Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 22 Feb 1950

Vol. 119 No. 4

Irish Whiskey Bill, 1950—Second and Subsequent Stages.

Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Mr. McGilligan

Deputies may remember that when speaking on the Financial Resolutions on the 4th May last year, I indicated that I proposed to meet representations of the Irish Pot Still Distillers' Association in regard to certain definitions. They had asked that the terms "Irish whiskey" and "Irish pot still whiskey" should be legally defined and pointed out that the absence of a definition constituted a certain handicap in relation to the export market. I had said that it seemed to me that the proper occasion to deal with the matter would be the Finance Bill of the year, but I was warned by the Chair, that the inclusion of a provision of that kind in the Finance Bill, might mean that the Finance Bill would not be declared to be a Money Bill. For that reason, I did not go on with the suggestion, since what I had indicated to the House was reported to me as likely to happen. When I did not put it in the Finance Bill, I thought of bringing it in at a later stage and this is now the time to fulfil my promise to the distillers.

In regard to the legal definition of Irish whiskey, the distillers said a definition of this type was necessary in order to safeguard the name of Irish whiskey at home and abroad. It is a rather technical matter. The whole matter has been under discussion with the people concerned—mainly these distillers—and with Ceimici Teoranta. The Department of Industry and Commerce have also been consulted about this and have concurred in the proposed amendment of the law. Deputies will see that all that is set out is that spirits described either as "Irish whiskey" or "Irish pot still whiskey" are not be deemed to correspond to the description for certain purposes unless—and then certain conditions are set out which form the technical side. The Bill is related to sub-section (9) of Section 105 of an Act of 1880 known as the Spirits Act. That sub-section (9) is in the following terms:—

"If any question arises as to the accuracy of the description of spirits in a permit or certificate, the proof that the spirits correspond to the description shall lie on the owner or claimant of the spirits, who shall prove the same by the oaths of two credible witnesses, being skilful and experienced persons competent to decide by examination thereof."

We add on to that that spirits described as "Irish whiskey" or "Irish pot still whiskey" will not be deemed to correspond to the description unless certain things are carried out which are set out in (a) and (b) of Section 1 of this Bill. That will meet the requirements, we have been assured. We have been assured further that representations on similar lines were made by the Scotch distillers to the British Government in 1933 and that they achieved the result in the Finance Act of 1933, where there was a definition of Scotch whiskey related to this same Act of 1880. We are following exactly the same procedure as adopted then.

I do not pretend to be able to explain what the definition will entail, but I do know that it is sought by the distillers as a necessity for protecting their export trade. The permit does not apply to export: the permit applies when spirits are moved inside the country from one bonded place to another; but the permit being given for the purpose of the internal movement of the spirits will be accepted, say in America, in relation to whatever whiskey is exported there. That is the way the situation is met for export purposes.

Mr. Aiken

We are, of course, altogether agreeable that this Bill should be adopted by the House. When Fianna Fáil was in office, it did all in its power to encourage our distillers to get up the stocks of whiskey, so that in the post-war period we might add to our export trade. Had they asked for anything like that, of course, and proved to the Government and its officials that it was necessary, they would have got it. Indeed, in certain years the commodities that were in short supply were made available to the distillers in order that they might get up their stocks.

I am sure the Minister and his officials have examined this from the technical point of view and are satisfied that it meets the situation. Reading it as a layman. it seems to me to be simple enough and if it gives power to prevent the movement of really good Irish whiskey it is a thing that everybody would approve of. We do not want the name of Irish whiskey to be destroyed in foreign markets—it is much too valuable an export trade—by people exporting Irish whiskey which is not up to standard.

Mr. Sweetman

This definition, as I have had occasion to know outside this House, is absolutely necessary, if there is to be any export to America. In fact, the position up to this has been that it is only by an indirect method that exports to America have been permitted. I think Deputy Aiken is wrong when he says that this is the first time it has come up. I remember this matter being raised about seven or eight years ago and on that occasion I do not think the then powers that be were prepared to give the association the facilities that are being given now. Just as the Deputy a few minutes ago welcomed the Customs Bill as a change of heart, so I, too, welcome this Bill as a similar one. Apart from that pleasantry—which was not what I got up to mention—there is very definite danger of real damage being done to the reputation of Irish whiskey, particularly by what is known as "Irish type" whiskey. I think that one of the things which this definition will do is to enable the distillers themselves to tighten up this point in their own associations, in their own sales catalogues, retail sales catalogues and so forth. There was a suggestion here some time ago that certain Irish whiskey would be utilised as a basis for Irish type whiskey in America and if anything like that were to occur it would be disastrous to the name of Irish whiskey. Anything we can do in this definition to prevent that happening would be welcomed by the country as a whole.

Question put and agreed to.

Agreed to take the remaining stages now.

Bill passed through Committee without amendment, received for final consideration and passed.