Agricultural Produce (Cereals) Bill, 1934—From the Seanad. - In Committee.

I propose asking the Committee to agree with all the amendments sent down by the Seanad. I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 1:—

Section 8, sub-section (1). The words "the whole or" deleted in line 47.

I think the Minister might explain the reason for this amendment.

Dr. Ryan

As the Bill stands the Minister for Industry and Commerce can inflict penalties where there is overmilling of a flour quota. But where a mill has a quota partly for flour and partly for whole meal the Minister has no power to inflict any penalty where the miller increases one at the expense of the other. The object of this amendment is to tie up the miller to whatever percentage he may get of flour or of whole meal.

Amendment agreed to.

Dr. Ryan

I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 2:—

Section 18. A new sub-section added at the end of the section as follows:—

(4) Section 57 of the Principal Act is hereby amended by the insertion in paragraph (c) of sub-section (2) of the said section after the words "into a maize meal mixture" now contained therein of the words "of the quantities of maize meal mixture brought on to such premises," and the said section shall be construed and have effect accordingly.

Is the Minister taking any steps to help bakers who are non-millers? He is aware, I am sure, that there has been a scarcity of flour for such bakers.

Dr. Ryan

I am not aware of that.

Amendment agreed to.
Amendments Nos. 3, 4 and 5 were agreed to:—
3. Section 21, sub-section (1). A new sub-section inserted before the sub-section as follows:—
"(1) Paragraph (c) of Part I of the form set out in sub-section (1) of Section 68 of the Principal Act is hereby amended by the substitution of the words ‘prescribed with the consent of the Minister for Finance in relation to' for the words 'of three months next preceding the commencement of‘ now contained therein."
4. Section 23, sub-section (3). After the word "prescribed" in line 33 the words "with the consent of the Minister for Finance" inserted.
5. Section 23, sub-section (3). After the word "prescribed" in line 37 the words "with the consent of the Minister for Finance" inserted.

Dr. Ryan

I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 6:—

Section 28. The words "is imported by parcels post and" deleted in line 31.

This is an amendment that, I think, the Minister might explain.

Dr. Ryan

As the Principal Act stands the Minister for Industry and Commerce has power to prohibit the import of wheat products. Having done so he can then issue a licence to any particular person. Up to this the practice has been to issue a licence for the import of wheat products that might be recommended by a medical adviser, but people coming into the country might have, say, a cake or half a cake in their baggage. That has been extremely awkward up to the present, because the Revenue Commissioners had to confiscate such imports. The purpose of the amendment is to allow such things to be brought in and also to allow a person inside the country to receive a present of a cake from a person outside the country.

Amendment agreed to.
Amendment No. 7 agreed to:—
Section 28. All after the word "it" in line 33 deleted down to the end of the section and the following words substituted therefor:—"either is imported as private effects in passenger's baggage or is imported by parcels post and shown to the satisfaction of the Revenue Commissioners to have been sent by a person who is not a trader dealing in such commodity and to be intended as a gift for the personal use of the person to whom it is addressed."

Dr. Ryan

I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 8:—

Section 30, sub-section (1). All after the word "unless" in line 45 deleted down to the end of the sub-section and the following substituted therefor:—

(a) in the case of a compound feeding stuff not manufactured in Saorstát Eireann, there is printed on the package containing such compound feeding stuff or on a label securely affixed to such package the name and address of the manufacturer and a statement in the prescribed form that such compound feeding stuff was imported into Saorstát Eireann under a licence issued by the Minister for Agriculture, and

(b) in the case of a compound feeding stuff manufactured in Saorstát Eireann, there is printed, on the package containing such compound feeding stuff or on a label securely affixed to such package, a statement in the prescribed form that such compound feeding stuff was manufactured in Saorstát Eireann under a licence issued by the Minister for Agriculture and the number of such licence.

I think the Minister might explain the difference between this amendment and the last one.

