Vol. 386 No. 3
asked the Minister for Finance, in relation to the regulations requiring travellers to remain outside the jurisdiction for 48 hours in order to qualify for full entitlement to carry goods into the State, the number of prosecutions which have been initiated since the introduction of the regulations up to 31 December 1988.
31.
asked the Minister for Finance, in relation to the 48 hour rule in respect of persons carrying goods from Northern Ireland to the Republic, the number of seizures which occurred for breach of the rule in 1988; the number of prosecutions which were initiated; the number of prosecutions which were concluded; the number of persons who were convicted; and the total amount of fines imposed by the courts in respect of the regulations.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 17 and 31 together.
I am informed by the Revenue Commissioners that, while comprehensive statistics are not available, it is estimated that 118 seizures were made in 1988 on foot of the 48 hour rule from persons entering the State from Northern Ireland. There have been no prosecutions arising from the rule and consequently no convictions or fines.
It is quite clear that the 48 hour rule has virtually eliminated the serious distortion of trade that was occurring.
Will the Minister agree that the fact that the Revenue Commissioners have made 118 seizures, that no prosecutions have commenced and no fines imposed, indicate the simple fact that the Government know that if they brought somebody to court the measure would be struck down at European level? That is why they are resorting to the strong arm tactic of seizing the goods but admitting quietly that they could not enforce the procedure by way of criminal proceedings because they could find themselves before the European Court within days.
The Revenue Commissioners — not the Government — decide whether there should be a prosecution.
Will the Minister agree that the Revenue Commissioners have decided not to prosecute any of these cases because they know they would not succeed? They are resorting to seizure of goods because they know that criminal proceedings would invalidate the whole scheme as there would be an immediate appeal to the European Court.
There has been an element of repetition.
The Deputy is not entitled to assume the reasons for the decisions of the Revenue Commissioners in prosecuting offenders. I am sure he will agree that the 48 hour rule has been extremely successful. Something in the region of goods worth £300 million were brought back to the South from the North by shoppers in 1986. The 48 hour rule has almost eliminated this distortion of trade and there have been many expressions of appreciation from traders whose businesses were badly depressed prior to the introduction of the 48 hour rule. As the Deputy is aware, the 48 hour rule will be taken to the European Court in due course and the Government will be defending it.
