Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 10 Nov 1932

Vol. 44 No. 11

In Committee on Finance. - Financial Resolution No. 5—Customs.

Mr. Lemass

I move:—

(1) That there shall be charged, levied, and paid on every of the articles mentioned in the first column of the Schedule to this Resolution imported into Saorstát Eireann on or after the 20th day of October, 1932, a customs duty of an amount equal to that percentage of the value of the article which is stated in the second column of the said Schedule opposite the mention of the article in the said first column.

(2) That the provisions of Section 8 of the Finance Act, 1919, shall apply to the duty mentioned in this Resolution in respect of any article with the substitution of the expression "Saorstát Eireann" for the expression "Great Britain and Ireland" and as though the Second Schedule to the said Finance Act, 1919, contained a list of goods to which duty of an amount equal to that percentage of the value of the article which is stated in the third column of the Schedule to this Resolution opposite the mention of the article in the first column of the said Schedule is made applicable as a preferential rate and such article were included in that list.

(3) That the provisions set forth in the fourth column of the Schedule to this Resolution opposite the mention in the first column of the said Schedule of any article shall apply and have effect in relation to the duty mentioned in this Resolution in respect of such article.

(4) That, whenever it is shown to the satisfaction of the Revenue Commissioners that the duty mentioned in this Resolution in respect of any article (other than empty butter boxes, empty butter casks, empty butter kegs, empty butter barrels, empty margarine boxes, empty egg boxes, and component parts (made wholly or mainly of wood) of any of those articles has been duly paid in respect of such article and that such article has not been used in Saorstát Eireann otherwise than for a purpose of manufacture, a drawback equal to the amount of the duty so paid shall be allowed on such article or on any goods in the manufacture or preparation of which such article is shown to have been used if such article or such goods (as the case may be) is or are exported as merchandise or shipped for use as stores or deposited in a bonded warehouse for shipment as stores.

(5) That Section 6 of the Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1879, shall not apply to any article liable to a duty mentioned in this Resolution.

(6) That any article liable to a duty mentioned in this Resolution which is re-imported into Saorstát Eireann after exportation therefrom shall be exempt from such duty if it is shown to the satisfaction of the Revenue Commissioners either—

(a) that such article had not been imported prior to its exportation, or

(b) that such article had been imported prior to its exportation but was not liable to any duty at the time of such importation, or

(c) that such article had been imported prior to its exportation and all duty to which it was liable on such importation had been duly paid and either no drawback had been allowed on its exportation or all drawback so allowed had been repaid to the Revenue Commissioners.

(7) That articles which have been imported and exported by way of transit only shall not be deemed to have been imported or exported for the purposes of the next preceding paragraph of this Resolution.

(8) That the value of any article for the purposes of this Resolution shall be taken to be the price which an importer would give for the article if the article were delivered, freight and insurance paid, in bond, at the place of importation, and duty shall be paid on that value as fixed by the Revenue Commissioners.

(9) If any person does any act (whether of commission or omission) which is a contravention of any condition prescribed by the Revenue Commissioners under a provision contained in the fourth column of the Schedule to this Resolution, he shall be guilty of an offence under the Customs Acts and shall for each such offence incur a penalty of fifty pounds, and any article liable to duty in respect of which such offence is committed shall be forfeited.

(10) That the duty mentioned in this Resolution is in lieu of and substitution for the duty mentioned at reference number 16 in the Schedule to the Financial Resolution No. 1 which was passed by Dáil Eireann on the 26th day of October, 1932, but no article imported into Saorstát Eireann before the 10th day of November, 1932, which was not at the time of importation chargeable with the duty mentioned at the said reference number 16 shall be chargeable with any duty mentioned in this Resolution.

(11) It is hereby declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution shall have statutory effect under the provisions of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1927 (No. 7 of 1927).

SCHEDULE.

