Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 22 Jun 1950

Vol. 121 No. 16

Questions— Oral Answers. - Perambulators.

asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce whether it is proposed to alter the policy outlined in communication T.I.D. 1294/1224 of 30th Samhain, 1948, providing for duty-free importation of perambulator components and accessories by recognised perambulator manufacturers only; and, if so, whether he is aware that the demand for parts for the servicing of Irish-manufactured perambulators is very small and has always been met; that the servicing of imported perambulators does not require the unrestricted importation of component parts, and that the home industry would be seriously prejudiced by the dumping of imported parts on the home market; and if he will give an assurance that the aforementioned policy will not be altered except to provide further and better protection for the home manufacturing industry.

It is not proposed to alter the policy outlined in the letter referred to by the Deputy except in so far as it has been decided to recommend the issue of duty-free licences to retailers of perambulators for imports of a limited number of parts, not procurable from home manufacturers, for resale as replacements and for the servicing and repair of perambulators. I have no particulars for the demand for parts for the servicing of Irish-manufactured perambulators but I understand that it has always been met.

I am aware that the servicing of imported perambulators does not require the unrestricted importation of parts. I am not aware, nor have I any reason to believe, that the concession granted was sought only for the purpose of establishing an assembly business in competition with the home manufacturing industry. It is not considered, nor is it desired, that the concession granted to retailers of perambulators should interfere with the manufacture of perambulators here or adversely affect employment in the industry. With this object in mind applications for imports of the parts covered by the concession are closely examined to ensure that only limited quantities of any of the parts will be admitted free of duty.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary's Department not considering treating the importation of parts in the same way as radio and motor car parts, that is, subject to the duty? The Parliamentary Secretary must be aware that the number required for the servicing of assembled perambulators is infinitesimal. Having them subject to a duty would not inflict hardship on the traders who are, apparently, looking for them. Is the Parliamentary Secretary further aware that there is a serious fear amongst the manufacturers that this is the thin end of the wedge to start an assembling industry which would put the manufacturing industry out of existence?

There are no grounds for that fear. The parts admitted free of duty are parts which were unprocurable from home sources.

Can the Parliamentary Secretary say that he is not utilising the ordinary channel outlined by him in the communication referred to for the importation of these parts, namely, the manufacturers of perambulators in the country?

As I understand it, only a limited number of firms have applied. I do not know what the Deputy means by the "ordinary channel".

Is the Parliamentary Secretary not aware that, as outlined in that communication, the recognised manufacturers were set up as the channel for the importation of parts for the servicing of home and imported perambulators? That practice is being departed from now.

The parts in question are often required by retailers to service perambulators in different localities. I do not think it is desirable that they should be obliged to get these parts — possibly in small individual consignments — through any other body.

Is that not the practice in practically all trades — that the retailers are supplied through wholesalers? In this case the manufacturers are serving the purpose of wholesalers. Has the Parliamentary Secretary any information that the retailers of these parts had any difficulty in getting them through the manufacturers who were permitted to import them?

It was on the recommendations made that the facilities were afforded.

Top
Share