Dr. Ryan

In the Principal Act we have power to compel the manufacturers of compound feeding stuffs to keep records. That was an extremely difficult thing for those people to do because, in some cases, there might be ten or 12 different materials in the one compound of feeding stuffs. It was very hard for them to keep complete records seeing that at the same time they might, for instance, be selling barley, and that barley might be one of the materials used in the manufacture. In the amending Bill that was brought before the Dáil that was changed. We then only asked those registered as manufacturers of compound feeding stuffs to have the name attached to a sack of compound feeding stuffs on leaving the factory because, by analysis, we can trace it back to see that they are complying with the formula submitted. We are not any longer enforcing the very strict keeping of records of the materials going into the feeding stuffs because we can at any time see if they are keeping to the formula which they have submitted and which is licensed by my Department. The question then arose of one compound feeding stuff manufacturer getting another compound feeding stuff manufacturer to do another part of the process for him. If the amending Bill were to remain as it left the Dáil, that would have to be disclosed. We are now only asking for the licence number of the other compound feeding stuff manufacturer which the Department knows and which the public are not interested in. That gets over the difficulty of one compound feeding stuff manufacturer getting another compound feeding stuff manufacturer to do a part of the process for him. A foreign manufacturer will still have to give the full name of the manufacturer as well as a statement relating to the licence under which he is allowed to import.

What all that really means is this: that not only is it necessary to have a licence, but that there are to be prescribed conditions for using the licence, and that all these must be affixed to the package itself.

Dr. Ryan

No, just the number of the licence in the case of the home-manufactured article.

Amendment agreed to.

Dr. Ryan

I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendments Nos. 9 and 10:—

Amendment No. 9—Section 32. The section deleted.

Amendment No. 10—Section 33. The section deleted.

These two sections are being removed. We propose to re-insert them as amendment No. 12 in another part of the Bill.

Amendments agreed to.
Amendment No. 11 agreed to:—
Section 50, sub-section (1). The word "entertained" deleted in line 30 and the word "entered" substituted therefor.

Dr. Ryan

I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 12:—

New section. Before Section 65, and in Part V, a new section inserted as follows:— 65. —(1) Whenever a milling (composite flour) order is in force, it shall not be lawful for any registered flour importer to sell any imported wheaten flour unless such wheaten flour is sold to another registered flour importer, the holder of a milling licence or the Minister or such wheaten flour is sold under and in accordance with a licence issued by the Minister under this section.

(2) If any registered flour importer acts in contravention of this section such registered flour importer shall be guilty of an offence under this section and shall be liable on summary conviction thereof to the penalties mentioned in Part I of the Schedule to this Act.

(3) Where a registered flour importer acts in contravention of this section such registered flour importer shall, for the purposes of Section 61 of the Principal Act, as amended by this Act, be deemed to have acted in contravention of the Principal Act, and the said Section 61, as so amended, shall apply and have effect accordingly.

(4) An offence under this section may be prosecuted by or at the suit of the Minister as prosecutor.

(5) The Minister may on the application of a registered flour importer grant to such importer a licence expressed to authorise such importer, subject to compliance with such conditions as he thinks fit to impose, to sell imported wheaten flour to a specified person without limit as to time or quantity or either of them or within a specified time or in a specified quantity.

(6) Every licence granted under this section to a registered flour importer shall operate to authorise such importer, subject to compliance with such conditions (if any) as may be specified therein, to sell imported wheaten flour to the person specified therein either (as may be specified therein) without limit as to time or quantity or either of them or within a specified time or in a specified quantity.

Does this preserve to persons who are engaged in manufacture here and who require to use imported flour the right to import flour still?

Dr. Ryan

No. These two sections— 32 and 33—were for the purpose of controlling the importers of flour so that if the regulation for the mixing of oat flour with wheaten flour were to come into operation they would be compelled to mix the oat flour with the imported flour. These sections are now being removed to another part of the Bill and will only come into operation whenever a mixing order is made. The object of the amendment is for the purpose of making the importers of flour keep returns and so on, so that the oat flour can be mixed with the imported flour.

The Minister is aware that there are manufacturers here who use imported flour. Are they secured under the amendment in the same way as they were under Section 32 as it originally stood?

Dr. Ryan

It is exactly the same wording.

Amendment agreed to.
Amendments Nos. 13, 14, 15 and 16 agreed to:—
13. Section 86. Lines 37 to 47, inclusive, deleted.
14. Section 90, sub-section (1). The following words inserted at the beginning of the sub-section:—"Subject to the provisions of this section."
15. Section 90, sub-section (1). All after the word "compulsorily" in line 26 deleted down to and including the word "kiln" in line 31, and the words "for the purposes of this Part of this Act any land" substituted therefor.
16. Section 90. A new sub-section added at the end of the section as follows:—
(4) The Minister shall not acquire under this section any land held or occupied by a local authority or any body corporate for the purposes of any railway, tramway, dock, canal, water, gas, electricity, or other public undertaking.
Agreement with Seanad amendments reported.
Ordered: That a Message be sent to the Seanad accordingly.