Skip to main content
Normal View

JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE ENVIRONMENT, TRANSPORT, CULTURE AND THE GAELTACHT debate -
Tuesday, 17 Jan 2012

Road Haulage Industry: Discussion with IRHA

We are meeting today the Irish Road Haulage Association to discuss challenges facing the Irish road haulage industry. I welcome Mr. Eoin Gavin, president, Mr. Gerry McMahon, national secretary and Mr. Seamus McGowan, national treasurer, Irish Road Haulage Association.

I draw witnesses attention to the fact that by virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, they are protected by absolute privilege in respect of the evidence they are to give this committee. However, if directed by the committee to cease giving evidence in relation to a particular matter and they continue to so do, they are entitled thereafter only to qualified privilege in respect of their evidence. Witnesses are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise nor make charges against any person, persons or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I now invite Mr. Gavin to make his presentation.

Mr. Eoin Gavin

I thank the joint committee for the opportunity to meet it this afternoon. The Irish Road Haulage Association, as Ireland's largest recognised road transport representative body, is committed to tackling head-on the issues affecting its industry. It seeks to build the future of the Irish road transport industry by developing and promoting industry standards, facilitating road transport operator education and training, educating end-users and securing an equitable business environment.

The haulage industry is an indigenous and highly competitive sector of Irish industry. However, it is being pushed to the brink on the back of increasing fuel prices. Diesel is the raw material of the haulage business. While traditionally it represented approximately 35% to 40% of our cost base, it now accounts for more than 50%, as a result of the increases in fuel price, carbon taxes and excise duties. It is worth noting that the Irish road haulage industry does not receive any financial assistance from Government and is a net contributor to the State. We represent more than 16,000 vehicles, 30% of the truck fleet in the country, but are doing 80% of the work. We are completely efficient in comparison with the own-account sector.

Evidence of the seriousness of the situation can be seen in the Irish Exporters Association's recent call on the Government to address the increased costs facing exporters as a result of cost increases being suffered by the haulage industry. In a country where economic prosperity is largely dependent on export demand, the Irish road haulage industry is of significant strategic importance in facilitating the export-led economic recovery of the State. The industry is comprised of many small to medium sized operators, family businesses, who service our economy's freight requirements. It is these operators who are feeling the brunt of the cost pressures facing the industry. Potential means of relieving these pressures at no cost to the Exchequer are set out as follows.

The IRHA suggests that a mechanism similar to the payment of excise duty on fuel used in motor vehicles for the transport of drivers and passengers with disabilities should be employed. The association surveyed some of its members and asked Deloitte to look at the high level reasoning behind its position. Following the Deloitte analysis of the matter, the association conducted an industry-wide survey to provide a more accurate picture to Government in support of our case. The findings of this extensive survey support what Deloitte stated, namely, that there is clearly a significant loss to the taxpayer as a result of fuel being purchased abroad. Our international fleet goes to Belgium, France, Holland and Spain every week and we are now purchasing all our fuel abroad. For example each time one of our trucks fills up in, say, Belgium, the Irish taxpayer loses €600, including the 48 cents in duty which goes into our tanks. Each truck carries in the region of 1,200 to 1,400 litres, which lasts a truck approximately one week. We fill our trucks in Belgium when coming home on a Friday evening with Irish imports. The gain to hauliers is approximately €120 per week, while the taxpayer is losing €600. The reason is that for the past ten years the Belgian authorities, as well as their French, Spanish and Dutch counterparts, have had an essential fuel user rebate that is index-linked to the rising or falling cost of fuel. This, in turn, has led to fuel being purchased abroad by Irish hauliers, as well as by hauliers from Northern Ireland and elsewhere in the United Kingdom who traditionally would have filled up in this country, with a net gain to the Exchequer. In addition to the current administrative requirement pertaining to the rebate for transporting people with disabilities, the Irish Road Haulage Association believes the following additional requirement should be met to apply successfully for an essential user of fuel rebate for hauliers: the ability to produce an up-to-date haulage licence and a tax clearance certificate, as well as fuel invoices and a certified claim by an accountant to prevent abuse.

