sawn is not subject to duty.

Mr. McGilligan

That is the point.

Mr. Lemass

I am quite prepared to meet the point raised by Deputy Cosgrave; that is, to try and have prepared some type of explanatory memorandum, the scope of which will be merely to indicate changes in the law which this Resolution purports to make.

Mr. Dillon

Arising out of what the Minister has said with reference to the preparation of an explanatory memorandum, might I remind him that I asked him on the Budget whether cotton blankets were subject to a duty or not? He protested that they were not. They are a commodity used very much by the very poor. The Minister overlooked the fact that in the next section of the Budget he put a substantial duty on sheets. Having consciously removed the duty from blankets he popped it on to sheets, with the result that while cotton blankets are, as such, duty free, they are apparently subject to duty as cotton sheets.

Mr. McGilligan

They are certainly dutiable.

Mr. Dillon

But I have it on the Minister's statement in the Official Report that they are not.

Mr. McGilligan

On that point——

Mr. Lemass

It does not arise on this.

Mr. McGilligan

The Minister does not deny that he did state to Deputy Dillon that blankets of cotton were not dutiable?

Mr. Lemass

What I said was that the duty on blankets did not apply to blankets of cotton. That was not my interpretation. The duty which was imposed by the Finance Act was more or less an increase of the duty which had been in operation for a number of years. We did not change the definition of the duty. The interpretation of the duty which excluded cotton blankets had been in operation.

Mr. McGilligan

Deputy Dillon made the point that these articles were used by the poor, and he asked if they were going to be dutiable. The Minister's answer was "No." The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance went to the Seanad and said "Yes." The Seanad moved an amendment excluding them, and quoted the statement made by the Minister for Industry and Commerce. Nevertheless, the exclusion proposed by the Seanad was refused and these articles are dutiable.

Mr. Dillon

All this shows the necessity for a memorandum.

Mrs. Collins-O'Driscoll

In connection with the duty of 2/- per gallon on vinegar, would the Minister say if vinegar is manufactured in this country?

Mr. Lemass

Yes, excellently.

Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance (Mr. Flinn)

Any amount of it in this House.

Mrs. Collins-O'Driscoll

I am quite aware of that.

Mr. Lemass

We have quite a number of firms here engaged in the manufacture of vinegar and there is no question of their ability to be able to supply the requirements of the home market.

Mr. McGilligan

With reference to "yarns (other than white yarns) wholly of wool or worsted or of a combination of wool and worsted, which are imported otherwise than in bobbins, cheeses, cones, or cops," I have a few questions to ask. Are white yarns exempt and, if so, why? Secondly, in order to get an exclusion of coloured yarns in this tariff is it only necessary to have it on "bobbins, cheeses, cones or cops" and if so, why?

Mr. Lemass

The difficulty in this case was to get an arrangement by which we could impose a duty on knitting yarn without imposing it on yarn used by the manufacturers of cloth. The definition which we are using seems to meet that. We are excluding from the scope of the duty yarn on bobbins because it is only imported in that form by woollen manufacturers. The net result is to confine the duty to yarn imported for knitting purposes.

Mr. McGilligan

So that if a person wants to engage in the manufacture of knitted goods and to get in the yarn free of duty, all he has to do is to get it wound round a bobbin? Is the position this that a person can evade the duty if he winds the yarn round a bobbin?

Mr. Lemass

If he thinks it worth while.

Mr. Dockrell

I take it that the duty referred to here does not apply to jute sacks coming in filled with other commodities?

Mr. Lemass

No.

Mr. O'Hanlon

I would like to have some information in regard to paragraph (h) under Reference No. 15 to the First Resolution. This paragraph states that a duty "shall not be charged or levied on component parts of type setting machines or of type composing machines." I should like to know whether it is the Minister's intention that the tariff should be put on type and type metals?

Mr. Lemass

They are not subject to duty at present.

Mr. O'Hanlon

But will they come under this, because the exemption seems to apply only to component parts of type setting machines or of type composing machines. Type metal is not a component part of a type setting machine or of type composing machines.

Mr. McGilligan

I would like to get this matter with regard to church articles of different types cleared up. They come under Reference Nos. 2, 7 and 16. Under Reference No. 2, articles made of certain named metals have a liability to duty. They also have imposed on them an additional duty if engraved, and that additional duty is on the value of the article. The question of a crucifix made of one of these valuable metals was raised. Can the Minister conceive of a crucifix which has not an inscription coming in?

Mr. Lemass

A crucifix is not liable to duty.

Mr. McGilligan

If made of gold or silver and inscribed, surely it is. If I import into this country a crucifix made of gold, is it not "an article made of gold?"

Mr. Lemass

Undoubtedly.

Mr. McGilligan

Where is it exempted from duty?

Mr. Lemass

Where is it made liable to duty?

Mr. McGilligan

If engraved—I am putting that qualification all the time. A crucifix made of gold or silver is going to be landed with whatever the duty is here.

Mr. Lemass

Surely not.

Mr. McGilligan

If engraved?

Mr. Lemass

If engraved and liable to duty under any other enactment.

Mr. McGilligan

We are given in No. 7 a list of articles which are of these metals, gold, silver and electro-plate. At (e) we have "plaques of silver." Is a plaque, portion of which is a crucifix which is inscribed, liable to duty under 7 and 2? I think so.

Mr. Lemass

A plaque which is not a crucifix but a plaque——

Mr. McGilligan

But which has a crucifix raised on it. Surely that is liable to duty under No. 7?

Mr. Lemass

Yes.

Mr. McGilligan

If there is an inscription—I cannot conceive any crucifix which has not an inscription—it is liable under No. 2 also?

Mr. Lemass

Yes.

Mr. McGilligan

The exemption later refers to articles which are made of wood, and does not affect these things. These things would be liable to duty in the manner I have described.

Mr. Lemass

Crucifixes are not liable to duty.

Mr. Brasier

Would the Minister be prepared to exempt rope and twine of a special kind which is not manufactured in this country and which is used in fishing?

Mr. Lemass

I shall be glad to get the particulars.

