Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 29 Oct 1947

Vol. 108 No. 7

Excise.

I move that the Dáil agree with the Committee in Resolution No. 10:—

(1) That in lieu of the duty of excise imposed by Section 6 of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1939 (No. 33 of 1939), there shall be charged, levied and paid on all beer brewed within the State on or after the 16th day of October, 1947, a duty of excise at the rate of ten pounds eleven shillings for every thirty-six gallons of worts of a specific gravity of one thousand and fifty-five degrees.

(2) That, in lieu of the drawback payable under Section 6 of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1939, there shall be allowed and paid on exportation as merchandise or for use as ship's stores of beer on which it is shown, to the satisfaction of the Revenue Commissioners, that the duty of excise imposed by this Resolution has been paid, a drawback, calculated according to the original specific gravity of such beer, at the rate of ten pounds eleven shillings and three-pence for every thirty-six gallons of which the original specific gravity was one thousand and fifty-five degrees.

(3) That, in the case of beer of which the specific gravity is different from the specific gravity mentioned in the relevant paragraph of this Resolution, the duty chargeable or the drawback payable (as the case may be) in pursuance of this Resolution shall be varied proportionately.

(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).

Mr. Morrissey

This is the Resolution that increases the price of the pint of stout and porter by 3d., and the-price of the bottle by 1½d. Will the Minister tell us—I am asking this because I have not the figure before me— what is the estimated yield from this?

£830,000.

Mr. Morrissey

I do not want to delay the House on this question because we have had this matter before, and we probably know more about it and its. effects. I am perfectly satisfied that the Minister will know more about it before the Second Stage of the Finance Bill is reached.

I am opposing this Resolution for the same reason that I opposed the increase in the price of cinema seats. I do not look on a pint of stout or porter or a bottle of stout as a luxury in the same way as some members of the Government apparently do. I want to remind the House that on an occasion many years ago a very distinguished member of the medical profession stated in this House that for men engaged in laborious work—particularly, manual labour—a pint or two pints of stout in the day would be of benefit to them and was to be commended rather than decried, so long as. the practice was not abused. He confined the allowance, more or less, to a couple of pints per day. It is idle for us to pretend that an increase in the cost of the pint or bottle of stout or ounce of tobacco or packet of cigarettes will not affect the cost of living of the average person. Of course, it will. We are merely pretending when we suggest that it will not. About 95 per cent. of the adults of this country— the ordinary, normal people—smoke or drink or go to the pictures or do two out of these things or all of them. The price of these things definitely enters into their cost of living. So long as the habit is not abused, I think it should enter into the cost of living.

The Minister may make the case that, in order to give these food subsidies, it was necessary to impose additional taxation. Could the money not be found out of savings from the already heavy taxation in force? We might be prepared to grant that to the Minister as justification for the increase of duty on wine or even on whiskey. We might say that whiskey or any other class of spirits should be regarded as luxury drinks, to be indulged in only by people able to pay for them. Beer—or stout and porter, as we know the drink in this country— is in a different category. I am opposed to this Resolution because it will have a very detrimental effect on the cost of living. Whether the House or the Minister likes it or not, it will affect the household budget to a very substantial extent. I do not want to go over the grounds again on which I am opposed to the Resolution. If one person out of a household takes a pint of stout or beer per day or two bottles of stout— which is not an abuse—it will mean 1/9 per week to him in additional taxation. Apart from the increase in the price of tobacco and in cinema prices, that will go a long way to wipe out whatever little relief is given by way of the subsidies for which, we are told, these additional taxes are imposed.

Question put.
The Dáil divided: Tá, 46; Níl, 32.

  • Aiken, Frank.
  • Beegan, Patrick.
  • Blaney, Neal.
  • Boland, Gerald.
  • Bourke, Dan.
  • Breathnach, Cormac.
  • Brennan, Thomas.
  • Breslin, Cormac.
  • Briscoe, Robert.
  • Buckley, Seán.
  • Butler, Bernard.
  • Carter, Thomas.
  • Childers, Erskine H.
  • Colley, Harry.
  • Crowley, Honour Mary.
  • Derrig, Thomas.
  • De Valera, Eamon.
  • Flynn, Stephen.
  • Furlong, Walter.
  • Gorry, Patrick J.
  • Hilliard, Michael.
  • Humphreys, Francis.
  • Kilroy, James.
  • Kissane, Eamon.
  • Lemass, Seán F.
  • Little, Patrick J.
  • Lydon, Michael F.
  • Lynch, James B.
  • McCarthy, Seán.
  • McEllistrim, Thomas.
  • MacEntee, Seán.
  • McGrath, Patrick.
  • Moylan, Seán.
  • O'Connor, John S.
  • O'Grady, Seán.
  • O'Loghlen, Peter J.
  • O'Reilly, Matthew.
  • Rice, Bridget M.
  • Ryan, James.
  • Ryan, Mary B.
  • Ryan, Robert.
  • Sheridan, Michael.
  • Skinner, Leo B.
  • Smith, Patrick.
  • Traynor, Oscar.
  • Walsh, Richard.

Níl

  • Beirne, John.
  • Bennett, George C.
  • Coburn, James.
  • Cogan, Patrick.
  • Corish, Brendan.
  • Costello, John A.
  • Davin, William.
  • Dockrell, Henry M.
  • Keyes, Michael.
  • McAuliffe, Patrick.
  • MacEoin, Seán.
  • McGilligan, Patrick.
  • Morrissey, Daniel.
  • Mulcahy, Richard.
  • Murphy, Timothy J.
  • O'Higgins, Thomas F.
  • Dockrell, Maurice E.
  • Doyle, Peadar S.
  • Everett, James.
  • Fagan, Charles.
  • Finucane, Patrick.
  • Giles, Patrick.
  • Halliden, Patrick J.
  • Keating, John.
  • O'Leary, John.
  • O'Reilly, Patrick.
  • O'Sullivan, Martin.
  • Pattison, James P.
  • Reidy, James.
  • Reynolds, Mary.
  • Rogers, Patrick J.
  • Sheldon, William A.W.
Tellers:— Tá: Deputies Kissane and Beegan; Níl: Deputies Doyle and Bennett.
Question declared carried.

What is the position, a Chinn Comhairle, with regard to Deputy Byrne's amendment to Resolution No. 11? I was going to move it on his behalf.

Mr. Morrissey

The amendment on the Order Paper, Sir. There is an amendment——

Yes. Have you the Deputy's permission?

I had not consulted him.

I am afraid it cannot be moved without the permission of the Deputy.

It can be put into the Finance Bill.

The Deputy will have an opportunity on the Finance Bill.

Mr. Morrissey

It will come under the Finance Bill again.

It cannot be moved?

Not without the consent of the Deputy. You will have another opportunity.

I can say the same thing on the Resolution.

When it is moved.

Top
Share