Another issue to be considered in the rising cost of fuel concerns green diesel, while everyone is aware of the practice of fuel laundering. The effect of the use of green or washed diesel on the competitiveness of the haulage industry is a major issue for our members and is grossly distorting the market. It also constitutes a significant drain on the Exchequer. There certainly is merit in considering a rebate system in which there would only be one excise charge for all diesel products but which would include an agricultural rebate system in which registered tax compliant farmers could reclaim the cost of diesel on a monthly basis. Both the AA and Retail Excellence Ireland believe in the necessity for a change in the system. A number of potential methods are available for consideration and being used in other European countries. The Irish Road Haulage Association would be glad to work with the relevant Departments in taking a sensible approach to resolving this matter. As everyone is aware, the impact on the environment in recent weeks of such fuel laundering has been considerable and as the price of diesel at the pump increases, so will the increase in the use of illegal fuel. This issue must be tackled straightaway as, apart from the environmental impact, it costs the taxpayer €600 million to colour the fuel. Our point is that a rebate should be given to farmers and fishermen. I note that, in addition to the repayment scheme in respect of disabilities, a scheme is also in place for fishermen, under which a rebate is given at the point of sale and that the scheme is working positively. A fisherman can register with his or her oil companies and has the pick of five or six such companies. When the trawler comes in, he or she takes the best price and is given the fuel, minus VAT and whatever rebate is availabvle. There is no administration involved and it tightens the tax net for the Exchequer.

On road tax, the Irish Road Haulage Association seeks to introduce a pay-as-you-go road user charge for commercial vehicles, which would entail the abolition of the current road tax regime to create a more efficient and, therefore, more effective road tax mechanism for heavy goods vehicles, which would be of benefit to both the sector and the Government. The existing road tax mechanism for commercial vehicles is creating severe difficulties for road haulage operators in Ireland owing to the outdated rationale employed to ascertain the appropriate sum a road haulage vehicle should pay for its tax disc. In the short term the association proposes that all commercial vehicles above 3.5 tonnes be taxed on their gross vehicle weight, not, as is currently the case, their unladen weight. Were gross vehicle weight to be the reference point, there would be a far more transparent and efficient system for all parties concerned.

In the longer term the Irish Road Haulage Association would support the introduction of a distance-based mechanism over and above the outdated road tax system currently in place. The association urges the Government to implement a pay-as-you-go system of road taxation for commercial vehicles that already is in place in numerous countries throughout Europe. The benefits of such a system would be twofold. First, it would allow Irish haulage operators to be far more competitive in the marketplace as they would only pay road tax as it arose, as opposed to absorbing cash flow through annual taxation when in the current climate the vehicle may only be operational for six months of the year. This results in a loss of working capital in an industry in which profit margins are between 1% and 3%. Furthermore, should a pay-as-you-go system be implemented for commercial vehicles in Ireland, the matter of public private partnerships must be revisited as it would provide a greater source of revenue which, in turn, could be reinvested in national road infrastructure. The entire system of toll roads and road taxation could be merged. Vehicles from Northern Ireland, elsewhere in the United Kingdom and Europe, be they used by haulage operators or tourists, drive around the country on national routes free of charge. They use the M50 free of charge and pay the odd toll. However, we believe a system should be introduced such as the Eurovignette which has been in place in the Netherlands for the past 15 years. In such a system people are obliged to pay online or at a local petrol station per day or per three days and the scheme is enforced through the potential confiscation of a vehicle until a fine is paid. We have been working under these conditions for the past 20 years elsewhere in Europe which generate great revenue for the country concerned and which help cash flow in haulage operations.