Description of Articles liable to Duty	Percentage Rate of Duty	Percentage Rate of Preferential Duty
(a) Mouldings manufactured wholly of wood.	50%	33?%	Whenever the Minister for Finance, after consultation with the Minister for Industry and Commerce, so thinks proper, the Revenue Commissioners may by licence authorise any particular person, subject to compliance with such conditions as they may think fit to impose, to import without payment of any of the duties mentioned in this Schedule any articles chargeable with any such duty either, as the Revenue Commissioners shall specify in such licence, without limit as to time or quantity or either of them or within a specified time or in a specified quantity.
(b) Planed or dressed wood.	50%	33?%
(c) The following tools when fitted with wooden handles and imported as complete tools, that is to say: hammers, hatchets, adzes, axes, pickaxes, mattocks, hoes, rakes and forks, and also wooden handles imported separately which, in the opinion of the Revenue Commissioners, are designed, constructed, and intended for use as handles for one or more of the said tools.	50%	33?%
(d) Articles of any of the following descriptions made wholly or mainly of wood, that is to say:	50%	33?%	—
(1) empty boxes of all descriptions and empty packing cases and component parts (made wholly or mainly of wood) thereof, but excluding from such boxes, cases, and parts the following articles, that is to say, punnets, chip boxes, and butter boxes of the pyramid type, and component parts (made wholly or mainly of wood) thereof;
(2) empty butter casks, empty butter kegs, and empty butter barrels and component parts (made wholly or mainly of wood) thereof;
(3) coffins and component parts (made wholly or mainly of wood) thereof;
(4) skewers;
(5) shutters;
(6) window blinds;
(7) poles, excluding telegraph poles, telephone poles, and poles of a like nature and use;
(8) empty baskets (excluding punnets and chip baskets) and component parts (made wholly or mainly of wood) thereof;
(9) beehives and component parts (made wholly or mainly of wood) thereof, but excluding sections;
(10) ladders, excluding extension ladders;
(11) empty tubs of all descriptions and component parts (made wholly or mainly of wood) thereof;
(12) any toy exceeding one shilling in value;
(13) gates and component parts (made wholly or mainly of wood) thereof;
(14) posts for fencing;
(15) shelters for vehicles, animals, or birds;
(16) match splints;
(17) trunks and component parts (made wholly or mainly of wood) thereof;
(18) walking sticks and component parts (made wholly or mainly of wood) thereof;
(19) shaped flower sticks;
(20) display stands and hangers and component parts (made wholly or mainly of wood) thereof;
(21) outdoor seats and tables and component parts (made wholly or mainly of wood) thereof;
(22) hand-trucks and component parts (made wholly or mainly of wood) thereof;
(23) boards for laundering by hand;
(24) public notice boards;
(25) beads imported otherwise than as part of another article;
(26) builders' woodwork and component parts thereof, but excluding wooden lock handles.

I do not know that it is necessary that I should read the whole of the Resolution. It is quite a long one, and it makes very little change in the existing law. It is intended to operate as a convenience for people who have been hitherto inconvenienced by the form of the Resolution which imposed duties upon certain manufactures of wood. The duty imposed by the Finance Act applied to all manufactures of wood with certain specified exemptions. We have found in experience that, from the point of view of public convenience and the point of view of administrative facility Resolutions of that kind are not the best. It is much better to set out a specific list of the articles to which the duty applies. The effect of the Resolution is merely to make a change in respect of the wood duty, which is the last of the duties imposed by this Administration and which is in the form I have indicated. The list to which the duty applies is as complete as we can make it. It is not thought that we have omitted from the list any articles which should be made subject to the duty because they are being manufactured here. If, however, it is found that we have in fact omitted some specific article, then it will involve bringing forward another Resolution for the purpose of adding it. In future, however, it will be possible for an importer to have more definite information as to the specific articles to which the wood duty will apply. That is the sum total of the change which we are making here by the Resolution.

Mr. Good

Is the duty increased in any case?

Mr. Lemass

I would not like to say it has not been. It is because there is some reason to believe that the effect of the change might be to increase the duty upon a particular article that the Resolution is necessary at all. The general intention, however, was to preserve the same position with this exception, that there would be exempted from duty certain articles which it was not intended should be subject to duty and which were caught by the general phrase used in the original Act.

