Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 29 Oct 1941

Vol. 85 No. 1

Imposition of Duties (Confirmation of Orders) Bill, 1941—Second and Subsequent Stages.

Minister for Industry and Commerce (Mr. Lemass)

I move that the Bill be now read a Second Time. This Bill is one of a number of similar Bills which has come before the House from time to time to confirm orders made under the Emergency Imposition of Duties Act, 1932. An order made under that Act by the Government requires to be confirmed by legislation within eight months. The orders being confirmed by this Bill are not of major importance. Three of them—Nos. 70, 155 and 214—were made solely for the purpose of giving the Government power to issue licences for the duty-free importation of the articles in question. Until these orders were made there was no power to permit duty-free importation of these articles in any circumstances. It was considered desirable that this power should be obtained and these orders were made. The other two orders mentioned in the Schedule result from recommendations made by the Prices Commission following reviews conducted by the commission of the duties in operation under the terms of the trade agreement with Great Britain made in 1938. As Deputies will remember, that trade agreement required that certain duties should be submitted to review by the Prices Commission.

We undertook to modify these duties if the commission so recommended, and to the extent that it so recommended. The commission, in accordance with the terms of the agreement, was asked to review the duties on certain clocks and on certain hollow-ware, and in due course its reports were presented, recommending certain modifications in the duties in each case. In the case of the duty upon clocks, which was a flat rate duty, the commission recommended the institution of a preferential rate for goods originating in the United Kingdom, and in the case of the duty upon hollow-ware it recommended a reduction from 40 per cent. to 30 per cent. in the preferential rate applicable to goods of British origin.

These orders have been made, and I am now asking for confirmation of them. I should mention that the first order in the Schedule—Order 70— was made on 15th March, 1941, and must be confirmed before 14th November; otherwise it lapses. It is undesirable that that order should lapse, and hence I am asking the Dáil to facilitate me in getting the Bill through the Dáil and the Seanad before the 14th November, by adopting all stages of the Bill to-day if there is no opposition to the measure.

Mr. Dockrell

The Minister said that the reason for passing the first three of these duties was in order to enable the licensing of duty free importation.

Mr. Lemass

Not the first three, but Nos. 1, 3 and 5.

Mr. Dockrell

It is not apparent to me how that works out, but I take the Minister's word for it. I do not suppose these are very important duties. I want to take this opportunity of reminding the Minister that, while it is very important to have power to allow importations duty free—and I entirely agree with it—to do that suddenly can impose great hardship on individual traders. One man may just have brought in a large consignment, and, although it may be to the interests of the country to do so, another person, a rival of his, may obtain his goods duty free. I would ask the Minister how far he can keep the commercial community in touch with the policy of the Government in these duty-free importations. At the present time, it seems as if anybody who can obtain supplies from anywhere is doing a service to the country. I suggest to the Minister that that requires long-term preparation. The person bringing in the goods would require to be able to give the supplier some idea as to how long the market was going to continue. At the present time we are living in a sellers' market. The seller can pick whom he is going to give his goods to, and is certainly going to be influenced by the good-will effect on his trading.

There is another point that, perhaps, I might mention in passing. It would seem as if, in spite of all the efforts that this country has made to build up Irish manufactures, that at the present time a great deal of those efforts are going to be brought to little or nothing. I suggest to the Minister that one of the reasons for that, perhaps the major reason, is that, while the manufacturing capacity of the country has been increased, due to the policy in other directions, the holding by stockists of goods has been enormously decreased. The consequence is that, I think, this country, on balance, has probably faced this war with much less preparation than it faced the last war. I would urge on the Minister that, even during the present crisis, he ought to see how far he can put the trading arrangements of the country on such a basis as to leave the stock-holding capacity of the country equal in some measure to the figure at which it stood before the last war. If he does that he will probably find that he will reap the benefit of Irish manufacturing and the stock-holding capacity of the country.

