Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 4 Nov 1980

Vol. 323 No. 8

Irish Whiskey Bill, 1980: Second Stage .

: I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time".

The provisions of the Irish Whiskey Bill, 1980, are explained in the memorandum which was circulated to Deputies on 25 June 1980.

This short Bill provides that spirits described as Irish whiskey or blended Irish whiskey must comply with certain technical requirements. It further provides that whiskey and blended whiskey produced either in the state or in Northern Ireland in accordance with these requirements shall be entitled to the description "Irish Whiskey" and "blended Irish whiskey". It also provides that the Irish Whiskey Act, 1950, be repealed.

The Irish Whiskey Act, 1950, protected the "good name" of Irish whiskey solely for the purposes of customs and excise, that is in connection with permits and certificates issued under the Spirits Act, 1880, accompanying the spirits in transit. These permits and certificates were designed to ensure the due payment of the duty chargeable on goods and were required to accompany them during removal from one place to another. Thus the Act of 1950 ensured that only spirits conforming to the definitions of Irish whiskey and Irish pot still whiskey as laid down in the Act could be described as such in the permits and certificates. However, the use of these permits and certificates by the Revenue Commissioners has now been discontinued for several years. In addition, the definitions contained in the 1950 Act are now considered inadequate because they do not make any reference to:

(a) a distillation strength limit;

(b) the period of maturation;

(c) the necessity of having organo-leptic — that is, taste and smell — qualities associated with and derived from the raw materials.

Also, the term "Irish pot still whiskey" is no longer used in marketing whiskey and there is no definition of blended Irish whiskey. For these reasons and some added considerations I am promoting this legislation.

The main added consideration which I have in mind relates to the fact that the only whiskey distillery operating in Northern Ireland is a subsidiary of our main distillery group, namely, Irish Distillers Limited. That subsidiary market their whiskey under the appellations "Irish whiskey" and "blended Irish whiskey" though their use of these appellations is not supported by legislation enacted by the Oireachtas or, until a very recent enactment, by legislation enacted by the UK Government. This point is of great significance because of new regulations being proposed by the EEC to govern the movement of whiskey within the Community. Under these proposals whiskey produced in Northern Ireland would not be entitled to be described, as it has been for years, as Irish whiskey or blended Irish whiskey, unless the use of these appellations is based on the legislation of a member state or states.

Discussions have taken place between the British authorities and ourselves as to the best way of dealing with the problem which the proposed regulations would otherwise present. It was considered that the problem could best be overcome by including in our legislation a provision to the effect that whiskey or blended whiskey produced in the South or in the North would be entitled to the appellations "Irish whiskey" or "blended Irish whiskey" and that similar legislative provision be made by the UK Government. Very recently, the necessary legislation was enacted on the British side and our Bill now proposes to do likewise. The enactment of this reciprocal legislation is, I should point out, a concrete example of political and economic co-operation about which the Taoiseach spoke in connection with his visit to the British Prime Minister earlier this year.

Finally, there is another reason for my being anxious to revise our definition of whiskey. The EEC Commission have had in mind for some time that whiskey be defined in an EEC context. The UK Government and ourselves feel that, prior to the discussions at EEC level on such a definition, the traditional manufacturers of whiskey in the Community — the Scottish and ourselves — whose production processes are broadly similar, should not only have as strong a definition as possible for whiskey but that both our definitions should be harmonised to the maximum possible extent. Though Scotch whisky is our main competitor in export markets, it is recognised on both sides that it would be to our mutual advantage to secure a Community definition that is acceptable to us.

The Bill which is now before the House takes into account all of the foregoing considerations. Thus the definition of Irish whiskey and blended Irish whiskey will now be aligned in general terms with the generic definition of whiskey as set out in schedule 7 to the UK Finance Act, 1969, as amended by clause 9 to the UK Finance Act (No. 2) 1980.

While I do not intend to go into the technical details of this Bill, which I am assured are in order, I should like nonetheless to draw Deputies attention to a few points of general significance.

I have decided not to provide for a generic definition of whiskey based on the criteria set out in the recent UK legislation — the Finance Act (No. 2) 1980, Clause 9 — because I am advised that such a definition might be regarded by the European Court of Justice as a measure having an effect equivalent to a quantitative restriction and thus contrary to Article 30 of the Treaty of Rome.

Although the Irish Whiskey Act, 1950, specifically defined Irish pot still whiskey, I have decided to omit reference to this product in the Irish Whiskey Bill, 1980, as the Irish distilling industry do not at present use this marketing term and do not envisage its use for marketing purposes in future. It is also relevant that the UK has not legislated for this type of product, and apparently does not intend to do so.