Mr. Dockrell

I should like to ask a few questions on the Schedule. I notice a reference to empty boxes of all descriptions and empty packing cases. I was wondering whether the Minister had taken power to exempt boxes when they are returned as empties from the other side. At the same time, it might involve very expensive machinery to deal with this matter. I should like to ask the Minister if he can devise any rough-and-ready way by which these boxes can be identified when they are coming back and by which the process of allowing Irish boxes back here again would be simplified. Another item upon which I wish to comment is that concerning mouldings manufactured wholly of wood. Presumably these can all be manufactured here and a considerable amount of employment given. The same remark applies to builders' woodwork, but I should like to draw the Minister's attention to paragraph (b), which deals with planed or dressed wood, and to suggest to him that he has possibly over-looked some of the effects of tariffing this particular item, and that he might quite easily undo the employment that he is giving under paragraph (a) in the manufacture of builders' joinery. It looks, of course, on the face of it as if all the planed and dressed wood imported into this country is going to be planed here. It will create a very considerable amount of employment. I presume the Minister has made some calculation along the lines of the amount of employment and the amount of wood that would be affected by this. I would like to ask him the number of Dublin standards that would probably be planed according to his calculation. Is he prepared to give a figure for the amount coming in through this port in a year?

Mr. Lemass

I am not prepared to give a figure off-hand. As the Deputy is aware, this tariff has been brought into operation gradually. Every facility is being given to the firms concerned to equip themselves for the planing and dressing of the wood here, and so long as there are difficulties of supply at this time all facilities are being given. Consequently, it will not be possible for us to visualise the full effects of it for some weeks to come, possibly even for a couple of months to come. It is not anticipated that any undue difficulty will arise, and certainly none has arisen so far.

Mr. Dockrell

I should like to say that I quite appreciate the facilities the Minister has given, and that I am not in any sense raising that aspect of the case, but I want the Minister to try and imagine that he has brought about the effect which he desires to produce, and then examine that and see whether he is satisfied with it.

Now I suggest to the Minister, as a very rough and ready figure, that 20,000 standards might be taken as something approaching a figure to calculate on. I do not know whether the Minister is prepared to accept that. At the same time he could work out the calculations himself, and I do not wish him to give me an answer at the moment. What I wish to draw his attention to is that this tariff on planed goods is going to produce an effect which may be described as rationalising the saw-milling industry. I do not think the Minister would be at all satisfied with the effect of that. That is why I am merely raising this question. If you take at the present time say 20,000 standards as a rough and ready figure for a year, and take the speed of one of these modern machines at 600 feet a minute, one machine for the City of Dublin would practically plane all the woodwork required in a year, in fact in less than a year. Now what is the effect of that? It would look as if the cheapest thing would be that there should be one machine in Dublin. Well I do not know that that is likely to come about. At the same time, from the Minister's point of view, I want to ask him whether he accepts my suggestion as to what the result of this will be.

Each timber merchant is faced with the necessity for installing one of these high-speed planing machines. I wish to again emphasise the fact that I am not starting this discussion in any sense as suggesting that the Minister is not meeting the trade in the change-over process, but what this really means is that the trade will be forced to rationalise the saw-milling industry. I do not think the Deputies here can appreciate the improvements that have been made in modern machinery. To describe them as going at ten times the rate of the existing machinery is only a moderate statement of their efficiency. The trade are at present naturally faced with various problems. One particular firm finds that the electric cable will not give them the amount of power they require. Another firm finds that they will have to take out two or three of these smaller machines and put in one of the modern machines. Another firm finds that they will require three times the space, in other words they will have to keep twice the number of boards that they kept of imported floorings, as well as their own stock of imported floorings.

The Minister will wonder what this is all coming to, but I am suggesting that if the timber trade is rationalised it will turn it into something quite different from what it is at the present moment, and the largely increased employment which would come in under mouldings and joinery may be quite nullified. The position is that none of these high-speed machines in any of the firms that are installing them can hope to be employed for more than two months in the year. I state that as an outside figure. I suggest to the Minister that the result of that will be that the most efficient of the men working the slower speed machines will be retained to work these higher speed machines, and there will be a position in which I would rather think there would possibly be somewhat less men employed than there were formerly. However, that is entirely a matter for the Minister, and that is why I stated that I wished the Minister to envisage the position that would be set up when this duty on planed goods would have had its full effect, and all the firms in Dublin would be equipped for dealing with the boards as they came along.

