Vol. 483 No. 1
17 Mr. Quinn asked the Minister for Finance the action, if any, he has taken since 8 October 1997 to have the European Commission undertake a study of the impact upon employment which the abolition of duty free sales will have across the EU; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19761/97]
I have not taken any direct action since that date to have the European Commission undertake a study of the impact on employment which the abolition of duty free sales will have across the European Union. Such a study was called for by the Deputy as my predecessor in the Department of Finance. My colleagues continue to lobby for support for such a study and, as appropriate, the pressure will be maintained at European Union events, such as the forthcoming Summit on employment.
As the Deputy knows, the ECOFIN Council and the Commission are well aware of the Irish position. What they need are similar expressions of opinion by other member states. There is no point in my approaching the Council again without further information on the consequences for Ireland of the ending of duty free sales. Therefore, while I will encourage our partners to support the call on the Commission to undertake an EU-wide study into the impact of the abolition of duty free sales, I intend to examine the results of my own study before deciding how best to take this issue forward with my ECOFIN colleagues. That study is not likely to be completed until the end of the year.
As I have already reported to the House, the results of my study will form a sound basis for our contribution to any further discussions on this topic both at the ECOFIN Council and within Europe more generally.
Can the Minister explain to the House how, on the one hand, he has taken no action to convince the Commission or ECOFIN Council to revisit the subject while, on the other, his colleagues continue to lobby for a change in this area? Since the only group that can actually organise a change is the ECOFIN Council, who are they lobbying?
The Deputy is not correct. It is not the ECOFIN Council which has the power in this regard.
Since it is a matter of taxation, the ECOFIN is the relevant Council to request the Commission to undertake such a study.
Yes, but the Deputy should be aware that three ECOFIN meetings have been held since I became Minister for Finance, on 13 October and 10 and 17 November. Furthermore, as he probably also knows better than anybody else on that side of the House, if a proposal is submitted — the present position being that duty free will end on 30 June 1999 — to reverse that decision, the Commission only can advance that proposal.
Deputy Quinn knows, as others should, that to change the decision of 1991, it must be proposed by the Commission and be agreed unanimously by all 15 member states. That fact must be borne in mind. My Cabinet colleagues have been dealing with this matter, in particular the Minister for Public Enterprise within the Council of Transport Ministers. There is evidence to suggest that Transport Ministers have been exerting considerable pressure in this respect. While no one can predict how these matters will develop over the next 18 or 19 months, that is the factual position with regard to duty free sales.
At any stage since assuming office has the Minister requested that this matter be placed even on the agenda for an informal lunch-time discussion at meetings of the ECOFIN Council? In the debate prior to the Summit on employment to be held in Luxembourg the Taoiseach stated specifically he would raise the issue of duty free. Is the Minister aware whether the Taoiseach has specifically requested the Luxembourg Presidency to have this matter listed for formal or informal discussion?
Having raised this matter himself at the ECOFIN Council meeting in November 1996, perhaps Deputy Quinn could inform the House of the outstanding reception he received for his proposal, when a deafening silence—
It was not deafening.
A silence.
No, it was not even silence.
Although supported by the Belgians and Finns, I failed to gain majority support.
That is a nice way of putting it.
As the Deputy knows, the Commission has steadfastly refused to undertake a study itself.
Yes.
Consequently, the Deputy, my predecessor, decided to initiate a study here and to intervene generally before consultants could be appointed. Early in my term of office I appointed consultants to study this matter because all studies undertaken to date have been prepared by somebody involved in the trade or others who could be deemed to have had a vested interest. That study should be completed by 31 December next and armed with that information I will be better placed to accede to some of the Deputy's requests. However, the Deputy should remember that one year only has elapsed since he endeavoured to raise this matter when, let us say, it did not receive a hearty response.
