I take it that the document which was sent to Deputies in reference to this Bill contains an error where it says—"As amended on Report"?
Documents and Pictures (Regulation of Export) Bill, 1945—Report and Fifth Stages.
Yes. It should be Committee—not Report. There is an error.
I move amendment No. 1:—
In page 3, Section 4 (2), lines 8 and 9, to delete the words "to enable photographic copies of the article to be made" and to substitute the words "for the making within a reasonable time of photographic copies of the article".
This amendment is to meet the point raised by Deputy Dillon that where documents are obtained for the purpose of making copies of them for the national collections there will be no undue delay. In order to meet the Deputy's point, I propose to insert the words: "within a reasonable time" in the appropriate place. I am informed that in fact there is very little delay. As I told the House yesterday, a very large number of papers can be copied within a single day in the National Library and I am not quite sure that the word "reasonable" will have the meaning that the Deputy, perhaps, would like. In any case, I think it is the best solution at the present time. I should like to get the remaining stages of the Bill as soon as possible. So, even though the amendment may not be of as much value as we would wish, I have put it on the paper and I propose to insert it to meet the point that has been raised.
I thank the Minister for introducing the amendment, which I think does meet the point I raised. In so far as I am personally concerned, I have no objection whatever to his taking the remaining stages to-day.
There is a point which is not quite clear to me. I see that the word "document" includes all photographs——
That is not in the amendment.
It is in the Bill. I am asking for an explanation.
I want to get the amendment agreed to first. The Deputy will have a chance on the Fifth Stage, rather than on Report.
Amendment agreed to.
Bill, as amended, received for final consideration.
Question proposed: "That the Bill do now pass."
I wanted to ask the Minister what is the position in regard to photographs that are sent out of this country for exhibition purposes and that come into this country for exhibition purposes and are then re-exported? Potentially, any photograph could be a document. Is the customs officer going to hold up photographs that are being sent out for proof that they are not within the scope of this Bill? If the Minister would explain to us the procedure by which an ordinary photograph for exhibition in some foreign country can leave this country without getting a certificate from the Minister, I should be perfectly satisfied.
If the Deputy would read the Bill he would see that the definition under the word "document" applies, under Section 2, to a document over 100 years old. I do not know whether or not that meets the Deputy's point.
No. My point is, how will the customs officer be satisfied, when photographs are leaving this country, that ordinary photographs do not come within the scope of this Bill? Is he to look at the photograph and to say: "That does not appear to be a photograph of a document over 100 years old"? That is my point.
Was not this point provided for by the Minister's amendment yesterday, when he took power to exclude from the prescription of this Bill "classes of objects". On that occasion, he said that he had in mind that where there was going to be an exhibition of photographs or paintings, he could make an Order exempting the whole category of goods from the operation of the Act. He instanced — rather incongruously, I think—the case of Christmas cards, saying he could make an Order excluding them. Is it not his purpose under that amendment to make an Order excluding such a category of goods as that described by Deputy Dockrell, so as to allow a person in possession of them to bring them in or take them out at his own sweet will?
Yes, if the document or the photographs in this case have no value from the historical point of view. In the event of their being over 100 years old and the provisions of the Bill applying to them, I can either give the owner who wishes to export them an export licence or, as Deputy Dillon points out, I can, under the sub-section which we inserted yesterday, exempt particular classes of photographs or any other articles from the operation of the Bill.
And, ordinarily, the Minister would proceed to exempt all photographs, since there are no photographs over 100 years old?
It is a pity that Deputy Dockrell did not address his question to Deputy Dillon. He might have gleaned that information before now.
Both Deputy Dockrell and I are very interested in this matter of photographs. If the Minister for Local Government and Public Health would behave himself, the Minister for Education and I would find out where we stand.
I cannot give any undertaking in advance. All I can say is that if the documents are of no value from the historical point of view, no obstacle will be placed in the way.
The word "document" in this Bill is deemed to include photographs. As it is his intention not to restrict the export of documents which are less than 100 years old, will the Minister not make an Order, in all probability under this sub-section, exempting all photographs, since there are no photographs 100 years old, the best you could get 100 years ago being a Daguerrograph?
I suggest that the confusion arises——
The Deputy should remember that this is the Fifth Stage and that he may speak only once. I will hear the Deputy.
Unless the Minister specifically declares photographs to come under the Bill, photographs are exempt, under Section 2, sub-section (1) (c), which declares:—
"Any document declared by an Order made by the Minister ... to be an article to which this Act applies".
Paragraph (a) excludes all photographs and therefore, unless the Minister makes an Order declaring certain photographs to come in, no photographs would be subject to the Act.
He told us yesterday that all photographs came under the Act.
Well, I will have to look into the matter.
Question put and agreed to.