Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 15 Mar 1961

Vol. 187 No. 5

Imposition of Duties (Confirmation of Orders) Bill, 1961: Second Stage.

Minister for Posts and Telegraphs (Mr. Hilliard)

In the absence of the Minister for Industry and Commerce, I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time." The purpose of this Bill is to confirm thirteen Orders made under the Imposition of Duties Act, 1957, which provides that Orders made by the Government under that Act, imposing or amending duties must be confirmed in the calendar year following that in which they are made.

Six of the Orders afforded new protection. Five others amended existing duties where experience had shown that these duties were not adequate because of increasingly severe competition from imports. Two further Orders were made because the existing duties were being evaded.

An explanatory memorandum on the Bill has been circulated to Deputies. I shall, of course, be willing to give any further information or answer any questions which Deputies wish to ask about the Orders.

Mr. Sweetman

Most of the information one would normally ask for on this Bill I obtained by way of Question about a fortnight ago and I do not propose to go into that matter again. One is bound, however, to feel each time we get a new Imposition of Duties Bill some apprehension as to what is going to happen to new protection starting now when the wind of change in Europe becomes even more pronounced. Most people who are acquainted with the situation in Europe feel that it is a matter of a very short time before the tendency towards freeing trade barriers is so great that we here will have to pay some considerable attention to it.

Whether we join the Common Market or the E.F.T.A. or whether we remain outside of both, it is a fact that the trend is towards freer trade and I am apprehensive, therefore, on that account as to the future of the industries which are concerned. It is an issue that cannot be burked indefinitely and one that will have to be considered in the not too distant future.

I appreciate that the Minister is probably taking this Bill at short notice for reasons that are obvious but better left unsaid. In that he has a colleague because I only heard ten minutes ago that I would be asked to say a word from this side of the House. However, I do feel strongly that during the course of this year the Government, with the special information that they must have about the progress of the Common Market and E.F.T.A. and our possible adherence to either of these bodies, will have to do something towards publishing a White Paper making the information available to them available to the rest of the country. I appreciate there may be difficulties as part of the information might be confidential, but there is not sufficient awareness in the country of the problems with which we are likely to be faced in that regard and the best way of obtaining that awareness and creating an informed public opinion on the problems involved would be for the Government to give a lead by the publication of a White Paper.

Industrialists, although they have a good deal of information, have not got the same facilities at all to obtain the information necessary on which to make decisions as the Government would have. I would ask the Minister to discuss, not merely with the Minister for Industry and Commerce but with the Taoiseach and the Government as a whole, the desirability of the publication of information of a statistical nature such as I suggest.

Mr. Norton

I appreciate the Minister is handling this Bill for his colleagues and I do not want to ask questions which are complex or embarrassing. I want to make one observation, so as to give notice that I shall raise the matter on some other appropriate occasion. The Taoiseach made a speech recently in which he referred to the developments in Europe, to the emergence there of two powerful trading blocs and from what he said one could assume that some via media would be found whereby Ireland could be associated with either one or both of these two blocs. He said that when this situation came about it was going to mean a draught on our industries and that we may have to proceed to dismantle our tariffs. He said that because of that some industries might go to the wall and might have to be closed down but that others, perhaps more deeply rooted, would be able to survive and carry on.

The pattern of that speech was, as I recollect it, that the Government contemplated taking steps to temper the storm and that it is beginning to think of dismantling tariffs. One would assume that from that time onwards the tariffs to be imposed would be less protective in the future than in the past. Some of the tariffs here are pretty high. There is one here which is 75 per cent. full and 50 per cent. preferential and there are others which are 60 per cent. full and 40 per cent. preferential with minimum rates for specific articles.

I do not know whether this Bill is intended to implement in any way what the Taoiseach said, that tariffs would have to be dismantled or whether the Bill contains any of the dismantling machinery which he foreshadowed. I see no difference between these tariffs and those imposed in the past. I want to find out from the Minister whether the dismantling process envisaged by the Taoiseach has yet commenced or whether we are carrying on in the old pattern of tariffs which would mean that the Taoiseach's proposal has not yet been put into operation. I do not know if the Minister is in a position to answer that question. I know the form of this Bill having been myself Minister for Industry and Commerce and I know the elaborate brief that comes with it.

Could the Minister tell me from the brief what is the position in respect of the imposition of duties on the importation of toy balloons? There is at present a customs duty of 60 per cent. full and 40 per cent. preference. Are these balloons being made here now? Where are they being made and how many people are employed in the making of the balloons? What is the annual output of the firm in respect of these toy balloons? I think the Minister will find that information such as that is usually in the brief.

I would also like similar information in regard to No. 8 which imposes duties in respect of watches. These duties, in my recollection, have been altered on more than one occasion and apparently a further alteration was made in August last when the ad valorem duty was reduced from 60 per cent. full and 40 per cent. preference to thirty-three and a third per cent. full and 22.29 per cent. preference with a minimum rate of duty of 30/- full and 20/- preference on watches, watch parts and springs. Who exactly is doing this kind of work here? How many firms are engaged in it? Where are they? What is the value of their output and how many people are employed by them?