Mr. McGilligan

Item No. 5 deals with "spectacles, monocles and other eye-glasses of which the lenses are under 43 millimetres in diameter or in the greater diameter, and lenses for above which are under 43 millimetres in diameter or in the greater diameter." Will the Minister explain what the limitations on these spectacles, monocles and other eye-glasses are in No. 5?

Mr. Lemass

Spectacles, monocles and other eye-glasses of which the lenses are under 43 millimetres in diameter or in the greater diameter——

Mr. McGilligan

What does that mean?

Mr. Lemass

If they are oval-shaped.

Mr. McGilligan

What is the phrase which means that?

Mr. Lemass

"Greater diameter."

Mr. McGilligan

"In the greater diameter"?

Mr. Lemass

Yes, "and lenses for above which are under 43 millimetres in diameter."

Mr. McGilligan

What is a lens "in the greater diameter?"

Mr. Lemass

That is the measure— under 43 millimetres in the greater diameter.

Mr. Dillon

Did the Minister consult the Department of Agriculture with regard to the tariff imposed on fillers and flats?

Mr. Lemass

Yes.

Mr. Dillon

The Department of Agriculture recommended a tax on fillers and flats for egg boxes although the best type of these articles is not manufactured in this country?

Mr. Lemass

The very best type is manufactured here by the most up-to-date machinery and in the most modern way.

Mr. Dillon

Does the Minister know what the best type is?

Mr. Lemass

Cardboard and straw.

Mr. Dillon

The best type is the cup-shaped type. Does the Minister state that the cup-shaped type is manufactured in this country, or does he know?

Mr. Lemass

I do not.

Mr. Dillon

I think the Minister should know before he puts on a tariff.

Mr. McGilligan

It is going to be made here next week.

Mr. Anthony

Item No. 1 refers to yarns wholly of wool or worsted or of a combination of wool and worsted, which are imported otherwise than on bobbins, cheeses, cones or cops. Does the Minister anticipate that as a result of this tariff the spinning and woollen industry will be further developed and give more employment?

Mr. Lemass

It should operate in that way.

Mr. Anthony

I should like to see it operate in the way the Minister desires, but does not the qualification he makes—"imported otherwise than on bobbins, cheeses, cones or cops"— negative the Minister's own object—to create further employment in the manufacture of these yarns into woollens?

Mr. Lemass

That duty, placed on hand-knitting yarns, does not apply to yarns used in the manufacture of woollen cloths. It is not intended that such yarns should be subject to duty.

Mr. Anthony

In what way does the Minister think that this will create further employment in the woollen industry?

Mr. Lemass

There is quite a considerable trade in hand-knitting yarns.

Mr. Anthony

I think it is infinitesimal.

Mr. Lemass

It is by no means as large or as important as the trade in yarns imported by manufacturers for weaving into cloth. From the examination I have been able to give the matter, there is no case for the imposition of a duty on yarns imported for weaving into cloth.

Mr. Anthony

Is not the Minister aware that the most important end of the work is the spinning of the yarns and that that would give more employment than all the other processes put together?

Mr. Lemass

That has not been established.

Mr. Anthony

Is that not one of the facts which emerge from the report of the Tariff Commission?

Mr. Lemass

I am not denying the importance of getting the spinning of the yarns done here, and I had discussions with woollen manufacturers upon that point. I am quite satisfied that it would neither help that industry nor the yarn industry to impose a duty on these yarns under the present circumstances.

Mr. Anthony

Would it not create further employment?

Mr. Lemass

It might have the opposite effect.

Mr. McGilligan

As regards item 11 —picture frames wholly or mainly of wood and pictures in frames made wholly or mainly of wood—I should like to know what that is intended to catch that has not been caught heretofore?

Mr. Lemass

The position heretofore was that if a frame came in with a picture in it it would escape the duty.

Mr. McGilligan

Why?

Mr. Lemass

Because it was not subject to duty.

Mr. McGilligan

Surely it was, as furniture.

Mr. Lemass

It was not subject to duty.

Mr. McGilligan

Will the duty paid on pictures in frames be refunded?

Mr. Lemass

No.

Mr. McGilligan

If they were not subject to duty, the duty was illegally charged.

Mr. Lemass

The frames could escape duty by putting in a penny picture of Robert Emmet.

Mr. McGilligan

I know Customs Officers who had a wholly different conception of the law and insisted on charging duty on pictures brought in with wooden frames around them. Duty was charged on the value of the picture and not on the value of the frame. The only way to evade duty was by taking out the picture, rolling it up and taking in the frame separately.

Mr. Lemass

That Customs Officer certainly mixed up his instructions. The reverse is what should have happened. A framed picture was not subject to duty; duty was not payable on it, and any person who paid duty on it can take his case to the Revenue Commissioners.

Mr. McGilligan

Surely pictures were always counted as furniture?

Mr. Lemass

Picture frames.

Mr. McGilligan

That was not the way the resolution ran. It ran: any article of furniture the component parts being of wood, then there was a duty upon it. I am astonished. I think there will be quite a number of claims made if what the Minister says is right. This, at any rate, sets up the position now that if a valuable painting is brought in with the ordinary exhibition frame around it, the fact that it is brought in with a frame around it will involve a payment of duty on the value of the picture.

Mr. Lemass

Not if the picture was imported for exhibition purposes.

Mr. McGilligan

I am talking of a person who buys a picture abroad. If a person on the Continent sees a picture for sale which does not happen to have a frame around it, or the artist is not disposed to sell the frame, and it is put on the ordinary type of wooden stretcher and imported that way, as long as there is something wooden about it there is a duty to be payable hereafter on it.

Mr. Lemass

I am not clear as to why——

Mr. McGilligan

It counts as a frame. What I am speaking about is a picture frame. That is going to be subject to 75 per cent. duty. On what value? Is it on the value of the frame or on the value of the entire article— the picture, plus the frame?

Mr. Lemass

The entire article.

Mr. O'Hanlon

Do I understand from the Minister that type is exempt from duty?

Mr. Lemass

Yes.

Mr. O'Hanlon

I think it would be better to have it specified.

Mr. Lemass

Type is not subject to duty now.

Mr. O'Hanlon

It will under this.

Mr. Lemass

No. It is free, the same as under the original Act. There is no change effected by this resolution at all.