Mr. Morrissey

I am sorry that I have not had the privilege of hearing the Minister's explanation of this particular Resolution. I want to say that I am in favour of part of the Resolution, and I am inclined to support the Resolution as a whole, but I would like to get from the Minister certain explanations. For instance with regard to (c) of the schedule, I think there is no reason whatever why we should not in this country be able to provide any of the articles mentioned there. I would like to go on to (d) (1) in the schedule with regard to boxes. I would like to put before the Minister cases which have been brought to my notice recently. There are a certain number of firms in this country who use boxes for packing certain articles, including say tea, but we have in Dublin wholesale tea firms that make a practice of sending out tea in 5 lbs., 10 lbs. or 20 lbs. boxes, which, as will be known to most of the members of the House, are smaller quantities than are usually sent out by a wholesale firm. They usually send either half chests or whole chests of tea. My information is that these boxes were imported at about 4d. each.

My opinion on that particular point was that the boxes before the tariff was imposed could be bought by those firms at 4d. each, and boxes made at home, after the tariff, had to be purchased at something like 7d., and they were inferior—I saw them myself—and while I have no wish whatever to decry Irish manufacture I had to admit when I was shown the imported boxes at 4d. and the boxes made here at 7d. the former were much more suitable, and seemed to me much better boxes so much so that I am told a number of firms in Dublin were paying the full tariff—that they were importing the boxes. Now I would ask the Minister to look into that matter and if we are not in a position in this country, or if we are not likely to be in a position in the immediate future to put on the market a box of in or about the same price and certainly as good quality as the box which was formerly imported, there is not much case for this particular tariff.

I happen to know something about the sawmilling industry. I have some practical experience in the business myself. I was in the business for a number of years, and I quite agree with Deputy Dockrell that great advance has been made within the past ten years in the machinery. I might, respectfully, submit that Deputy Dockrell is rather in favour of the Minister than against him, except from the point of view of the boxes and I think there is no reason whatever why we should not be able to make them here. I am satisfied from my own personal experience that we are able to make in this country all the articles that come under C in the schedule. I would like to have from the Minister this point: why people in this country should now be compelled to pay an increase of 100 per cent. to be able to purchase or acquire an article not as good but almost as good as the article they were purchasing before. On the other parts I am in absolute agreement, and I think we are able to make them as good, at least, as we are able to import them.

Mr. O'Neill

Under Section D (1) and (2), I appeal to the Minister in the matter of fish boxes and fish barrels. I think he originally exempted these from the operation of this tax. Fish boxes are made, I believe, in this country very good and just as cheap as boxes imported, but in the case of the shipping trade, which is in a very precarious condition, there are a number of these boxes passing to and fro and some firms from the other side which deal with fish buyers in this country send their boxes across to be filled for the English markets. There is a continuous flow of boxes, empties and full, passing through our ports, and if there is going to be a tax on these it will mean a considerable difficulty in assessing the tax to be paid. I am not bringing this matter up for the protection of the box-making industry, because we can make boxes here for our own trade, but to avoid trouble. Deputy Dockrell has already mentioned matters in connection with other packing cases and with regard to barrels. Barrels go out full and never come back again. They are nonreturnable and usually go to foreign places. In the case of barrels we cannot compete with the foreign-made barrel. This barrel comes under the same category as the pyramid type of barrel which is properly exempted from tax. I appeal to the Minister in the matter of fish barrels to take into account these circumstances. We cannot produce barrels of this variety at a price that would enable the fish merchants and the exporter to make proper use of them. I think in these two matters I would ask the Minister to consider fish boxes and fish barrels in connection with these tariffs.

