asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if the selective employment tax in operation in Britain has been found to violate the Anglo Irish Free Trade Agreement.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Selective Employment Tax.
146.
While the selective employment tax is not directly contrary to any of the provisions of the agreement, it amounts to a subsidy which, though small, could be countervailed if, in a particular instance, it caused or threatened material injury to an Irish industry.
In the light of the information supplied have representations been made to Britain about this selective employment tax?
Yes.
How long ago were representations made?
About the time it was introduced.
It is a long time ago.
May I ask what is the result? It is important to know this.
It was not accepted on the British side that there was a breach of the terms of the agreement and, as I have indicated, I think there is some substance in their argument. While it is a subsidy on exports from this country, as I have indicated, under the provisions of the agreement in the event of a subsidy of that nature, which might have the effect of causing or threatening to cause material injury, action can be taken to bring in a countervailing duty. We have had no complaints from Irish industry to the effect that this has operated as a subsidy causing or threatening to cause material injury to their industry and, therefore, we have not had to take any action.
Surely the Minister will agree that with progressively more tariffs this subsidy will operate against us very much in this country.
I do not think I would agree with the Deputy. I should point out that it is calculated that the overall effect of this on industry will amount to a subsidy of 0.4 per cent. Admittedly, this is a tax, and in some cases it could work against industries in this country, but the amount will indicate that it is unlikely to cause material injury to Irish industry. I am more concerned about another aspect of this imposition, which is the giving of a subsidy in development areas in Britain, that it might operate to our disadvantage in trying to attract industry here. However, all the indications are that since it was brought in——
We were right in the Labour Party.
——our efforts to attract industry here have been going ahead faster than ever.
The Minister must agree we were right.
(Interruptions.)
Question No. 147.
What about all the people who have lost jobs?
The Deputy is talking about industrial employment and I am talking about new industries. We have never done as well in that field as we have in the past 12 months.
Is the Minister not aware that between 1957 and 1967 we have been losing an average of 1,600 jobs per year?
I could not say offhand what the exact figure is.
Check it.
I am saying that in the creation of new industrial employment we are doing much better than we were doing before.
I accept the figure for industrial employment but we are losing 1,600 jobs per year.
The only way we can remedy that is by more industrial employment.