Mr. McGilligan

As to the question of toys, which arises under 15 and 16, I take it from a casual reading of both of these that any toys made of tin or tinplate or tinned plate are exempt entirely, and when one comes to the wooden article the wooden toy is exempt only if the value is a shilling or under. If the article is made of a combination of both and there is more of tin than of wood, it escapes duty altogether.

Mr. Lemass

I would not say that. No. 16 says, "Articles manufactured wholly or partly of wood or timber."

Mr. McGilligan

No. 15 applies to "Manufactured articles made wholly or mainly of tin, tinplate or tinned plate, or a combination of them," and the exemption must apply to articles made wholly or mainly of tin. If it is made more of tin than of wood, then surely it is exempted under No. 15.

Mr. Lemass

I would say so.

Mr. McGilligan

It is?

Mr. Lemass

Yes.

Mr. Good

Would the Minister tell us whether under No. 10 it is intended to include sewer pipes and flue linings, which are manufactured of clay?

Mr. Lemass

No. The pipes must be designed and intended for use in smoking tobacco and other substances.

Mr. Good

It is not the intention, on account of their being manufactured of clay, that this will be applied to sewer pipes and flue linings?

Mr. Lemass

I cannot imagine anybody smoking tobacco out of a sewer pipe.

Mr. Good

It says pipes manufactured of clay.

Mr. Lemass

Designed and intended for use in smoking tobacco. I think that definition is clear.

Mr. McGilligan

As to No. 18: "Unassembled iron and steel parts for bodies of motor omnibuses, motor charabancs and commercial motor vehicles," what are the prospects of having these manufactured?

Mr. Lemass

They are being manufactured. They can be all manufactured.

Mr. McGilligan

Why the limitation by means of the word "unassembled"?

Mr. Lemass

Because assembled parts are already liable to duty. The Finance (No. 2) Act imposed this duty upon the complete body, and upon the assembled parts of such body. It exempted from duty unassembled parts. Consequently, we are imposing it on the unassembled parts. The assembled part is already liable.

Mr. McGilligan

Why were unassembled parts previously exempt?

Mr. Lemass

Because in the examination we were able to make at the time we were not satisfied that they could be all made and made satisfactorily here, and at that time we decided to exclude them until we had an opportunity of going into the question in greater detail. We have gone into the question, and we have come to the conclusion that all of them can be made here, and are made here.

Mr. Dillon

As to No. 22: "Cordage, cables, ropes and twine of hemp or light material" with certain exclusions, under the Finance Act the Revenue Commissioners held that fishing nets were not caught. Will they be so held not to be caught still?

Mr. Lemass

There is no change effected by this.

Mr. Dillon

So that fishing nets are still exempt?

Mr. Lemass

Yes.

Mr. Anthony

With regard to this 50 per cent. on pipes made wholly or mainly of clay, what extra employment does the Minister contemplate will be given by this tariff?

Mr. Lemass

Very little.

Mr. Anthony

The Minister should be aware that there is a tendency in this country to depart from the use of the clay pipe.

Mr. Lemass

It has gone out of fashion altogether.

Mr. Anthony

It has been found in practice to be unhygienic and deleterious in many cases, and the medical authorities have attributed the disease of cancer to the continued use of the clay pipe. It appears to me that the Minister is attempting to encourage the use of the clay pipe, but he must be aware that the tendency is to get away from the use of it. Even in the remotest country areas the use of the clay pipe is more the exception than the rule.

Mr. Lemass

Deputy Dillon told us that it was used as a sign of mourning.

Mr. Goulding

I do not agree with Deputy Anthony as to the clay pipe being unhygienic. That has not been proved at all. As a matter of fact, the manufacture of clay pipes is an old-es-tablished industry in the country.

Mr. McGilligan

Long before the Minister was born.

Mr. Goulding

Long before any Deputy was born.

Mr. Anthony

Fitzgerald, of Cork, was the first manufacturer of clay pipes.

Mr. Goulding

The clay pipe was probably used many hundreds of years ago, before we had tobacco at all. Probably when it first came into use they were made and at present they are being bought. The making of clay pipes provides a considerable amount of employment, and the Minister is right in encouraging their manufacture.

Mr. McGilligan

What were they used for before tobacco was used in the country?

Mr. Anthony

Blowing bubbles.

Mr. McGilligan

Was the recent deputation to London provided with clay pipes?

Mr. Anthony

Will the Minister give an explanation as to the tariff?

Mr. Lemass

It was demanded by all Parties in the House three months ago. It was the only question on which we were unanimous in connection with the Budget.

Mr. Anthony

Deputy Morrissey and I objected very strongly against that imposition.

Mr. Lemass

I do not think so.

Mr. Goulding

The most important thing to remember is that the manufacture of clay pipes will give employment in the country.

Mr. Anthony

The Minister suggested that the employment given would be infinitesimal. He suggested that there would be no extra employment at all.

Mr. Lemass

I did not say that.

Mr. McGilligan

Probably there might be a couple of hundred extra pipes manufactured. With regard to No. 24, it is proposed that jute piece goods are to be taxed. I take it that would apply to jute sacks, either the sacking or the made-up bag?

Mr. Lemass

Yes.

Mr. McGilligan

It will apply, not merely to sacking, but much more so to the made-up bag?

Mr. Lemass

There is a separate duty on the bag—No. 7 of Resolution 2—a minimum duty.

Mr. McGilligan

Have we not a considerable export trade in jute bags?

Mr. Lemass

Yes.

Mr. McGilligan

Is there any prospect of that trade being injured by the tariff now being imposed? Has that matter been considered?

Mr. Lemass

I do not think there is any likelihood of that. The goods exported are of a different class to the ones imported. The point is that the factory might devote its attention in future to supplying the requirements at home rather than interest itself in exports. The volume of goods imported exceeds the volume exported in value. If you take second-hand bags into account, it will be found that the excess is considerable. If the factory decides to alter its organisation, its equipment and its method of business so as to supply the home trade with its requirements, it would have a much larger market under the new circumstances than it has at present.

Mr. McGilligan

Yes, for a different article which, in the ordinary course of their business, they did not decide to manufacture. Is it not a fact that the export trade is likely to be met with a 10 per cent. tariff on 15th November?