Mr. Dillon

I mentioned at an earlier stage of some Finance Bill the question of egg boxes. The Minister then was not quite clear whether that came under the heading of planed and dressed goods, and of course it does not. The component parts of egg cases are neither planed nor dressed, but they are apparently to come under D (1) where the Minister refers to packing cases and component parts thereof. I would suggest to the Minister that as he has recognised the principle that butter boxes should be excluded and other containers of agricultural produce which this country habitually exports, he should consider the desirability of excluding the component parts of cubicle egg cases, which are largely made of foreign timber and which would be of the best quality. I asked the Minister already whether he consulted the Department of Agriculture about that. It would be interesting to know if he had done so, and if the Department of Agriculture would not second what I say, that the best type of egg box, and the only really dependable type of cubicle box, is the one made from foreign and thoroughly dry timber. It is necessary to import these things, and it would be a very grave charge, in my opinion, on the egg trade, which already is desperately embarrassed, if they had to pay something extra for their cubicle egg cases, which the Minister might remember are entirely for our export trade. They all go out and never come back.

Under 20, the Minister has tariffed wooden display stands. I do not know whether he has any reliable information that this will promote the manufacture of these in this country. He probably has some experience. I have none. But I venture to suggest to the Minister the result of that will be to put these wooden stands clean off the Irish market and they will probably be replaced by metal appliances. That simply makes it more difficult for the trading community— that is the only result that the tariff will have, I submit. What is the meaning of builders' woodwork and component parts thereof? I do not know whether the Dáil knows exactly what the Minister proposes to tax under builders' woodwork and component parts thereof. The definition seems to me to be so vague as to make it very difficult for anybody, except one who had a preconceived notion as to what it actually means, to know what it covers.

Mr. Morrissey

Before the Minister concludes I wish to say a few words. I hope he will not give way, at least, on the question of egg boxes. I am not going into the other points, but if there is one thing which we can make in this country, even from seasoned timber, it is egg boxes. We can compete with anything imported from abroad, and I hope the Minister will not give way on that.

Mr. Anthony

I hope the Minister will not give way in connection with one or two matters mentioned by Deputy Dockrell. He mentioned, amongst other things, planed or dressed wood. He gave vent to the fear that if the Minister were to pursue his policy the logical conclusion would be the rationalisation of this particular industry. I should like to disabuse the mind of Deputy Dockrell. As I understand the policy of the present Government, it is the decentralisation of industry. I ask the Minister is not that his statement? Is not his policy the decentralisation of industry?

Mr. Lemass

Right.

Mr. Anthony

I accept the Minister's word. If the fears of Deputy Dockrell were to materialise it would be the negation of what the Minister has said in his public speeches and pronouncements. Rationalisation would be the negation of his policy of decentralisation of industry.

There are one or two items in the Schedule to which I would like to refer. Apart from planed or dressed wood I wish to refer to some other matters, some of which were touched on by Deputy Morrissey. We have very good and efficient saw-mills in this country, some of them located in Cork City. I have been approached on many occasions by representatives of the saw-milling industry in Cork Borough, who informed me, and I have no reason to doubt their word, that they could produce as cheaply and as good many of the commodities imported into this country. When one considers that our people have had to meet the cost of production in Scandinavia and the low prices paid to labour in such countries——

Mr. Dillon

Low prices of labour——

Mr. Anthony

Undoubtedly. Low prices to labour paid for dressed timber produced in Scandinavia and other places. I am not going to stand for that. Turning now to Item 12 in the Schedule: "Any toy exceeding one shilling in value," I will ask the Minister to reconsider this figure of one shilling. We are all aware the toy industry, as an industry, in this country is infinitesimal. I do not think there is any large industry in the manufacture of toys in this country. But we are all aware that the cheap toy, costing a shilling or even two shillings, brings a good deal of colour into the lives of the poorer children in this State. I suggest to the Minister that he might raise that figure of one shilling to two shillings. There are many people of the lower middle class, and even of the very poorer class, who will indulge in the luxury and the great pleasure which it gives to bestow on a child at Christmas time a toy of the value of a shilling or even two shillings, and in many cases a little beyond that. It may be suggested that these poor people should not indulge in this luxury because they may be going beyond their means. But at Christmas, and at birthday times, people will go even beyond their means in order to introduce a little colour into the lives of their children. I suggest, therefore, to the Minister that he should raise the figure from a shilling to two shillings. The Minister is long enough in business to be aware that what I have just stated is quite true. Item 15, "Shelters for vehicles, animals or birds." I suppose a shelter may be defined as something that covers. There are other dictionary definitions but I accept the one that most easily applies. I want to know would bird-cages be included?