Section 1 (1) of the Bill provides that for the purposes of any statute or instrument made under statute, spirits described as Irish whiskey shall not be regarded as corresponding to that description unless those spirits comply with certain requirements. The objective of this provision is to ensure that Irish whiskey has an identity, backed by legislation, on both the domestic and export markets for any purpose. Section 1 (2) provides that the expression "blended Irish whiskey" shall mean a blend of a number of distillates, each of which separately is entitled to the description "Irish Whiskey". The production of blended whiskies is a feature of modern distilleries; such whiskies are so called to distinguish them from straight whiskies, which are produced from one distillation process.

Section 1 (3) (a) of the Bill sets out the technical requirements which must be adhered to before a product is entitled to use the appellation "Irish Whiskey" or "blended Irish whiskey". These criteria have been settled in agreement and following full consultation with the industry. Deputies will, I am sure, excuse me from explaining in any detail the precise reasons for these particular standards having been set. In any case I should be loathe to divulge the secrets of the whiskey production process which the Irish whiskey industry so jealously guards from its competitors.

As it is considered, for completeness sake, that a requirement about maturation should form an integral part of the legislation, section 1 (3) (b) provides that spirits must be matured for at least three years, either in the state or in Northern Ireland or partly in one and partly in the other before they can be described as Irish whiskey or blended Irish whiskey. It is provided also that the spirits must be matured in wooden casks.

The Irish whiskey distilling industry is one of the oldest and most valued industries in the country. Particularly in the past decade, it has grown in importance and has contributed significantly to our economy and to our export trade. The Irish Distillers Group, the blend — if I may so term it — of John Jameson and Son, John Power and Son, Cork Distilleries Company and "Old Bushmills" has an impressive track record behind it. For instance, the group now employ more than 1,000 people at their various locations, that is, at the two distilleries in Midleton and Bushmills; at its bottling plants and other offices. Sales of Irish whiskey rose from £18.8 million in 1970 to £82.3 million in 1979. Irish whiskey is now exported to more than 100 countries and the volume of this business has risen by 420 per cent between 1970 and 1979, from 207,000 cases to 1,080,000 cases. Indeed we all look to continuing growth in exports of the products of the group as now constituted and organised.

As the industry considers that its product requires legislative protection so as to give it an identity on both the domestic and international markets, I commend to the House the proposals set out in the Bill.

: As this is the first occasion on which I have spoken in the House since the Minister of State was reappointed I would like to extend good wishes to him and to wish him success in his Department. This side of the House welcome the Bill with the exception of some minor reservations which we can discuss at length on Committee Stage. The term "Irish whiskey" cannot be used in future unless it corresponds with the legal requirements set out in the Bill. It is necessary to ensure that our whiskey is properly defined, of a proper standard and of proper marketable quality in regard to its export.

Irish Distillers, whom the Minister mentioned, have a subsidiary in the North of Ireland. This company cover the whole of this island and it is good to see that in the Bill the term "Irish whiskey" refers to whiskey from the whole island. I am glad to see that this particular firm have the name Irish Whiskey attached to them. I know that reciprocal legislation has already been passed giving effect to this. Problems could be caused if we did not have this Bill and also reciprocal legislation passed.

Section 1 (3) (b) deals with the maturity of whiskey. All whiskey distilled here is retained in wooden casks in warehouses for a minimum period of five years before it is let on to the market. In this Bill we have a period of not less than three years. I do not think that is wise. The Minister should ensure that a minimum period of five years is set out in the Bill. I have spoken to people who have taken whiskey which had been distilled for approximately three years. I believe that such whiskey can be dangerous and is rough whiskey to drink. The people I have spoken to maintain that because it is a rough whiskey it will put people off drinking it. It is very important to extend the three-year period in the Bill to a minimum period of five years.

I am glad to see that the Minister has defined the maturation period. It was not defined in the Irish Whiskey Act, 1950. I believe the minimum maturation period is in the Immature Spirits Act. People in the licensed vintners trade to whom I have spoken would like to see the period extended to five years. The Minister should take this matter up with Irish Distillers. I hope that a satisfactory agreement will be arrived at in this matter.

The Minister mentioned that there will be legislation in relation to this matter coming from the EEC. It is important, therefore, to have this five-year period inserted in our Bill. Our exports of whiskey are of great importance to us. Is the Minister aware of difficulties which our exports of whiskey are having in relation to advertising? There were difficulties with regard to our entry into the French market in relation to advertising. This matter came before the EEC court because Irish whiskey is a cereal based spirit so we had difficulty in advertising it on the French market. Spirits in France have been categorised into aperitives and digestives. Our spirits were put into the category of aperitives.