Mr. Lemass

I am not sure that that is so. It must be remembered that the chief competition comes from India. The low priced goods coming from India really affect the trade, and it is not so much a question of competition from Britain.

Mr. McGilligan

There is an Import Act in England under which the goods from this country are exempted up to the 15th November, and that catches jute bags. If that exemption is not continued after the 15th November there will be a 10 per cent. tariff against jute bags coming from this country and entering England.

Mr. Lemass

Quite so.

Professor Thrift

When dealing with No. 24 the Minister referred to Resolution No. 2. If he turns to No. 2 on this list he will observe in the notes that this duty is in addition to any other duty that may be chargeable on the articles. That note is made in certain specified cases. There are other notes that set out that the duty is in lieu of any duty that may be enforced. Is it safe to assume that if there is no such note the duty mentioned is the only duty applicable to the article?

Mr. Lemass

Jute sacks cannot be described as jute piece goods.

Professor Thrift

That is not my point. Certain notes set out that this duty is in addition to any other duty that may be chargeable. Other notes indicate that the duty is in lieu of other duties. In respect of some duties there are no notes at all. Would it be safe to assume if there is no such note the article is not liable to any duty at all?

Mr. Lemass

That would be a correct assumption in 90 per cent. of the cases, but in some cases there will be the possibility of two duties applying to the article, in which case the higher duty will operate.

Professor Thrift

It would seem to me to be rather dangerous to have certain notes setting out that the duties are in addition to other duties and other notes indicating that certain duties are in lieu of other duties and, following all that, other articles with no note whatever, where, in my opinion, a note is really wanted.

Mr. Lemass

I will try to get these notes covered in the memorandum.

Professor Thrift

I have another remark to make with regard to No. 19. I am not yet satisfied that the effect of a duty like that in No. 19 will not tend very largely to increase the cost of the raw material.

Mr. Lemass

I would not say so. This did operate in the case of marble. The price of marble was undoubtedly increased and the protection which we gave to the stone-cutting industry was seriously diminished. There is only one supplier of raw marble. I am quite prepared to admit that a further increase might follow, but if that further increase should take place, while it might diminish the protection we are giving to the stone-cutting industry, it will also operate as a non-legislative tariff in favour of the production of marble. It will, I believe, tend towards the development of the marble quarries in this country and the utilisation of this marble in preference to the imported article.

Professor Thrift

But this refers to marble which cannot be got in the country at all.

Mr. Lemass

It is intended in all cases where stone is imported that it should be imported in the raw and worked up into shape in the stone-working places here.

Professor Thrift

But will it not mean that the buyer has to pay more for the raw unworked stone?

Mr. Lemass

That may have operated to some extent, but only in the case of marble. I will admit that the marble quarries here have not been in production, but steps are being taken to bring some of them into production in the future. Some big buildings in course of contemplation will occasion that, because it is intended to use Irish marble.

Professor Thrift

I take it the Minister has in mind Italian marble. That sort of marble cannot be got in this country at all.

Mr. Lemass

It is a different type of marble.

Professor Thrift

The effect of this is that the person who wants it for his own special purpose has to pay more for the raw material. That does not do anybody any good.

Mr. Lemass

If he wants Italian marble he must pay for it.

Mr. McGilligan

Speaking on the Resolution generally, I must say that I regard this list as almost the height of insanity, but that does not mean that I do not welcome it. The whole tariff policy as it had been proceeding up to the end of last year was more or less balanced. We had, at any rate, got to the position in which there was no outcry in the country against tariffs by reason of high costs. Even some of the articles tariffed under the Finance (Customs Duties) (No. 2) Act might have been accepted with good grace and goodwill in the country—I believe they would certainly have been accepted—if there had been some limitation put upon particular charges there imposed upon the community. If there had been a recognition that the duty upon a dear class of goods, say on woollens, was being increased and a remission made in consequence on a type of cloth not likely to be made, and if there were indications that the necessary changes could apply to the boot and shoe tariff—if those things had been done, there might have been a chance that a tariff policy would not be made the subject of violent Party disputations and would not be made the subject hereafter of a compaign in the country which is bound to develop into anti-tariff and pro-tariff.

This means that we have actually crossed the line. The last Budget brought us across the line but this nonsense to-night definitely puts us across the line. It means the end of a tariff policy which would otherwise have operated with goodwill on everybody's part, with tariffs operating under some sort of supervision and in a selective way. That chance is gone and the country is going to be faced with a very bad situation. There is not going to be any appreciation of tariffs properly used. This ludicrous use of tariffs will put people entirely and definitely against them and it is only right it should. I do not believe that there is going to be any talk made by the Minister himself or any evidence produced other than his usual recital of assurances as to the employment to be given in the manufacture of these goods.

The truth is, and it has been stated by a Labour authority in this country, that there are more unemployed in this country to-day than ever before, and that there are more people in receipt of home assistance than ever before. A great deal of that is due to a tariff policy which ran amok. Even if the tariff policy had been kept within bounds, it would, owing to the time at which it was introduced, have had bad results for the country.

This is camouflage. We are to tighten up the whole thing. We are to have our own heels made in the country; we are to have our own pipes made in the country and we are having all these miscellaneous things flung at us. We have had things flung at us that look well on paper and which, repeated to people who are not very careful about the statements they hear, will convey the meaning to them that there will be more employment created in the country. We have a state of general camouflage. We are to have all these things tariffed here. We are to have a grand tariff policy proceeding industrially in a short space of time. And these statements are made at a time when we have the returns from the tariff policy announced by the Minister.

We were told that a sum of £910,000 was to be brought in from the tax on the new tariffed goods. We were told that it was not possible to have made any better estimate than that because the development of home manufacture was to be taken into consideration. That estimate of £910,000 was the considered estimate of the Minister as to the sum that the tariffed articles would bring in to the Treasury. But we have seen 80 per cent. of that sum collected in six months. Now the difference between the estimate and the assurance given by the Minister and the actual fact in the way of levies made on the people is exactly the difference between the Minister's assurance as to the industries that were to be started and the actual fact.