Mr. Lemass

If made of wood or mainly of wood.

Mr. Anthony

Then every bird-fancier will take to making his own bird-cages. Item 20, "Display stands and hangers and component parts made wholly or mainly of wood." Here, again, does that include the ordinary coat-hanger which is usually bought for two or three pence? If it does include these cheap coat-hangers, are they made in any part of Ireland? I am not aware that they are. Does the Minister include these coat-hangers?

Mr. Lemass

Yes, made wholly or mainly of wood.

Mr. Anthony

Are they manufactured in Ireland?

Mr. Lemass

They can be.

Mr. Anthony

Where? Has the Minister got any indication from any manufacturer in this country that he is prepared to manufacture coat hangers at a penny or twopence a piece? Has the Minister got that information? He indicates that he has. Well, I remember reading a periodical for many years where the phrase "The dark brotherhood" often occurred. These people must be very dark indeed, for I never heard of them. What does the Minister mean by Item 24, "Public notice-boards." We know that in many parts of the country metal boards on which luminous lights are displayed are to be seen. Does the Minister include those?

Mr. Lemass

This is a duty that applies to articles made wholly or mainly of wood.

Mr. Anthony

In some cases there would be wooden component parts.

Mr. Lemass

We say "wholly or mainly of wood."

Mr. Anthony

I am satisfied, but I ask the Minister to accept an amendment about the figure in regard to the toys. Would he raise the figure of 1/-to 2/-?

Mr. Lemass

The position with regard to toys is that the shilling mentioned there is the shilling at the port; it is not the retail selling price which is substantially higher. In fact the shilling toy would be retailed at 2/-or thereabouts. The duty applies to toys made wholly or mainly of wood. That industry existed here, and we are anxious to revive it. But apart from that consideration, Deputies will have to face up to the fact that, in view of the general consideration, importation of quite a number of articles will have to be restricted in order to redress the external trade position. This duty only applies to toys, and the one shilling exemption applies to the C.I.F. price. Yo-yos are not subject to duty notwithstanding the fact that there is a factory established which is engaged in the manufacture of yo-yos.

Mr. Anthony

Another national effort.

Mr. Lemass

As far as the point made by Deputy O'Neill is concerned, fish barrels are not subject to duty. As far as fish boxes are concerned, if they were imported prior to exportation and any duty payable at that time was paid on them, then they can be allowed in again without being subject to duty, by the Revenue Commissioners.

Mr. O'Neill

On their first coming in there will be a duty?

Mr. Lemass

If they were not of Irish manufacture. Then they can move backwards and forwards without being subject to duty.

Mr. Morrissey

Might I ask why fish barrels are not subject to duty?

Mr. Lemass

As the Deputy was not here when I was moving the motion, I want to say again that this motion is not imposing any new duty. It is changing the form of the duty upon manufactured woodwork for the convenience of administration and for the convenience of the public. We are taking off a general duty and imposing specific duties upon the articles set out in the list.

Mr. Morrissey

What has happened within the last three years to change the Minister's mind regarding the duty on fish barrels?

Mr. Lemass

I think the question asked by some Deputy opposite concerning an import duty upon herrings imported to the Continent would be a very conclusive answer to the point raised.

Mr. Morrissey

I take it the Minister has changed his mind.

Mr. Lemass

Circumstances have changed considerably.

Mr. Morrissey

Always do.

Mr. Lemass

As to one point raised by Deputy Dockrell, namely, the reimportation into the country of Irish-made cases sent as containers of goods, the Revenue Commissioners merely require evidence of exportation. If that evidence of exportation is produced a free admission of the box or package is made. The duty upon egg boxes and egg box parts was imposed deliberately with the full approval, and in fact under the pressure, of the Department of Agriculture. It is not intended to modify it in any way. Builders' woodwork includes all types of woodwork used in building construction: doors, stairs, banisters, window frames and the like. That duty has been in operation for some months and is not being changed by this Resolution. Deputies Anthony and Dockrell spoke about the possibility of the duty upon planed and dressed timber leading to the rationalisation of the saw-milling industry.

Mr. Anthony

That I deny.