Perhaps the Minister would let us know what the present position is in regard to advertising our product on the French market. If we cannot advertise our product we will not be able to sell it to the fullest extent. I believe we are agreeable to allowing the French advertise here so I hope that reciprocal arrangements will be made available to us so that we can advertise our products in France. As far as I know, the EEC Commission decided that we must be allowed to advertise our products fully in France. I hope the Minister looks into this matter. It is difficult for our products to gain admission to the French market and I should be glad if the Minister would deal with this fully in his reply.

In his statement the Minister of State gave some figures with regard to exports. He said that sales of Irish whiskey rose from £18.8 million to £82 million in 1979. Those figures appear satisfactory but with a more vigorous marketing campaign we could increase our exports. I have had occasion to visit England, France, Germany and other European countries as well as African countries and I must point out that I found it difficult to obtain Irish whiskey in some of those places, and this applies in particular to the European countries. There is a market there that could be tapped. The figures with regard to sales appear satisfactory but with proper marketing we could sell much more in Europe, America and elsewhere. This is an Irish product that is regarded highly throughout the world.

This legislation will be of considerable benefit but I think every Irish person should be an ambassador for this country when he goes abroad. Everyone who consumes alcoholic drink should do his best to promote Irish whiskey. It is very rare to find a Scottish person drinking Irish whiskey. That is their choice but I think that, similarly, we should see the advantages of our own products. Imports of Scotch whisky here are sizeable. Irish people who go abroad on holiday or on business should make an effort to promote Irish whiskey. The goodwill is there and it is up to us to make the effort to promote our products. Irish whiskey is as good a product as there is on the market and it would be to our advantage to improve sales.

Section 1 (3) refers to spirits distilled at an alcoholic strength of less than 94.8 per cent by volume. Is this a reference to the product as it comes off the still? The product will be about 70 per cent proof in the bottle and I should like the Minister's clarification on the figure of 94.8 per cent. Whiskey would be very potent at that level. I presume that that figure refers to the product as it comes off the still, at which point it is distilled further and reduced in strength.

We welcome the Bill. As the Minister pointed out, there has been a satisfactory growth in the sales of Irish whiskey since the Irish Distillers group took over. Our embassies should stock Irish whiskey. I remember visiting one of our embassies some years ago and practically every drink was available except Irish whiskey. I was disappointed that such a situation should arise in an Irish embassy and that point was made to the authorities there. Our embassies, Córas Trachtála and other organisations should co-operate with the Irish Distillers group to encourage our exports of whiskey. The sales of this product are important to the economy. With the minor reservations I have made, I welcome the Bill.

: On behalf of the Labour Party I should like to join with Deputy Enright in accepting the need for this Bill. I agree with the Minister that the problems that have arisen, particularly with the EEC, require that this measure be passed. I suppose that none of us here is an expert on the subject of Irish whiskey; I take a different beverage and I cannot speak with personal knowledge of Irish whiskey.

As a Member of the European Parliament I have been aware of the ethyl alcohol directive that has been debated for a considerable time. Agreement has been slow at the European Parliament level. It demonstrates the problems that occurred on entry to the EEC with the opening of the European Market to whiskey and spirits. This caused a considerable problem for the original six producers of cognacs, wines and spirits. There is no doubt that spirits from Ireland and Scotland have made considerable inroads on the Community markets and this has alarmed producers on the Continent. Therefore, every trick in the book is being used to increase the cost of the Irish and Scottish products in the Community. The ethyl alcohol directive certainly had that in mind, making it more difficult to sell wines and spirits. That is why we have this Bill before us today.

To make it easier for our exporters we should see that the Bill goes through without hesitation. I am not in favour of harmonising everything in the EEC and I would not like the Bill to give the impression that the Scottish and Irish whiskies were the same blend. That would be a mistake because we have a very distinctive market from our Scottish friends in their export drive and the success of Irish marketing can be seen from the figures which the Minister has given—a 425 per cent increase, from £18.8 million to £82 million in ten short years. That is a vast improvement in export sales, even allowing for inflation during that period.

I wish the Minister had told us more of the problems in the EEC, particularly under the ethyl alcohol directive, which, I think, is the one which refers specifically to the ingredient in the distilling of whiskey, the problems that were there and how members of the parliament could be briefed on the problem. In the past we had a gentleman from Irish Distillers who did brief some of us but, since I have not been a member of the agricultural committee which deals with this at European level, I have not seen any documentation from there. If there is anything that Members can do, it is the duty of the Government and the producers to see that we are equipped with the facts.