All this addition to the taxation of the people certainly means very little indeed in the way of employment. It means a little bit extra. We will find out how much by practical experience, but it means a great deal extra in the way of costs to the community. It certainly means this that a great many more people are getting sick and tired of the tariff policy. More people who were prepared to give tariffs a chance when properly applied are now turning away from them in disgust. We gain very little in these tariffs and we lose a great deal.

Of course there are bigger things toward, and this is one of the things that has to be weighed in front of the people who are gradually getting involved by what is happening. Here is a matter which, whether you are expending your energy either on being enthusiastic about it or vehemently opposed to it, will be found to be a preparation for the economic war that is going to be announced. We are going to be a much more self-contained nation making our own pipes and our own heels. It is put forward now and the House has been given an opportunity of discussing the tariff policy in the Finance Customs (No. 2) Act or the Budget that was introduced last April. Over 80 per cent. of the £910,000 has been levied in the first six months.

It will be found instead of that £910,000 levied under these tariffs that something in the region of one and a half million pounds will be levied. The fact is that instead of that £910,000, a sum of one and a half millions is to be taken from the community and that in spite of the assurances that had been given that factories would spring up and that home goods would be made to replace the articles excluded. All these things that were to come from the tariffs, the promises and hopes expressed by the Minister, have not materialised. The hopes have been disappointed.

For myself I always felt that this country could not get on without a tariff policy. Tariffs had to be tried. I also knew that the impositions caused by the tariffs would be very severe upon the community at this particular time, and therefore I believe that tariffs ought to be brought in with very great care and very slowly, and with some appreciation from time to time of the costs that were to be placed on our main producers in the country.

That policy was tried and it had been found successful, having got 15,000 additional people into employment. That placed a fairly heavy extra charge on the community at the beginning, but that charge was lessened year by year. You had a policy which was under your control, and one that could be closed down when the farming community found they could not bend their backs to any further burdens. It was proper and right that a chance should be given to a tariff policy. What is proper and right about the present tariff policy at this moment when farmers are ground down, when they cannot get any prices, when the Government attitude has landed them in difficulties and when the hopes that were held out of other markets have been falsified?

The farmers are put in the position that they must sell and cannot get any remunerative price. These tariffs mean large extra cost to them and to the townspeople as well, but particularly to the farmers. The impression that the people will get of this rather futile piece of work at this time is that they are not getting a right tariff policy or a policy on right lines. They have a policy that means nothing in the way of extra employment, but it is a policy that means a great deal in the way of extra cost to the community and a great deal in the way of people hardening their minds in the future against any tariff policy.

Mr. Lemass

Before the Resolution is put I would like to make some reply to the remarks made by Deputy McGilligan. I assume that we will have some reply to matters arising out of this Resolution.

An Ceann Comhairle

I had intended to interrupt Deputy McGilligan only that he did not speak at any great length. The procedure when these Resolutions are before the House is to give the Resolutions on the day on which they are expressed to take effect; that is to-day. The procedure is to debate the policy on a general Resolution. It has taken one and a half hours to dispose of one Resolution, and we have six Resolutions to get through. Each Resolution must be put separately. I do not think that Deputies have dealt with them all at this rate of progress.

Mr. Lemass

I would like to say, before you put the Resolution, in connection with a remark made by Deputy McGilligan that the tariff policy introduced by this Government on imported goods has been much more successful than we had hoped at the time. The suggestion that this tariff policy is a failure has no foundation whatsoever—

Mr. McGilligan

Except in the revenue returns.

Mr. Lemass

If the amount imported in the first six months has been high is not that more satisfactory than that the amount in the second six months should be high?

Mr. McGilligan

But suppose it continues?

Mr. Lemass

Is the Deputy sure when he is relating the figure that the figure given has any relation to the returns for the twelve months?

Mr. McGilligan

Will the Minister give us the proper ones?

Mr. Lemass

I cannot give you the proper ones. The Deputy referred to the unemployment situation. He gloated over the fact that there is more unemployment in the country to-day than ever there was. To some extent, that may be said to be correct. There are 87,000 people registered as unemployed. I do not think there are 87,000 people actually without work but there are 87,000 people registered under our new system of registration at the Exchanges as being available for work. Let the Deputies get that figure straight into their heads— 87,000. That figure is justification for this policy, because if we are going to find work for those people we cannot find it by adopting a tariff policy which will please everyone, including the importers. If the unemployment situation is worse here than it was this time last year it is due to the fact that 24,000 young people who went out of this country in every single year of the ten years that the Deputy opposite was Minister did not go out this year. They stayed at home this year and are looking for work, and we cannot get them that work unless we revive the industries of the country. That is the purpose of this policy. That is the purpose of these tariffs. That is what we have been aiming to do, to exclude from this country every article that we can make for ourselves. All the articles which have been specified in this list are articles capable of being manufactured here, that were in the past manufactured here, and in the future we are determined that in the production of these articles Irish people are going to be employed in this country. The policy on which we embarked has been successful. It has been more successful than I dared hope at the time. I remember Deputy Hogan rising up and saying that in eight months this policy would be discredited. I took him on that, and I said that if at the end of eight months we could not show a substantial increase in industrial productivity and a substantial increase in the numbers of people engaged in industrial manufactures we would admit failure.

Mr. McGilligan

That was not the question put.

Mr. Lemass

I am speaking with a hazy recollection of what the matter was about.

Mr. McGilligan

Would the Minister take the challenge as put—that there would be more people unemployed after eight months as a result of the Minister's policy?

Mr. Lemass

If the Deputy will give me the figure with relation to the number unemployed in April last year which is capable of comparison with the figure now available I will accept the challenge. The Deputy knows quite well his Government has succeeded in building up a false feeling of security amongst the people, and succeeded in painting a false picture of the situation by deliberately restricting the number of people registered as unemployed. In the County of Galway there were two unemployment exchanges where people could register.

Mr. McGilligan

That is not so.

Mr. Lemass

It is quite so.

Mr. McGilligan

Does the Minister deny that any person could register by sending his name in an envelope without a stamp on it through the post?

Mr. Lemass

At the present time any person can register in a Civic Guard barracks.

Mr. McGilligan

If he does that what good will it do him? Was it going to get him any work? Was it even going to get him the price of the envelope?

