asked the Minister for Finance if he can state the grounds on which duty continues to be levied on coal imported from Great Britain; whether he recognises the hardship inflicted on consumers who are obliged to buy British coal which is subject to duty in preference to other foreign coal which, if the restrictions were removed, could be obtained free of duty; and whether he is prepared to (a) permit the importation of all coal free of duty; or (b) permit the consumers to obtain their supplies in the most favourable market.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Duty on British Coal.
The duty on coal imported from Great Britain continues to be levied with the objects of securing a revenue for the Exchequer and of affording a limited protection to native fuels. I recognise that the payment of a duty inflicts a certain hardship on consumers, but I am not satisfied that the hardship inflicted in this case differs in nature or in degree from that resulting from any levy on any other commodity of general use nor that the hardship is incommensurate with the revenue received. I am not prepared to adopt either of the alternatives suggested by the Deputy.
Are we to take it that that is an unequivocal denial that this duty is imposed as a reprisal against the British but that it is imposed for revenue, and revenue alone?
In view of the fact that coal is such a widely used commodity, so far as the poorer sections of the community are concerned, would the Minister consider the desirability of transferring a revenue-raising duty of this kind to some other commodity not used so generally by the poorer sections of the community?
Arising out of the Minister's reply as to undue hardship, is the Minister aware that in addition to the 5/- tax for revenue purposes, the people are compelled, as a result of that agreement, to pay a further 5/- per ton over and above the price they were paying for continental coal before the pact?
I am not aware that, so far as the general majority of fuel consumers are concerned, there is any special reason why they should not use turf and native fuel instead of imported coal.
Are we to take it that the Minister is retaining this tax for the purpose of, shall we say, inducing people to burn more turf? I have no doubt that that is the excuse that will be given.
Is the Minister aware that so much was it felt last year by the prices comptroller that the cost of the coal was inflicting hardship on the poor people that he intervened to reduce the cost of bell-men's coal and succeeded in getting it reduced from 30/- per ton to 29/- per ton, and can the Minister say by how much the price of bell-men's coal has gone up as a result of the coal-cattle pact?
I am afraid the question the Deputy has just put shows that he does not appreciate the factors which go into the fixing of prices.
Does the Minister argue that the price of bell-men's coal to the poor will still remain at 29/- per ton?
Will the Minister say what the price of the turf to the poor is?
The Deputy knows that as well as I do.