I would like to see what the rise in the home market sales has been. We are all aware that there has been a very substantial rise in the consumption of spirits on the home market. While that may be good for the producer it certainly has not been good for the moral fibre of the community or for the driving public, because there has been a number of accidents caused by too much drinking. While we may welcome the Bill from the point of view of exports, there is concern about the way the product is being sold on the home market because more young people are drinking spirits. I hope advertising in this country is tempered so that whiskey is not put forward as a great boost to young people or as being a more manly drink than some other less potent spirit.

In duty free areas, where sales are very high, whiskey is probably the biggest individual seller. Indeed, metrication has been accepted at that level but not on the home market. Whereas we are being advised to adopt metrication, in that area we are still dealing in pints and half pints, in spirits and any liquid except, perhaps, in motor oil. We have litre bottles at airport exits. The Minister should ask his colleagues in the Department of Finance, if the export drive is to take place at that point, if he will harmonise the size of the bottle, making it either litres or pints because there are unfortunate people who buy two litre bottles and find they are over the duty limit and have to give one up. People are embarrassed by this. It is a good export point for us, we should either change the rule in consultation with our European partners or correspond to the actual limits that are allowed.

Deputy Enright talked about the embassies abroad. I have been in many embassies in the last eight years, since I have been a member of the European Parliament, and my experience is that they do produce the home product on every occasion. I have to say that, because I have visited them in both Canada and the United States and in various member states and, if it is a sales point, they are most generous in their selling of the product.

: On occasions the product was not available. It was demanded by a colleague of yours who is not in the House any longer.

: I hope it was some years ago.

: I feel it is worthy of mention, because we should act as our own ambassadors in this regard.

: I want to comment also on Deputy Enright's point about reducing the maturation period to at least three years. I was in the House on one occasion when the maturation period was reduced from, I think, ten to five years. Maybe I am wrong, I cannot say definitely, but I do know there was a short Bill brought in to reduce the maturation period on that occasion. If this is a further reduction, the Deputy is right to comment adversely on it. On the last occasion export orders were so great because of the long maturation period that stocks were being reduced at such a rate that they could not fill the orders and, therefore, the short cut was to reduce the maturation period which would, in the long run, be an adverse selling point.

: Hear, hear.

: I join with Deputy Enright in asking the Minister to take a very close look at that move, which is perhaps being foisted on him by the producers. We have a good name in this area and we should maintain it. It would not be maintained if the maturation period is drastically cut. It also will have another effect because, when the last Bill was brought in, the ten-year-old blend became much more expensive and sold at a far higher rate at home. I join with Deputy Enright in asking the Minister to take a very close look at what is being suggested in that section.

I wish the Minister every success in his new position and I look forward to cooperating with him in the future.

: I thank Deputies for their good wishes and for the manner in which they have received this non-controversial Bill.

Deputy Enright raised the matter of maturation and said that whiskey must be matured for five years, this being traditional in the case of Irish whiskey. That is not entirely correct. The Immature Spirits (Restriction) Act. 1969, provides for three years and the present Bill does not concern itself with the age of whiskey but merely provides that spirits must be matured for at least three years in order to be described as Irish whiskey or blended whiskey. The assumption that it was necessary to mature the whiskey for five years is not altogether correct.

: I was not sure whether it was five years or three years. The Act was passed 11 years ago.

Mr. Gallagher

: As in the case of any other Irish product, we try to promote the sales of Irish whiskey, and I believe that the implementation of this Bill will put us in a stronger position in regard to the sales promotion of Irish whiskey and strengthen the position of the company concerned.

The question relating to the French is a rather complicated one and if it is the case that they are indulging in a practice which is not entirely correct we will deal with the matter at EEC level.

The figure of 94.8 per cent refers to the spirit as it comes off the still and Deputy Enright need not worry too much about that figure.

If Deputy Kavanagh has any questions in relation to alcohol regulations the officials of my Department will be glad to talk to him and iron out matters to his satisfaction.

I thank Deputies for their acceptance of the Bill and hope that it will pass through the House as quickly as possible. The matter is rather urgent and the distillers are anxious to have this legislation enacted.

Question put and agreed to.

: When is it proposed to take Committee Stage?

Mr. Gallagher

: Now, if that is acceptable.

: We propose to put down an amendment on Committee Stage because the question of maturation is causing some concern in regard to the definition of Irish whiskey. The three-year period is specified in this Bill and is also included in the 1969 Act. I believe this might not be in our best interests when discussing definitions in the EEC and I should like to consult my party on this matter.

Mr. Gallagher

: We can order it for Tuesday next and leave it to the Whips to arrange.

Committee Stage ordered for Tuesday, 11 November 1980.
Top
Share