Mr. Lemass

The Deputy talked about rationalisation. I merely say this to him. If he attributes to the word "rationalisation" the same meaning as his idea of rational reorganisation, then I say that rationalisation and decentralisation are synonymous. They mean the same thing. Deputy Dockrell is perhaps right in that connection.

Mr. Anthony

I should like to challenge the Minister as to that.

Mr. Lemass

It is perhaps correct that one of the results of the imposition of the duty will be to produce a certain co-operation between the saw mills here for the purpose of getting that additional work done on the most economical terms.

Mr. Anthony

And the elimination of labour. Is not that your idea of rationalisation?

Mr. Lemass

The entire work will be fresh work. At present the timber is imported and planed and dressed. In future it will be imported simply sawn and the planing and dressing will have to be done here, so that any work done in the planing and dressing is gain.

Mr. Anthony

Quite right.

Mr. Lemass

It is desirable, of course, that whatever degree of co-operation will enable the work to be done efficiently and in the least costly manner by the saw-millers in Dublin should be arranged for, and if the saw-millers are thinking along that line it is all to the good. On the whole, however, I think that the effect of the duty will be to increase the efficiency of the industry and also to help the country saw-miller to a substantial extent, which is an advantage from the rationalisation point of view. In any case, we see no reason why that work, which is done in other towns of a similar size to Dublin, should not be done here. I cannot see how it can possibly result in any diminution of the employment that will be given on the joinery or moulding end of the business. In any case, so long as it gets efficient work and reduces the value of unnecessary imports, then I say it is a national gain.

Mr. Anthony

Will the Minister consider raising the one shilling in the case of toys to two shillings?

Mr. Lemass

No.

Mr. Anthony

Or some other figure?

Mr. Lemass

No.

Mr. Good

I want to impress on the Minister that in making a change of this kind considerable latitude will be necessary, because, as I pointed out when he introduced this duty previously, the timber from which flooring will be manufactured in future is not imported into this market at all. All the flooring imported into this market is wrought flooring, and the reason why I stress this particular fact is that the timber from which the home-manufactured flooring will be made cannot be imported here until next Spring. It has doubtless come before the Minister that the ports from which this timber is imported are ice-bound ports in nearly all cases and will not re-open before the Spring. Consequently, that particular timber cannot be here until April or May next. Then, after that timber is manufactured here, it will have to be given some time to dry. The timber itself will be cut for some time, but after any timber is worked on the surface it is necessary to give it some time to season further. My object in mentioning this to the Minister is that we do not want to have, in connection with housing schemes in which flooring is used very largely at present, people complaining about the defective nature of the floors. I am aware that even imported floors had to be taken up owing to the amount of shrinkage that took place. We do not want to have the same difficulty arising from the home-manufactured material. I ask the Minister to bear that fact in mind in the interest of the industry and allow a reasonable time for the transfer to be made.

The Minister mentioned on a previous occasion that what he was trying out here was already being carried out in Belfast and Cork. I have made some inquiries into that matter and I find that two-thirds of the flooring used in the Belfast area is imported planed and one-third is manufactured in the area. With regard to the south of Ireland, doubtless the Minister hears a good deal about the south from the Parliamentary Secretary. In that case I am told that only one mill manufactures flooring, so that he is not exactly in the strong position from that point of view that he thought he was in. Deputy Dockrell has pointed out that the Minister may be disappointed with the results accruing from the change-over. I have no doubt whatever on that point. The installation of one of these machines will mean the scrapping of dozens of machines in the city. I am quite satisfied that the volume of labour under the new centralised method will be considerably less than it is under the decentralised method at present.

Further, I may point out to the Minister that there is a considerable amount of moulding done in these centralised machines, at the moment, which it will be cheaper to do in the fast running, up-to-date, centralised machines in future, and, consequently, the mouldings will come in in that particular way. There, again, there will be a considerable reduction in the volume of labour. I am quite satisfied that the net result of this will be more efficiency, probably, but certainly a considerable diminution in the volume of labour.