Mr. Lemass

The fact is this, that until we make the machinery of the labour exchanges machinery capable of securing that those who register for work get an opportunity to work, until we insisted that every job throughout this country made available as the result of any expenditure of Government funds was to be filled through the Labour Exchanges we could not secure what we wanted to secure, that we would have on our books the names of every man and woman seeking employment. We have that now. There is no figure in relation to the figure of six months ago capable of comparison with the figure we have now.

Any attempt to prove that the unemployment position is worsened as a result of comparison between the number of registered unemployed before and the registered number now is deliberately false and misleading. Let me say simply this. The tariff policy has been successful in every branch. In respect of every industry to which it has been applied there has been substantial development, increased productivity, and increased employment. We are going ahead with the policy. We are quite convinced as a result of our experience and as a result of any theories derived from text-books that it is by that policy we can deal with the very serious unemployment problem we have. I have no desire to diminish that problem in the mind of anybody. If we cannot get a clear realisation in all quarters of its magnitude, a clear realisation of the seriousness which attends it, we will not get behind this policy and the other measures the Government has adopted to deal with it the necessary enthusiasm. It is because the public are beginning to realise now that there is a problem of great magnitude, it is because they are getting now information deliberately kept from them before that we are getting behind this policy a growing measure of support from the people. The duties imposed by these Resolutions may not be of first class importance. Nevertheless they are capable of providing work for a number of people who are now without it and on that ground alone they are worthy of acceptance by this House.

Mr. McGilligan

Are we in Committee still?

An Ceann Comhairle

Yes.

Mr. Lemass

Will I have an opportunity of replying to him again?

Mr. McGilligan

Certainly.

An Ceann Comhairle

I do not know if the House desires to get this through before 8 o'clock.

Mr. McGilligan

It is a question of whether we take the General Resolution or not. Will the General Resolution be held over until to-morrow?

An Ceann Comhairle

Yes. But not a repetition of the debate, we presume.

Mr. McGilligan

Oh no. That will be a different resolution, sir. Arising out of the statement that the tariff policy of the Government, which is now intensified, has been successful in every branch, it has been successful in one branch, namely the Revenue branch—£910,000 to be collected, 80 per cent. to be lifted in the first six months and no signs of it diminishing.

Mr. Lemass

Well, that is something.

Mr. McGilligan

In June and July the Minister was certain of all the factories that were going to spring up by magic from the manufacture at home of these goods. He expressed himself at times as being doubtful if we would get £910,000, that we are going to get a million and a half. That is the test of the policy. The home manufacture of goods has not filled the bill to the extent of the difference between the £910,000 estimated and the million and a half that may come in. Taking unemployment and the challenge about eight months made here by Deputy Hogan, Deputy Hogan never made any statement so foolish as that it was not possible to get people into employment if you prohibited goods from coming in.

Mr. Lemass

He made more foolish statements than that.

Mr. McGilligan

It is certain you will get people into employment. That is not the test of the tariff policy. The test is what price will the goods be sold at. Will they be sold at such a rate that people in other employment will lose that employment? Will you find at the end of eight months as a result of your tariff policy that there are more people in employment or more people out of employment? The Minister denies about his figures and what they mean. He will not go to any meeting, unless he goes like the great Sequah long ago, with two or three bands to hide the groans and the agony of the people who are suffering from him, and say there are less people out of employment at the moment than there were when he came in. Even his brazenness will not carry him to that.

Mr. Lemass

I will say deliberately that the unemployment situation is not nearly as serious as it was this time last year.

Mr. McGilligan

The man capable of saying that need not say anything more. Is this a point of order?

Mr. Lemass

The Deputy is afraid to hear facts. He is running away from facts.

Mr. McGilligan

The Deputy capable of saying that is capable of anything. Look at the bill for Home Assistance mounting up. Look at the hunger marches going on. Look at the invasion of places by unemployed, and yet the unemployment situation is better than when the Minister came in.

Mr. Lemass

There is an attempt being made to deal with it now.

Mr. McGilligan

Nobody denies that an attempt is being made to deal with it.

Mr. Lemass

That was not the case last year.

Mr. McGilligan

A blundering attempt.

Mr. Lemass

Successful now.

Mr. McGilligan

Nobody denied that there was going to be an attempt made. The question that was at issue was this, was the attempt likely to be successful or not, and the result has proved that it was not.

Mr. Lemass

What is the test?

Mr. McGilligan

The test is the number of people out of employment at this moment, the number of people on Home Assistance, the intensified feeling in the country about unemployment and the agitation that is rising in the country about the people who are losing employment day by day. The figures have been quoted, 86,000. I suppose what is quoted is 80,000. 80,000 did not represent people who were looking for work, who were available for work and who depended for their livelihood upon the wages they get for work. It represented people who answered the question were they or were they not working.

Mr. Lemass

Exactly.

Mr. McGilligan

That 80,000 figure was definitely explained, and I doubt if the Minister would make any serious attempt to dispute the reductions that had to be made in this figure. The 87,000 figure is equally capable of explanation. It would be quite foolish for anybody to over-estimate or to estimate wrongly or inaccurately the 87,000 figure. Let nobody follow any mistaken belief in what the Minister has said that because there is a new system of registration the figure is swollen. At the moment the Minister says the great change is that anybody can walk into the nearest police station and register.

Mr. Lemass

More than that.

Mr. McGilligan

That is one point. Let me deal with it point by point. He could always have done that.

Mr. Lemass

He never did it before.

Mr. McGilligan

It would cost him nothing. He could have gone to the nearest Post Office, written his name on a sheet of paper, and folded that paper in such a way that it would go through the post—he did not need an envelope—and without any charge to himself, it would go to Headquarters. The difference is now he can go in and write his name. That made the difference between 80,000 and 87,000.

Mr. Lemass

I did not say that.

Mr. McGilligan

There was more to be got out of registering now. There were 17,000 vacancies per annum filled by the other system.

Mr. Lemass

We are filling 2,000 a week.

Mr. McGilligan

There were 17,000 to be filled. Was that enough incentive to make a man go into the nearest Post Office and sign up his name?

Mr. Lemass

That 17,000 was a fictitious figure.

Mr. McGilligan

It was not. There were 17,000 vacancies filled per annum.

