Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 30 Jun 1936

Vol. 63 No. 5

Supplementary Estimate. - Vote 19—Tariff Commission.

Minister for Finance (Mr. MacEntee)

I move:—

Go ndeontar suim ná raghaidh thar £3,467 chun slánuithe na suime is gá chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfaidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31adh lá de Mhárta, 1937, chun Tuarastail agus Costaisí Choimisiún na nDleacht (Uimh. 40 de 1926 agus Uimh. 31 de 1930), agus Choimisiún na Marcanna Earraí Ceannaíochta (Uimh. 48 de 1931).

That a sum not exceeding £3,467 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1937, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Tariff Commission (No. 40 of 1926 and No. 31 of 1930), and of the Merchandise Marks Commission (No. 48 of 1931).

General Mulcahy

I wonder would the Minister tell us what the Tariff Commission are doing?

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

The work of the Tariff Commission is the investigating of tariffs, but the members of the Tariff Commission seem to be performing other functions as well. The members of the Tariff Commission are also members of the Merchandise Marks Commission; some members of it also constitute the Fruit and Vegetables Tribunal, and the Chairman, I understand, is also acting as Chairman of the Dairy Disposals Board, so that while they are not, I might say, fully engaged in Tariff Commission work they are fully engaged. This particular Vote covers their activities under these three or four separate heads. One of the members is also in charge of the Stationery Office, a Department of the State.

General Mulcahy

I wonder would it be possible to relieve members of the Tariff Commission from some of their duties on these other bodies to which the Parliamentary Secretary refers, for the purpose of getting them to look at some tariffs that have been imposed. For instance the Minister for Agriculture told us the other day that the Government had sent the Muirchu over to some shipyard in Great Britain to have repairs carried out there, because the tenders for repairs that were received from the Dublin Dockyard were higher I think by 41 per cent. in one case and 66 per cent. in another case than the tenders sent in by the British dockyard. On the other hand, that is equivalent to saying that a tariff of 41 per cent. or 66 per cent. was denied to the ship repairers or shipbuilders here in the city of Dublin as against an outside tender while the Minister for Finance and the Minister for Commerce with the greatest possible lightheartedness have been asking the Dáil week in and week out to put a tariff of 75 per cent. on cutlery and things like that in connection with cutlery assembling and a tariff of 100 per cent. on assembling of clocks. Even to-day we had I think a tariff of 75 per cent. put on some clock cases and things like that. If the position is that there are some heavy industries that we do require to have here, I think it would be worth while to ask the Tariff Commission at least to take up such cases as I have mentioned and to carry out an examination as to whether in fact it was the reasonable and correct thing to send the Muirchu out of this country for repairs rather than give a tariff as substantial as 66 per cent. to the ship repair workers here; and on the other hand to say if it was reasonable to give 100 per cent. protection to clock assemblers. The tariff position is now settled, and rather definitely in some cases, behind high tariff walls and I think the time has come when the Tariff Commission should be relieved from some of their other duties in order to enable them to review the whole tariff situation as it exists and give us in greater detail than the Minister for Industry and Commerce or the Minister for Finance is able to give us the case for preserving these tariffs at their present level. There are certain things that can very well be compared and it does to my mind seem rather tinkering with industrial development if, as I say, wanting some heavy industries badly, we are to refuse this tariff to dockyard workers and at the same time thinking we are performing the greatest national service, give 100 per cent. to the clock assemblers in this country.

Mr. Flinn

I think the Deputy has raised an extremely interesting point and one which under other circumstances might well be raised here——

General Mulcahy

Surely this is the only occasion on which I could raise this point.

Mr. Flinn

Oh, I am not questioning that at all. At the moment so far as the Estimate is concerned, so far as the people concerned here are shown to be engaged in full-time work then the Estimate is all right but the Deputy has asked to what extent there has been any review as to the actual consequences of tariffs. I remember when the tariffs were introduced under the previous régime that we were told they were for experimental purposes. I certainly as a student was extremely interested in these tariffs and in their experimental purposes. I did go to some trouble— and I was met with courtesy by the officers of the Department of Industry and Commerce—in attempting to find out what information had been obtained in relation to these experiments and what conclusion had been drawn from them. I was at the time disappointed to find that there were no apparent recorded experiences in connection with them, and this is a thing I regard as a defect in relation to the tariffs introduced. I think there should come a time when there should be some attempt to find out exactly the consequences of tariffs in particular and, if possible, from experiences of actual tariffs, to formulate some rules under which you could decide the question of tariffs. I think the Deputy will agree that at the moment there are no agreed criteria under which you could estimate the value of tariffs. Governments in all countries are introducing tariffs on different degrees and varieties of articles apparently with no scientific basis at any rate.

General Mulcahy

The framers of the Tariff Commission laid down the basis and provided a reasonable ground under which a consideration of the tariffs could be carried out.

Mr. Flinn

I am not questioning that. The Deputy will agree that there will be no agreement in this House at the present moment on the matter of those criteria upon which tariffs could be imposed. I agree that what the Deputy has said is one statement on the tariffs, but I am putting to him that until you have some agreed basis upon which tariffs can be judged you cannot set up that investigation.

General Mulcahy

But you cannot have materials upon which to make a basis until you have had your investigation.

Mr. Flinn

If you are going to have an answer to the question you must know that the important matter is the formulation of the terms of that question, and it is not the slightest use to assume that the Tariff Commission was in a position to do so. Unless and until this House is agreed on the nature of the question to be put to the Tariff Commission, it would be impossible to put that question usefully to them. I have, said it when in Opposition, and I say it now: that there should be the most critical examination of the results and activities of this kind, and I should like to see some method by which that could be done. It is again evident that that could not be done because the Tariff Commission under the terms of reference which the Deputy regarded as good, but which I do not regard as good, required two or three years to investigate one single tariff. If it is the policy of this House that this country should be effectively protected by tariffs, then it is perfectly obvious that the method used by the Tariff Commission would not meet the case—I am merely putting this to the Deputy——

General Mulcahy

I am not raising anything but the post factum question that it is assumed to examine things.

Mr. Flinn

It is a post factum question as to whether or not the commission shall investigate something on some terms of reference on which the Deputy knows this House will not agree.

General Mulcahy

The Parliamentary Secretary misunderstands me, I think. I asked that the Tariff Commission be used now to see what actually has happened without going into what would happen if a tariff had gone on in the past.

Mr. Flinn

To ask the Tariff Commission to say what has happened means nothing. The Tariff Commission would not know what you meant when you put them that question. They would say that under this a whole series of industries has been started, X, Y and Z, a certain increase of wages has been distributed, a certain increase or decrease of prices has taken place in certain places. They have ascertained that. Are they then to be asked to decide whether that was right or whether it was wrong? Are they to be asked to balance one against the other, or what are they to be asked to do? The returns of industrial production is an investigation of that kind from the most material point of view. It shows in relation to every industry the increase in the distribution of wages; the increase and the use of material; the increase of prices of the commodities; the relation between manufacturings costs; and the relation between materials and total costs. It seems to me that the returns of industrial production in relation to every industry give to the Deputy all the facts upon which he could formulate a case, if he desired to do so. What it does not do is, it does not lay down any standard by which we can judge whether an increase of X in the price of a particular commodity being balanced by an increase of Y in the distribution of wages, a benefit is being obtained by the community and, if so, what is the amount of that benefit?

Vote put and agreed to.