Mr. Lemass

With reference to the first of the matters that Deputy Dockrell mentioned, I want to say that importers generally are fully informed of the policy of the Department in the matter of issue of licences. I think no difficulty has been experienced by any trade organisations or associations in approaching the Department of Industry and Commerce and in ascertaining precisely what it is intended to do. Generally speaking, licences for commodities which are in short supply are issued on application. The difficulty is not in obtaining a licence to import, but to make the licence effective by procuring goods. I do not think there is any risk that the powers conferred under these orders can be used in the manner in which the Deputy suggests: that is to say, giving a licence for duty free importation in respect of goods upon which another importer has paid duty. I am quite certain that if any such case arose we would hear all about it very quickly.

Mr. Dockrell

On a point of order, I did not suggest that for a moment. What I am suggesting is that there is a period at which the duty is taken off—just before one man has paid it and after another will not have to pay it.

Mr. Lemass

That is true. That situation may arise at any time when a duty is either taken off or reduced in size. It may be an argument against taking off duties or reducing them in size. On the few occasions on which that situation did arise, where for one reason or another a duty was removed or reduced, my recollection is that we made special arrangements to permit of a refund of the duty in respect of goods held in stock by an importer on which duty had been paid. I can certainly say that we did that in the case of motor car parts which at one time were liable for duty. When the duty was removed, an assessment was made of the amount of duty paid on these parts held by importers, and, through a vote of the Dáil, a refund of the duty was given to them. I think that action of that kind would probably be necessary in any case where considerable hardship might result from a sudden change in the duty position.

Mr. Dockrell

What period would the Minister be prepared to go back over?

Mr. Lemass

In that particular case, we went back only as far as duty was paid on stocks held by persons who themselves paid duty.

Mr. Dockrell

They could not ask for any more than that.

Mr. Lemass

I do not know that the Deputy is quite correct in saying that the development of industry here and the imposition of tariffs to protect these industries had produced a position in which this country entered the war period less prepared than previously in the matter of stocks. I should say that that contention was not merely contrary to facts, but almost contrary to common sense. These duties were imposed for the purpose of protecting the industries established here, and it seems to me that the proprietors of these industries would have had a much greater inducement to secure their own position by laying in stocks of raw materials necessary to continue production than importers normally dependent on day to day importations of manufactured goods would have had. Not merely was there a greater inducement to the individual firm to acquire and maintain adequate stocks of materials for manufacture, but the capital cost of maintaining these stocks would be considerably less than the capital cost of maintaining an equivalent quantity of manufactured goods. My information is that, over a great range of commodities, it is much more true to say that our stock position was much better at the beginning of the war than it was at any time previously, or would have been, if manufacturing enterprises in relation to these goods had not been started here.

It is also a point to bear in mind at the present time that, even though there may be little point in maintaining duties which are at present ineffective, because the goods to which they relate cannot be imported anyhow, except under very exceptional circumstances and on very rare occasions, we have to rely to a very great extent upon the personal efforts of the individual manufacturers here to procure supplies of materials for themselves and, of course, the enthusiasm, willingness and enterprise of these manufacturers in doing that will perhaps be influenced by the security of their position here. Consequently, even though I do propose temporarily to suspend a number of duties which are at the moment of no importance because the goods to which they relate cannot be imported, I would not at all urge the adoption as a general policy of the removal of all duties in present circumstances. There are cases in which, I think, action along these lines might even have the opposite effect to that intended and might prevent us rather than facilitate us in obtaining additional supplies.

Mr. Hickey

Is there not a danger of creating a good deal of unemployment by too much freedom to import stuff?

Mr. Lemass

The trouble at the moment very largely is that we cannot get the goods anyhow, and in relation to a number of classes of goods, there is some prospect of obtaining the finished article, where the raw materials cannot be obtained. There is probably unemployment in these cases, because if the raw materials cannot be obtained, the employment will not be forthcoming anyhow.

Question put and agreed to.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Next stage?

Mr. Lemass

I should like to get all the stages now. I have already explained the reason. The Bill must be law, if it is to be effective, before 14th November. If the Dáil is not meeting next week, I should like to get all the stages to-day or to-morrow.

Agreed to take remaining stages now.

Bill put through Committee without amendment.

Bill received for final consideration and passed.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

This Bill has been certified by the Ceann Comhairle as a Money Bill within the meaning of Article 22 of the Constitution.