Mr. Lemass

The vacancy was filled when the County Surveyor sent down a list of the names to the Manager and he sent back the same list of names.

Mr. McGilligan

We will deduce this by Parliamentary Question from the Minister afterwards. There were 17,000 vacancies filled through labour exchanges, and people who registered at these exchanges knew that, and yet we are told the difference is there are 2,000 vacancies per week being filled.

Mr. Lemass

On the average.

Mr. McGilligan

And yet there are 87,000 unemployed still?

Mr. Lemass

I did not say that either.

Mr. McGilligan

There are 87,000 registered although the Minister has been filling vacancies at the rate of 2,000 a week—for how long?

Mr. Lemass

Quite a long time.

Mr. McGilligan

Quite a long time notwithstanding the fact that there are 87,000 still registered. There was something more to be got by way of examination—that is what we have got. Has the 2,000 a week—say 8,000 a month—has that been going on for four months? So there are 32,000 vacancies filled in four months and we have still 87,000 registered. I wonder have we anything more than 87,000 registered at this moment, and the home assistance bill is certainly higher than it ever was before—and our tariff policy is a success—and the people are being mulcted to the extent of 80 per cent. of the £910,000 in six months. They have been mulcted in six months to the extent of 80 per cent. of the £910,000 that was to be covered in a year—and the tariff policy is a success. That is the sort of success that breaks the Government. It is unfortunately going to break the tariff policy, and that is what I regret.

Mr. Lemass

When I came into office I was faced with a figure of unemployment which had no significance. I said to myself if we are going to tackle the unemployment problem we must get a real picture of the size of it. We must get some figure which will indicate exactly the number of people available for work and get a list of names and addresses with their qualifications. I set out to get that. I knew quite well when setting out we would have little whipper-snappers coming deliberately and misrepresenting the result, saying that the increased figures we secured were representing a worsening of the situation instead of a bettering of the situation. We knew these misrepresentations would be made. We knew members of the late Government concealed the position for ten years by publishing faked figures, and continued to publish these faked figures as against the figures now available in order to pretend the situation had got worse. Has it got worse? It is not easy to say whether it has or not. If we had put into employment in protected industries or any other industries 16,000 people this year the situation would be still the same as last year. I want the Deputies to appreciate that this year the population of this country is going up and instead of having an annual drainage of 27,000 per annum as we had while the Deputies opposite were in office we have people coming back into this country seeking work, and we have got to find that work. We have not altogether been successful. We have not provided them all with work, but we have provided work for very large numbers directly on relief labour of one kind or another and indirectly through the operation of this policy. There were 87,000 people registered— that is a big number. It does not represent 87,000 people unemployed, because as the Deputies opposite know throughout this country the people available for work on the roads or other public works are men who are not labourers in the ordinary sense—they are small land-owners, not people who would be reported as unemployed. They are farmers in poorer districts who support the livelihood they get from their lands by doing occasional work on the roads or work of some other kind. Probably 50 per cent., certainly 40 per cent. of the total of our registered unemployed is represented by such people. The number of registered people unemployed in the County Mayo when the new system came into operation went up from about 200 to something over 12,000. Is any Deputy opposite pretending that 12,000 people became unemployed in that period? The number of unemployed in Donegal increased from a few hundred to something well over 12,000. The same situation applies in Galway and all the western counties, and in so far as the allocation of relief fund was based on the number of registered unemployed in the different districts there was a direct inducement in every district for every person who was seeking work to register for work. The larger the number of registered unemployed the greater the amount of the allocation of the relief fund made.

I am rising to make sure that no Deputy will misunderstand the position as a consequence of the statements made by Deputy McGilligan. We had a serious problem but the situation has not become worse as a result of the tariff policy. It has been considerably eased as a result of the tariff policy and any proof anybody wants of this can be produced. The figures of people in protected industries are being prepared and will be published. The total number of people engaged in insurable occupations are being prepared and will be published. Figures for the output of the protected industries are being prepared and will be published, the market statistics are available already up to the end of August.

Mr. McGilligan

Hear, hear.

Mr. Lemass

As the Deputy says, hear, hear, and they show conclusively there has been a steady decline in the importation of all or nearly all the protected articles—a decline which in some cases was much more substantial than I thought would be effected within the period of three months, and Deputies should remember these tariffs and this protective policy had been in operation only for three months up to the end of August. Now as that policy has worked out in a period of great hardship, in a period of world depression, in a period when every country in the world has unemployment trouble as big if not bigger than ours, we can safely assume that we can deal with the unemployment situation best by continuing that policy, by continuing to afford to Irish industries the protection they deserve and by fostering the growth of new industries in the country. That is what these Resolutions are intended to do and we will not be prevented from doing that by any tactics of misrepresentation based upon faked figures as the Deputy opposite stated. I would not like the Minister to be misled by any figures supplied to him by his Departmental officers or from local exchanges in the towns and cities. I have been making inquiries as a result of continuous communications which I have been receiving from parts of my own constituency and, particularly, from one county, Leix. I was informed, on 26th September, by a Government Department, because I made inquiries arising out of the very small grant given to the county, that the number of registered unemployed was 950, and that in one registration area, Portlaoighise, there were 425 out of the 950 registered. I would like to point out to the Minister that if those who are really unemployed in rural areas saw any real hope of getting employment in or near their registration areas there would be a considerable increase in the number of registered unemployed over those actually looking for work.

Mr. Lemass

Quite so.

Mr. McGilligan

So that we have not got at the whole yet?

Mr. Lemass

It is quite possible.

Mr. Davin

The position in the rural areas, so far as I know it in my part of the country, is no better than it was last year, and I would like to know the number of people who registered in the Civic Guard stations and local post offices as a result of this particular facility which was provided by the present Ministry.

Mr. Lemass

The number went up by 40,000 in the week in which the new system came into operation.

Mr. Davin

I intervened in this debate to say what I believe to be the truth, so far as portions of my constituency are concerned and, although I do not want to magnify the position, I assure the Minister that it is certainly worse in the rural areas in County Leix than it was twelve months ago.

Mr. McGilligan

And everywhere.