Mr. Lemass

In connection with Deputy Good's remarks, I want to say merely this, with reference to his statement as to the possibility of getting supplies of sawn timber at this time of the year, that we have the licensing provision here and we put it in precisely because we knew that there was going to be a certain period of time necessary during which the mills would be equipping themselves, and that this very difficulty would arise, but I am not accepting the statement as correct, although I have no doubt that the Deputy made it in good faith, that it is not possible to get supplies at this time of the year. I adduce only one fact to support my position, and it is that there is imported into British ports, in the months of December, January and February, a quantity of sawn timber which is, at least, ten times the total requirements of this country. That sawn timber is coming from somewhere, and whatever source of supply Great Britain has during these months can also be availed of here. However, that is a matter which will fall for examination. If there is difficulty, we are going to case the position——

Mr. Good

May I point out to the Minister that rough timber is imported into ports in Great Britain for their requirements, at the moment, of these particular areas? That timber can be bought and brought over here and worked, but the cost would be very much in excess of what the cost would be by direct importation from the timber port.

Mr. Lemass

But surely it is coming directly from the timber port to the British port?

Mr. Good

No: what happens is this, as the Minister knows, that the timber comes direct in here from the timber port and does not go to any intermediate port. It comes direct, and what he is proposing is, that the market here shall be supplied from timber which has already been imported into a British port.

Mr. Lemass

Oh, no. If the British saw millers can get supplies in the months of December, January and February——

Mr. Good

Not from the timber ports.

Mr. Lemass

From whatever source they are getting them, they can be got here also.

Mr. Good

I suggest to the Minister that he should make inquiries from those in the trade and he will then find out the accuracy of that statement.

Mr. Lemass

The matter is being examined at the moment, and I have on my desk letters from timber agents in the Baltic offering supplies of sawn timber to firms here during the next couple of months.

Mr. Good

At increased prices?

Mr. Lemass

No, at the same price at which they are offering to people in Britain and other places—quoting their prices.

Mr. Good

Has the attention of the Minister been drawn to the fact that these supplies can only be obtained at reasonable prices when those ports are open?

Mr. Lemass

I am aware of the fact that, in some part of the world, there are people apparently in a position to supply sawn timber to Great Britain in ten times the quantity that we require, as the British trade returns show.

Mr. Good

I suggest to the Minister that he should make inquiries and satisfy himself on that.

Mr. Lemass

I can assure the Deputy that the fullest possible inquiry will be made before the facilities we are giving to the saw millers will be withdrawn. On the other points mentioned, efficiency in the saw-milling industry will be something worth having, and, if the effect of this Resolution does not put an extra man at work, but gets us efficiency, and reduces the value of unnecessary imports, we will gain.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

There is one point on which I would like information from the Minister. What does he anticipate will be the extra retail cost to the purchaser of some of the articles which are subject to this duty? Take, for example, a hatchet——

Mr. Lemass

I ask the Deputy to bear in mind that the duties have been in operation for nearly six months and we are not changing them in this Resolution.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

I want to know from the Minister what the extra cost is. Take a hatchet with a hickory handle. They are now either being manufactured in the country or they are still being imported as manufactured articles, and I want to know from the Minister as to whether the price of, let me say, a hickory handle for a hatchet has increased and, if so, by how much. I take that one specific example but it would be exactly the same for all those articles under (c) and for ladders and other things of that nature which are subject to this tax.

Mr. Lemass

I cannot give the Deputy the information he desires now. There is no reason why all these things should not be made here. They are, in fact, being made here and, consequently, there is no reason why they should be imported.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

Is the Minister not inquiring as to the effect of his taxes?

Mr. Lemass

Quite.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

Well, could he not give us some indication as to their results?

Mr. Lemass

Not without notice. The Deputy is aware that we have, at the moment, no power to carry out price investigations. We are endeavouring to get that power despite the opposition of his Party.

Mr. Fitzgerald-Kenney

Without having any power to compel a person to give information, the Minister, through his officials and otherwise, might make inquiries, and one would imagine that a Minister, imposing duties of this nature, would have inquiries made and not merely impose the duty and then leave it in the air quite careless of its operation, which, I gather from what the Minister for Industry and Commerce now says, is the course which he is adopting.

Resolution put and agreed to.

Resolutions to be considered on report on Wednesday, 16th November.