Then we come to No. 13 which is a duty on socks made of man-made fibres which came into operation in November. It amended the previous duty of 75 per cent. full and 50 per cent. preference and provided instead for a minimum rate of 50/- full and 34/4d. preference per dozen pairs of socks. Is this designed to deal with the socks imported from Britain or the Continent or is it a device to catch Hong-Kong socks, Japanese socks or socks made in other countries where cheap labour is used? I should be glad if the Minister can let me have this information but if he finds it difficult to give me the necessary information now I will be satisfied if he will send it to me.

Mr. Hilliard

The matters raised by Deputy Sweetman and Deputy Norton in relation to the position that exists in the trading groups in Europe have not come to any finality, as the Deputies will know, and I would not wish to enter into the field of prophecy as to what exactly will happen in that regard. I would suggest to the Deputies concerned that it would be more appropriate to raise these questions that have been raised here on the Minister's Estimate.

Any change in tariff policy or fiscal policy in any country necessarily brings with it difficulties. It brings with it a change in the organisation even of the firms that are engaged in industrial production in any country, and it is bound to bring a change in our country. We have been operating a protective policy for a long number of years and I want to assure the Deputies concerned that the Government is very much alive to the likely outcome of any definite and final decisions that may be arrived at in Europe and in regard to our participation in any trade groupings or arrangements in the future. The Government did prepare and circulate papers before giving information on free trade developments, and no doubt they will favourably consider doing so again or publishing a White Paper when the time is ripe and when there is something concrete on which to report.

Deputy Norton raised questions on certain duties. He asked a question as to where toy balloons are made. Toy balloons are made by the Shannon Industries, Ltd., Carrick-on-Shannon, Co. Leitrim. There is a market in toy balloons in this country and it is valued at £10,000 a year. Shannon Industries, Ltd., was supplying one-third of the market at the time of their application, and they are in a position to meet all reasonable requirements of the market. Of course, they give a guarantee, as every other firm is asked to give, that they will not raise their prices unduly or, if they have to, in the early stages, as their experience increases, they will be in a position to sell their manufactured articles at competitive prices.

At the time of the imposition of the minimum duty, Shannon Industries, Ltd., employed a total of 23 persons. They were not employed full-time; five people were employed full-time and four part-time in connection with the production of balloons. There has been no increase in employment on the production of balloons, as the effect of the duty has not yet been fully felt, and when it is they hope to be in a position to employ a total of 23 persons.

Mr. Norton

Making balloons?

Mr. Hilliard

I am reading from the brief and I am accepting that is the correct information. The question of watches was raised by Deputy Norton. The watches are mainly assembled in Dublin by Dublin firms. The Irish watch assembly firms are concerned mainly with the lower and medium-priced watches. These firms represented that the former rate of duty was inadequate to overcome the established trade connections and traditional preference for imported Swiss watches. They maintained that the cheap type of Swiss watches, because of the indication on the dials of their Swiss origin, had an overwhelming competitive advantage over the Irish products and that the duties imposed were necessary to ensure the survival of the Irish watch assembly industry. The output of home assemblers was 50,000 watches annually but they have the capacity to increase it to 100,000 watches which is the estimated market for low and medium-priced watches. As a result of the amendment of the duty the output of watches by Irish assemblers increased in 1960 to 80,000 watches. Some 40 workers were employed on watch assembly but as a result of the amendment of the duty the employment given by firms in the Watch Assembly Association has increased to 65 persons and the association estimates that there are about 15 persons employed by firms outside the association.

Mr. Norton

Do I take it from what the Minister says that this is purely assembly work?

Mr. Hilliard

Yes, all assembly work. The parts are all made abroad and assembled here.

Mr. Norton

What about the socks?

Mr. Hilliard

There are four firms in Dublin and four in Cork engaged in the manufacture of socks made from man-made fibres.

Mr. Sweetman

Is that what an ignorant person like myself would call nylon or terylene?

Mr. Hilliard

Yes. Mixed wool. The Deputy was correct in his assumption in regard to imports from Hong Kong. The Federation of Irish Industries made urgent representations regarding threatened imports from Hong Kong. As the Deputy will know from his past experience and from his ordinary observation, the prices of socks imported from Hong Kong would be so ridiculously low that firms in this country could not compete with them. The number of persons employed by the home manufacturers concerned is 365 persons, but I take it that they are not all engaged in the manufacture of socks.

Mr. Norton

I merely want to know where the socks are coming from.

Mr. Hilliard

I take it they would be engaged in the general manufacturing activity of the firms concerned.

Mr. Sweetman

The Minister is getting on so famously may I ask him could he supply the same information about leather board.

Mr. Hilliard

Does the Deputy want to know the number of firms?

Mr. Sweetman

As the Minister is only standing in I do not want to put too many questions.

Mr. Hilliard

I dealt with these matters previously when I was Parliamentary Secretary in the Department of Industry and Commerce.

Mr. Sweetman

If I had remembered that I would have asked the Minister plenty of questions.

Mr. Hilliard

The Deputy will be kind to me, therefore, and will not ask me too many additional questions. Two firms, in Carrick-on-Suir and Portlaw, Waterford, had an annual market for sole leather goods of about £23,000. At the time of the amendment of the duty one firm employed 23 persons exclusive of clerical staff. At the present time 26 are employed, 23 on leather-board work and three on insoling material.

Question put and agreed to.

Committee Stage ordered for Tuesday, 21st March, 1961.