I would like to ask if as the Minister said this Bill can be re-enacted in 1974, why is the wording "shall continue in force until 31st day of March, 1974 and shall then expire"? Was this particular wording used in every period of three years since 1956? It is merely a drafting point but I want to be satisfied that there is no change.
Committee on Finance. - Control of Exports (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1956 (Continuance) Bill, 1971: Committee and Final Stages.
Question proposed: "That section 1 stand part of the Bill."
Section 7 (2) of the original Act states that "this Act shall continue in force for a period of three years and shall then expire". Each succeeding Act had this format.
The Minister, in deference to Deputy O'Leary and myself, availed of the opportunity to talk about imports. I want specifically to say that I was not talking about imports in relation to the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Area Agreement. I was talking about the section of that agreement referred to by the Minister himself in relation to cotton. I think of the textile workers in Loughrea and I wonder now when the Minister says that the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Area Agreement has been under continuous review why it is that in this period of five years since we signed this Agreement, if there have been redundancies because of certain provisions of this Agreement which have been agreed by the Federation of Irish Industries and the Congress of Trade Unions, no action was taken.
Acting Chairman
It would not be in order to have a general discussion on the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Area Agreement on this section of the Bill.
I submit that paragraph 5 (c) of the Minister's speech says:
It will be necessary to continue these powers for a further period and to enact the appropriate legislation. Control continues to be necessary for the following purposes:—
(c) to implement the terms of the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Area Agreement which requires, inter alia, control on exports to the United Kingdom of textile goods containing cotton,
Acting Chairman
That is the only matter which should be discussed. As long as the Deputy does not dwell too long on the agreement it is all right.
I propose to discuss that particular section and to ask why is it if this agreement has been under continuous review, and if this particular section of that agreement referred to by the Minister in his speech has been under continuous review, that something was not done under Article 19 or Article 5 (1)?
The reason for there being written into the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Area Agreement at the time, the control that I mentioned here on the export of cotton-content goods which covers years, fabrics, household textiles and garments, containing 50 per cent or more of cotton, is that it affects goods going to Britain and the Six Counties. It was introduced away back in——
1966.
No. It was 1959, when the British at that stage expressed concern at the alleged extent of imports from this country of such goods containing cheap cotton from Asian sources, the content of the cheap cotton yarn going into items like textiles, garments, yarns and fabrics. In fact, since that time, under the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Area Agreement, these textile controls, which had operated in 1959 against our goods, were revised. They now involve a quota allocation based on a datum year. I have not the figures for the quota but the position is that the manufacturing firms here making up a certain amount of this material with the finished article containing less than 50 per cent of a low cost imported element, can get a certain quota in. It is working to the advantage of a number of those firms having this quota that they can get into Britain at this stage. In actual fact the overall prevention of exports here, with the exclusion which we have to allow a certain quota into Britain, is working to the advantage of a number of firms here at the present time. I know of one firm which ran into difficulties, in so far as they exceeded the 50 per cent amount, with the British Board of Trade in relation to a duty on them.
Can we accept the Minister's assurance that in fact this provision is working in the view of his Department and himself for the benefit of our manufacturers here? If that assurance can be given my decision is not to say any more about it.
My understanding at the present time is that it is but as the matter has been raised here I would like to take the opportunity of looking more fully into it with a view to ensuring that it is. If I find it is not it is one of the factors that I would like to have included in my discussions with the British in view of the fact that it is written in as a restriction which appears to me on the face of it to be of advantage to the UK.
The Minister has always been a very helpful man. I wonder perhaps, when he has made this examination, if he might extend the perhaps unusual facility to the Opposition of writing a letter to me and to Deputy O'Leary, if he wishes it, indicating the result of his inquiry? It is the business of the Opposition to be worried about redundancies. There are redundancies in the textile trade.
It is the job of a Minister to be worried too.
In order that we will not spend our lives haranguing one another across this House we will perhaps for a change work together for the good of the people, the workers and the employers of this country. Would the Minister be good enough when he has examined this, to let us know? I am making this request for myself and Deputy O'Leary may want to make his.
I shall communicate with both Deputy Donegan and Deputy O'Leary.
Question put and agreed to.
Section 2 agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported without amendment, received for final consideration and passed.