The Irish Road Haulage Association believes the current policy approach to carbon tax in respect of freight transportation is failing to ensure carbon credit costs find their way to the parties on whose behalf emissions actually arise. The burden of carbon taxes is met by the transport industry. However, as merely a facilitator of demand from manufacturers, traders, distributors and consumers, it often must bear the cost as opposed to being in a position to pass it on to the end-user. The method of taxing carbon should be re-examined to ensure it ultimately is levied on those served by the industry. In the meantime, it is vital this tax is not increased. The plastic bag levy is a prime example in this regard. Plastic bags were got rid of because the tax was levied on the person who used the plastic bag. The current carbon tax is levied on the fuel. Consequently, hauliers bear the brunt because they are tied into contracts and in a competitive environment against illegal fuel. Were the end-user obliged to pay carbon tax, for example, on a movement from China to Kildare, the carbon footprint thereon would encourage greater efficiencies in the transport sector. It would stop someone from sending a truck to Dublin from Cork loaded with four pallets as such a person would now fill the truck in the belief the carbon footprint would be reduced. Under the current system, the small businesses which comprise our industry will be obliged to absorb these carbon taxes each time they are in increased in future budgets. Consequently, having a mechanism such as the plastic bag tax would earn additional revenue and change the thinking of persons who hire our services.

The Irish Road Haulage Association firmly believes the long-term viability and integrity of the industry can be assured only through a mix of the implementation of an essential user fuel rebate, the correct targeting of carbon tax, the eradication of illegal fuel products and revised road tax for commercial vehicles. We respectfully request members to give due consideration to our proposals to ensure the survival of numerous Irish road transport operators and, in turn, protect countless jobs in the sector. Only through the support of the Government and the Oireachtas in acknowledging the industry's contribution to economic prosperity will the current level of employment in this industry be maintained. I note that 2.5 jobs are maintained for each truck on the road and that the association represents 16,000 haulage trucks in this country.

I thank Mr. Gavin for his presentation and will now take questions from members, starting with the leader of the Opposition, Deputy Dooley.

I welcome Mr. Gavin, Mr. McMahon and Mr. McGowan and thank Mr. Gavin for his thoughtful presentation. All members are familiar with the campaign the Irish Road Haulage Association has led in recent weeks and months in an effort to assist both its own members' businesses and Ireland as a whole in remaining competitive which, as we seek to increase exports of Irish-produced goods, is an integral part of the desire of all for a return to some level of economic normality. There is little doubt but that the export sector has been performing well in a difficult trading environment. A key part of this performance has been the ability to get goods to the marketplace in a timely fashion and as inexpensively as possible. The continued survival of the hauliers' industry is of key importance in this regard. The issues Mr. Gavin has highlighted are of great concern to me, as they will have a significant impact on the country's capacity to remain competitive in this sector. To this end, some of the issues he has raised in respect of carbon taxation and road taxation are matters of Government policy and I do not seek to try to draw a line between the Opposition and Government members. All members have been on the other side of the fence and obliged to implement tax-raising measures.

One issue I view with a great degree of concern is fuel laundering. I have little doubt that for genuine road hauliers, it must be nauseating to see some of the rogue operators competing against them in the full knowledge they are not paying the same amount for diesel. There is real concernin this regard, even among the oil distribution companies to which I have had the opportunity to speak in recent weeks. People who sell to the regular trade as well as to hauliers are finding that they are unable to remain in business and compete with the ongoing illicit trade. Mr. Gavin mentioned the sum of €600 million. Does he consider this to be the loss to the State as a result of the availability of laundered fuel in the marketplace? Does he believe Revenue is doing enough to clamp down on this activity? He should provide members with an account of any experience he might have had in respect of the North of Ireland. I certainly have been provided with information from persons who seek to suggest the authorities in the North have a better capacity to detect laundered fuel than their counterparts in the South. While I do not know whether this necessarily is the case, such information certainly has been presented to me.

Are we behind the curve in respect of the detection of illicit fuel? This is a major issue. I intend to place before the committee a proposal to the effect that it examine the position with regard to laundered fuel and the impact it has on the marketplace, on the road haulage industry, on Ireland's capacity to remain competitive internationally and on the overall revenue collected by the State. If we could remove illicit fuel from the equation, perhaps the burden with regard to the collection of taxes through the carbon initiative and issues in respect of road tax could be resolved.

