Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 29 Oct 1947

Vol. 108 No. 7

Resolution No. 6—Customs and Excise.

Mr. Aiken

I move that the Dáil agree with the Committee in Financial Resolution No. 6:—

(1) That the Finance Act, 1920, as amended by Section 7 of the Finance Act, 1946 (No. 15 of 1946), shall, as on and from the 16th day of October, 1947, be amended by the substitution in Part I of the First Schedule to the said Finance Act, 1920, of the matter set out in the Schedule to this Resolution for the matter inserted therein by the said Section 7, and sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the said Finance Act, 1920, shall have effect accordingly.

(2) That the duty of excise imposed by sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Finance Act, 1920, shall, as on and from the 16th day of October, 1947, be charged, levied, and paid at the rate of six pounds, seventeen shillings the gallon (computed at proof) in lieu of the rate chargeable by virtue of sub-section (2) of Section 7 of the Finance Act, 1946.

(3) That nothing in this Resolution shall operate to relieve from or to prejudice or affect the additional customs duties or the additional excise duty in respect of immature spirits imposed by Section 9 of the Finance Act, 1926 (No. 35 of 1926).

(4) It is hereby declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution shall have statutory effect under the provisions of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1927 (No. 7 of 1927).

General Mulcahy

What is the effect of this Resolution going to be?

Mr. Aiken

The Schedule sets out exactly what is going to happen, and I do not think that there is any necessity for me to read the Schedule. It is quite difficult to read out and it is there for General Mulcahy to read if he wants to.

General MacEoin

Does the Minister intend to double the Garda Síochána Force? With the small crop of oats, wheat and barley in certain parts of the country and the bad potato crop, a great deal will be manufactured into the native brew, and the Minister, by putting a tax of 6d. extra on spirits, is going to give one of the greatest possible fillips to a native industry which has not the sanction of any Party in this House or of the Minister for Finance. The net result will be that the little still on the hill will be working harder than ever to the detriment of a great number of people. I would like to ask the Minister whether he has considered all the dangers that this increase is likely to bring about in the country. It is true that in winter time a drop of whiskey in the house is very useful to all types of workers and this 6d. per glass increase is not justified under the circumstances.

Mr. Davin

Will the Minister state quite frankly whether this tax has been put on as a result of a request from elsewhere to reduce dollar expenditure, and whether he can confirm what was said in effect by the Minister for Industry and Commerce that by reducing the demand for whiskey here there could be an increase in the quantity for export to America in order to get dollars in return? Is that the sole reason for the tax, and, if not, what is the real reason?

General Mulcahy

The reason we were given when the proposal was first made known to the House was that the Minister wanted to get £935,000 more out of the pockets of those who are going to drink spirits in the current 12 months. I think that the Minister should dilate on this, particularly if there is a conflict between the explanation given either here or anywhere else by the Minister for Industry and Commerce in regard to the intention of this. If I understand the proposal put before the House by the Minister for Finance it intends to take £935,000 out of the pockets of the people who want to use spirits.

Mr. Davin

If they can get them.

General Mulcahy

The House has been told that the ability of this country to pay 1d. per person per day in relief depends on the Minister being able to get another £935,000 out of their pockets.

Mr. Morrissey

A little more than that was said about it. That was not what the Minister said when this was being introduced, but because they wanted to stop the people drinking spirits so that we should have a greater exporting surplus of spirits, particularly whiskey, to enable us to get badly-needed dollars. I should like to know whether the Minister or his Department has made any estimate of the additional amount of whiskey which it will be possible to export consequent on the imposition of this additional tax. Can the Minister tell us whether any estimate has been made of the number of additional dollars we shall get for the additional whiskey so exported? Will he tell us how the dollars which we get for all the whiskey we now export compare with the 4,500,000 dollars which we are expending for five air machines?

Mr. Aiken

I shall not be drawn into a general Budgetary debate on a Financial Resolution. These Budget proposals were made by the Government at my request and at the request of nobody else. If Deputy Davin would remember that he is not addressing a public meeting down the country, we should get along much more quickly with this business. It is hoped to raise £935,000 by this increased duty on spirits. There was no difference in the explanations given by the Taoiseach, the Minister for Industry and Commerce and myself in regard to the Budgetary proposals. We hope to get this additional sum of £935,000 from the tax but if, as the Minister for Industry and Commerce said, by any chance, the Revenue Commissioners and I are wrong in our estimates and we do not get that amount, then there will be more whiskey for export. The proposals were made on the assumption that we should get this increased revenue of £935,000 this year.

General Mulcahy

From five months consumption.

Mr. Morrissey

Are we to understand that this estimate of £935,000 assumes that there will be no reduction in the amount of whiskey consumed in this country?

Mr. Aiken

The Deputy has already made one speech and I shall not reply to a second speech by him.

Mr. Morrissey

I respectfully submit that my question is perfectly in order.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is entitled to put a question.

Mr. Morrissey

My question and remarks were absolutely relevant to this resolution. I spoke of nothing but whiskey and I assume that this Resolution deals with whiskey. I am asking for information which is at the Minister's disposal and which I am entitled to get—whether the estimate of £935,000 is based on the same consumption of whiskey in this country as at present. Surely, that is a reasonable question.

Mr. Aiken

The sum of £935,000 is based on the consumption which we expect.

Mr. Morrissey

The Minister is entitled to take up that attitude but, if he does, he will not make matters easier for himself or for the Financial Resolutions. I know who will have the best of the bargain if the Minister takes up that line of conduct.

Mr. Coburn

I understand that the Minister said that his estimate was based on the present consumption here. May I remind the Minister that the Minister for Industry and Commerce stated in this House that it was hoped to be in a position to export a large quantity of whiskey so as to get dollars needed for foodstuffs——

An Ceann Comhairle

May I remind the Deputy that the Minister has concluded?

Mr. Coburn

I am putting a question.

Mr. Davin

Has the Minister any hope of increasing the export of whiskey to America, or elsewhere, as a result of the imposition of this tax? That question has nothing to do with crossroad speeches. It is a fair question.

Mr. Aiken

That was not the question which I described as of the crossroad type in my reply. Deputy Davin knows very well the portion of his speech which I referred to as of the crossroad type.

Mr. Davin

I had not the pleasure of listening to you during the by-elections.

Mr. Aiken

You had the pleasure of listening to yourself.

Mr. Davin

I had a bigger audience than you had at Cloughjordan.

Question put and declared carried.