I move amendment No. 9:—
Before Section 15 to insert a new section as follows:—
(1) The duty of customs imposed by Section 20 of the Finance Act, 1952 (No. 20 of 1952), shall in respect of tobacco imported on or after the 1st day of October, 1954, be charged, levied and paid at the several rates specified in Part I of the Fifth Schedule to this Act.
(2) The duty of excise imposed by Section 19 of the Finance Act, 1934 (No. 31 of 1934), shall, as on and from the 1st day of October, 1954, be charged, levied and paid at the several rates specified in Part II of the Fifth Schedule to this Act.
(3) Sub-sections (3) and (5) of Section 19 of the Finance Act, 1934, shall apply to tobacco which is chargeable with the duty of excise imposed by sub-section (1) of the section at a rate specified in Part II of the Fifth Schedule to this Act and for the purpose of such application references in the said sub-sections (3) to (5) of the said Section 19 to Part I of the Sixth Schedule to the said Finance Act, 1934, shall be construed and have effect as references to Part II of the Fifth Schedule to this Act.
(4) The rebate on hard pressed tobacco mentioned in sub-section (2) of Section 17 of the Finance Act, 1940 (No. 14 of 1940), shall, in respect of any such tobacco sold and sent out for use within the State by any licensed manufacturer on or after the 1st day of October, 1954, be at the rate of two shillings and eight pence per pound.
(5) For the purpose of this section, importation shall be deemed to take place at the time when the entry of the relevant goods under the Customs Consolidation Act, 1876, is delivered.
This is another of the series of amendments which I have moved to this Bill, the purpose of which is to reduce taxes to the extent that members of the present Government, and Deputies behind them, had suggested was possible prior to the general election. The most remarkable thing about the discussion upon these amendments is that no member of the Government has thought fit to explain to the Dáil why it is not possible to reduce these taxes now. They had repeatedly asserted in the past that these taxes were unnecessary and had expressed confidence in their ability to reduce them, if the opportunity were given them. Deputies will recollect that the present Taoiseach had said that he would repeal these taxes in ten minutes if he became head of the Government, and that he would resign in one minute if he found himself unable to do so.
Perhaps equally remarkable is the fact that during the course of the debate not a single Deputy sitting behind the Government thought fit to ask the Government as to why a reduction is not possible. These Deputies seem to have forgotten completely the confidence they expressed before the election in their ability to force the Government to reduce taxes. Should they not now ask for an explanation as to why it cannot be done? Not a single one of them has sought that explanation. Apparently they are content to vote to maintain these taxes without knowing why. The definite pledges and undertakings given by them to the electorate are still fresh in our minds. The speed at which they are discarding these pledges and repudiating their undertakings is rather nauseating. They should at least make some pretence at seeking a reasonable explanation as to why it is necessary to maintain these taxes at their present level.
If the Government will say that these taxes cannot be reduced, that the revenue that they will yield is required for the purpose of meeting the cost of necessary Government services, then the position will be clear to the public. The issue between us during the course of the election campaign was whether these taxes were necessary or not. We said that they were necessary, that the Budget could not be balanced without the revenue which they represented except at the cost of a serious curtailment in the scope of Government services. Deputies opposite said that these services could be maintained and taxes reduced at the same time. If that was not so, will they say so? If the explanation is that the Government has now found out, and Deputies behind them are beginning to suspect, that during the election campaign they were talking nonsense and, if they stand up now and say so, it will end this discussion. We know they were talking nonsense. They are beginning to suspect it. Some members of the Government know that in that respect we were right and they were wrong but will they say that?
Will the Minister for Finance stand up and say that he is resisting the reduction of these taxes because he cannot forgo the revenue which they will bring in? That is the explanation which the Dáil is entitled to get, an explanation which the public will understand. It is treating the Dáil with contempt for Ministers to ask the House to resist these amendments without giving a reason for that resistance. It is treating the public with contempt, in view of the declarations that were made to them and the promises that were given to them, to refuse now to cut down these taxes without giving a single reason for maintaining them.
Do Deputies not think their constituents are entitled to an explanation of the votes they gave yesterday? Is there one Deputy opposite who will attempt to give that explanation? If that explanation is not given it merely demonstrates the contempt that Deputies have for those who voted for them.