Mr. M. Hayes

Might I put a question to the Minister before he stops? He told us when he came into office that the figures of the unemployed were quite wrong, and in order to find the right figures he tried a particular system. Am I to understand that he ridicules the figure he now has for Mayo and Donegal and that we have not the right figure? He said that we had not the right figure when he came in and he has adopted a particular scheme and the result of that scheme is to give a figure which he ridicules. Is that the position?

Mr. Lemass

It gives a figure which represents with some degree of accuracy, not the number of unemployed, but the number of people who are available for work other than the work they are at.

Mr. McGilligan

It always did that.

Mr. Lemass

We are trying to get additional information now, and to segregate that figure into those who are, for example, holders of land, people who are workers with no means of living other than by their work, and the people with other means of livelihood. If we do that we will probably have more accurate information as to the position.

Mr. Hayes

The Minister's scheme for finding the true figure of unemployed would need considerable amendments before it can give any figures over which he himself can stand.

Mr. Lemass

Quite so.

Mr. Hayes

So that the Minister's improvement is not really of any great value in spite of all the talk.

Mr. McGilligan

The Minister asked for a figure and he has now to explain it away. That is what it comes to.

Mr. Lemass

I will admit that I was somewhat disappointed. I thought that the new system would give a figure that would be a fairer reflex of the unemployment situation than the figure we got has been. We have to go a step further and analyse that figure before we can be satisfied that we have the information we require if we are to deal with the problem.

Mr. McGilligan

Does the Minister consider it possible to get a better analysis than the 80,000 not working people?

Mr. Lemass

Quite.

Mr. McGilligan

Will it be done?

Mr. Lemass

Yes.

Mr. McGilligan

Is it in process of being done?

Mr. Lemass

Yes.

Mr. McGilligan

And you are likely to get a true figure?

Mr. Lemass

Yes.

Mr. McGilligan

The Minister had better hurry up because people are falling into the belief that he will not.

Mr. Lemass

I am delighted to see the Deputy agitating on behalf of the unemployed. Time works great changes.

Mr. McGilligan

It has worked tremendous changes in the Minister when he finds that the unemployed are not under his control, and that he cannot get them into employment.

Question put.

The Committee divided: Tá, 68; Níl, 58.

Tá

• Aiken, Frank.
• Allen, Denis.
• Bartley, Gerald.
• Beegan, Patrick.
• Boland, Gerald.
• Boland, Patrick.
• Bourke, Daniel.
• Brady, Seán.
• Breathnach, Cormac.
• Breen, Daniel.
• Briscoe, Robert.
• Browne, William Frazer.
• Carty, Frank.
• Clery, Michael.
• Cooney, Eamonn.
• Corish, Richard.
• Corry, Martin John.
• Crowley, Fred Hugh.
• Curran, Patrick Joseph.
• Davin, William.
• Derrig, Thomas.
• De Valera, Eamon.
• Everett, James.
• Flinn, Hugo V.
• Flynn, John.
• Flynn, Stephen.
• Fogarty, Andrew.
• Geoghegan, James.
• Gibbons, Seán.
• Gormley, Francis.
• Gorry, Patrick Joseph.
• Goulding, John.
• Harris, Thomas.
• Hayes, Seán.
• Hogan, Patrick (Clare).
• Humphreys, Francis.
• Jordan, Stephen.
• Kelly, James Patrick.
• Kennedy, Michael Joseph.
• Keyes, Raphael Patrick.
• Kilroy, Michael.
• Kissane, Eamonn.
• Lemass, Seán F.
• Little, Patrick John.
• McEllistrim, Thomas.
• MacEntee, Seán.
• Maguire, Ben.
• Maguire, Conor Alexander.
• Moane, Edward.
• Moore, Séamus.
• Moylan, Seán.
• Murphy, Patrick Stephen.
• Murphy, Timothy Joseph.
• Norton, William.
• O'Grady, Seán.
• O'Kelly, Seán Thomas.
• O'Reilly, Matthew.
• O'Rourke, Daniel.
• Powell, Thomas P.
• Rice, Edward.
• Ryan, James.
• Sexton, Martin.
• Sheehy, Timothy.
• Sheridan, Michael.
• Smith, Patrick.
• Traynor, Oscar.
• Walsh, Richard.
• Ward, Francis C. (Dr.).

Níl

• Alton, Ernest Henry.
• Anthony, Richard.
• Beckett, James Walter.
• Bennett, George Cecil.
• Blythe, Ernest.
• Bourke, Séamus A.
• Brasier, Brooke.
• Brodrick, Seán.
• Burke, Patrick.
• Byrne, John Joseph.
• Collins-O'Driscoll, Mrs. Margt.
• Conlon, Martin.
• Cosgrave, William T.
• Craig, Sir James.
• Hennessy, Thomas.
• Keating, John.
• Keogh, Myles.
• Kiersey, John.
• MacDermot, Frank.
• McDonogh, Fred.
• MacEoin, Seán.
• McGilligan, Patrick.
• McMenamin, Daniel.
• Minch, Sydney B.
• Mongan, Joseph W.
• Morrissey, Daniel.
• Mulcahy, Richard.
• Nally, Martin.
• O'Brien, Eugene P.
• Davis, Michael.
• Desmond, William.
• Dillon, James M.
• Dockrell, Henry Morgan.
• Doherty, Eugene.
• Doyle, Peadar Seán.
• Duggan, Edmund John.
• Esmonde, Osmond Grattan.
• Finlay, Thomas A.
• Fitzgerald, Desmond.
• Fitzgerald-Kenney, James.
• Good, John.
• Gorey, Denis John.
• Hayes, Michael.
• O'Connor, Batt.
• O'Donovan, Timothy Joseph.
• O'Hanlon, John F.
• O'Higgins, Thomas Francis.
• O'Leary, Daniel.
• O'Mahony, The.
• O'Neill, Eamonn.
• O'Reilly, John Joseph.
• O'Sullivan, John Marcus.
• Reidy, James.
• Reynolds, Mrs. Mary.
• Roddy, Martin.
• Thrift, William Edward.
• White, John.
• Wolfe, Jasper Travers.

Tellers:—Tá: Deputies Boland and Allen; Níl: Deputies Doyle and Bennett.

Question declared carried.