Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 21 Jun 1960

Vol. 183 No. 1

Committee on Finance. - Finance Bill, 1960—Financial Resolution.

I move:—

"(1) That the following subsection shall be inserted in section 1 of the Finance (Excise Duties) (Vehicles) Act, 1952 (No. 24 of 1952), after subsection (10):

‘(10A) In Part I of the Schedule to this Act "tricycle" shall (without prejudice to the provision with respect to that word contained in subparagraph (1) of paragraph 1 of Part II of that Schedule) be construed as referring to a vehicle conforming to such definition of a tricycle as the Minister for Local Government prescribes for the purposes of the said Part I by regulations.'

(2) That—

(a) subsection (1) of section 9 of the Roads Act, 1920, shall be amended by the substitution of ‘the first day of April' for ‘the twenty-fifth day of March',

(b) subsection (2) of section 15 of the Finance Act, 1922, shall be amended by the substitution of ‘the first day of April' for ‘the twenty-fifth day of March' and

(c) subsection (11) of section 1 of the Finance (Excise Duties) (Vehicles) Act, 1952, shall be amended by the substitution of ‘the three months beginning with the 1st day of January, the three months beginning with the 1st day of April' for ‘the period beginning with the 1st day of January and ending with the 24th day of March, the period beginning with the 25th day of March and ending with the 30th day of June'.

(3) That references in the Roads Act, 1920, the Finance Act, 1922, and the Finance (Excise Duties) (Vehicles) Acts, 1952 and 1960, to the use of a vehicle shall be construed as if the word ‘use' included keeping or leaving a vehicle stationary.

(4) That paragraph 2 of Part I of the Schedule to the Finance (Excise Duties) (Vehicles) Act, 1952, shall be amended by the substitution of ‘6 cwt.' for ‘5 cwt.'

(5) That subparagraph (c) of paragraph 6 of Part I of the Schedule to the Finance (Excise Duties) (Vehicles) Act, 1952, shall be amended by the insertion after ‘for the conveyance of a machine, workshop, contrivance or implement' of ‘(being a machine, workshop, contrivance or implement which is built in as part of the vehicle or otherwise permanently attached thereto)'.

(6) That the foregoing provisions of this Resolution shall have effect as on and from the 1st day of July, 1960.

(7) 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)."

Am I correct in thinking No. 4 is intended to be a Financial Resolution and not a Money Resolution?

It is a Financial Resolution.

Who is moving it?

I moved it.

If this is a Financial Resolution it is usual so to head them in the Order Paper. Money Resolutions are never so headed but I thought Financial Resolutions are so headed?

It is set out on Page 369 of the Order Paper, No. 11 as:

"(a) Finance Bill, 1960—Committee (Motions for Financial Resolution and for Money Resolution—See Nos. 4 and 5)."

It is usually set out on the Resolution itself.

I do not think so.

I have certainly seen it so.

If it is a main Financial Resolution.

Then this is the fourth Budget this year?

Sin ceist eile.

Some changes have been made in motor vehicles duties, some very small changes, and it was to obviate the necessity for bringing in a special Bill that I undertook to bring them in in the Finance Bill on behalf of the Minister for Local Government. I think I might say a few words on each subsection. Subsection I refers to tricycles, some of which are now being made in this country with two wheels close together. There is some definition under the Acts but fortunately this type of vehicle is not properly covered and, for road traffic purposes, it is proposed that these tricycles can be classed as tricycles and not as four-wheeled vehicles.

The second subsection proposes to change the ending of the first quarter from the 25th March to the last day of March. That will make the four quarters of equal length. At present, I think there are ten days' difference between the first quarter and the second quarter. The change was made many years ago and was regarded at the time as being temporary because Easter occurred between the 25th and 31st March that year, and evidently it was intended to give people an opportunity of bringing their cars out taxed for the second quarter for Easter. Although at the time it was regarded as temporary, it has remained there ever since.

Subsection 3 deals with the point that has been raised, I believe, in some cases that a vehicle standing on the road is not in use and, therefore, a charge that the vehicle is unlicensed or any other charge could not be sustained. Up to this it has been interpreted that the vehicle is in use when standing on the road, but evidently some doubts now arise in that connection. This is intended to make sure that vehicles standing on the public highway are in fact regarded as in use.

Does the Minister say that this is a proposal to regard the vehicle as being in use——

——for all purposes of the Finance Act even when in a garage or locked up?

No, when on the public highway.

Subsection 4 deals with invalid-propelled vehicles which, up to this, were always under 5 cwt., but there is some new type or make recently introduced which is between 5 cwt. and 6 cwt. and the regulation is being altered to allow these new vehicles to come under the very low taxation level applicable to these vehicles.

Subsection 5 deals with vehicles which are used as machines such as bulldozers or contrivances of that kind which are not detachable. They have a low tax rate and this is intended to strengthen the law in respect of them, so that the low-level taxation cannot be claimed where a machine is put on to a lorry where the lorry was not constructed purposely for that job. These are the main points. They are all very minor ones.

I do not understand No. 5.

It is as clear as mud I am afraid.

The wording of the original paragraph deals with the conveyance of a machine, workshop or implement and the intention is to insert the words "being a machine, workshop, contrivance or implement which is built in as part of the vehicle or otherwise attached thereto". It is to prevent a machine or workshop being put on to an ordinary lorry and a claim being made therefor of the lower rate of duty.

How could you put a workshop on to a lorry?

The Deputy is aware that there are workshops for repairs to bridges and so on. They are built on to lorries and this is merely to ensure that the fact that you build a workshop on to a lorry does not mean you can claim the lower rate of tax.

I am always very suspicious when the Department of Local Government asks the Department of Finance to do something. Then, prima facie, there must be some catch in it. The Minister started off by saying that subsection (1) meant that a tricycle was a vehicle with three wheels and that it had not got four wheels. That is an epoch-making discovery. But may I infer, from the procedure point of view, that when this Resolution is reported, if it is ever reported, there will be an amendment to the Finance Bill moved by the Minister based on these Financial Resolutions, or will that be taken separately? Will we be recommitted for that or what is the procedure for the discussion of the matter?

When the Finance Bill comes up there will be a Committee Stage on which these matters may be discussed.

Am I to understand that this Financial Resolution does nothing more than, so to speak, bring Section 21 of the Bill into order or does it go any further than Section 21?

It puts it into order and will come up for discussion on the Bill itself.

I understood from the Minister that this Resolution was to go beyond Section 21 as we have it.

No. I should have, in the normal way, brought in this Resolution at Budget time. As that was not done, it is being done now.

So it is purely to cover Section 21 and is not a further amendment to that Section?

Just to cover Section 21.

We shall have some discussion on the section.

It is not always easy to explain technical matters, but I have a constitutional horror of consenting to legislation which I am obliged to confess I do not understand. I do not understand paragraph 5. I do not even understand what kind of thing we are legislating about. I have never seen a workshop put on a lorry and I do not know what the meaning of that operation is. I can understand putting a machine on a lorry. I can understand putting a contrivance or an implement on a lorry, but it is more astonishing when I am told that the workshop must be permanently attached to the lorry.

Is there a Deputy in the House who has any clear vision of what a workshop, permanently attached, can be doing on a lorry? I imagine the Minister must have some more copious information on the subject somewhere in his files. Perhaps he could tell us if there are any notorious instances of workshops permanently attached to lorries which could bring to our mind a true picture of paragraph 5 of this Financial Resolution.

As the law stands, I should say, if a vehicle which is used entirely for the carriage of, say, a mobile crane——

Which would be a contrivance.

——or a tower waggon it is taxed at a lower rate—£1 per horse power lower. This amendment is brought in to prevent its becoming possible for a person to put such a thing as a crane into an ordinary lorry and claim, for that reason, that the lorry should be allowed the lower rate of duty. It was intended that this lower rate of duty was to cover the vehicle which was capable of carrying goods in the ordinary way but could never be used for the purpose of taking a workshop or a repair tower or the crane, permanently attached to it.

I see what it means now.

Question put and agreed to.
Resolution reported and agreed to.
Top
Share