Mr. Eoin Gavin

The Deputy's first question related to the figure of €600 million. At present, some 1.25 billion litres of fuel are being dyed by the State each year. This results in a loss of revenue - between white and green diesel - of €600 million. That is what the State is giving away without any checks or balances being in place. We recognise that those involved in agriculture and construction and fishermen do not use their vehicles - or vessels - on the roads and are entitled to cheaper fuel as a result. Traditionally, they have had access to this fuel. A system could be put in place overnight, through the co-ops and the oil companies to counteract the loss of €600 million to which I refer. The Irish Road Haulage Association, Retail Ireland and IBEC are strongly of the view that there is no way of putting in place a rebate system which would give rise to a cost of €600 million. At present, retailers are losing out to the tune of more than €150 million as a result of the availability of illegal fuel. Their loss is twofold, namely, in the context of fuel sales and the fact that people are not visiting the shops on their forecourts. People are not frequenting certain petrol stations because it is more expensive for them to do so.

Those involved in the road haulage industry are the biggest users of fuel in the country. We use up to 700 million litres of fuel each year. The cost has not been quantified. This is because the illicit fuel is available on the black market and people will not indicate if they have bought it. As a result, it is not possible to identify the overall loss. There is no doubt that an illicit trade exists and everyone will have seen reports regarding the finding of sludge at a particular site last week. If the figure for retail in respect of the use of this type of fuel is 30%, then the same figure must apply in respect of commercial industry. This is giving rise to a cost of €600 million in the context of the differential between white and green diesel. That is being given out in the absence of any checks or balances.

People often ask why it is easier to wash the green agricultural fuel available in the South than it is to wash red agricultural fuel used in the North. There are a couple of answers in this regard. The first relates to the differential between sterling and the euro. Red diesel is much more expensive. When people buy it for illegal purposes and then wash it, the market does not support the differential following completion of this process. There is not a big margin for criminals in respect of red diesel. The sale of such diesel in the UK is strictly monitored. If an oil distributor sells a particular amount of diesel, HM Revenue and Customs will immediately want to know who bought it, what it is being used for, and so on. Another deterrent relates to the fact that the UK is a closed economy and, unlike Ireland, it is not obliged to rely on exports. The cost of transport in the UK is quite high. The margin on which UK hauliers operate is approximately 5% to 6% greater than that of their Irish counterparts. As a result, they are not that inclined to purchase laundered fuel and, consequently, there is not a big market for it.

It has been suggested that the capacity of the authorities in the North to detect contaminants in fuel is much more sophisticated than that of their counterparts in the South. Is Mr. Gavin in a position to indicate whether this is the case.

Mr. Eoin Gavin

I spoke to customs officers in respect of this matter, particularly with regard to whether the State Laboratory is considering new ways of testing the fuel seized. Under the current regime, it is not possible to detect whether the fuel has been laundered. In the context of a different dye being added to the fuel, the officers to whom I spoke indicated that they are not aware of such a product. They indicated that if they came across such a dye, it could take between 12 months and two years to complete the tender process in respect of it. Thereafter, it would be necessary to check with vehicle manufacturers to discover whether such a dye would affect engines. As a result, it would take three to four years to complete the process. In view of the rate at which laundered fuel is becoming available, the oil companies would be out of business and the haulage industry would be decimated long before then.

Members must recall that motorists and hauliers who use laundered fuel can do a great deal of damage to their engines. I am of the view that those involved in the illegal trade are making such revenues from it that they are examining ways of washing diesel in such a way that it will not affect engines. That is a measure of how large this industry has become.

I thank Mr. Gavin, Mr. McMahon and Mr. McGowan for coming before us. In addition, I thank Mr. Gavin for his presentation. He put forward some good ideas and gave us food for thought, particularly in the context of washed diesel. This is a major issue which has been raised in the Dáil and the Minister recently indicated that he intends to examine it to discover whether there is any way we could deal with it. In that context, the ideas put forward by our guests are extremely important. Mr. Gavin referred to tax and how it should be dealt with. I have not considered that matter but I will certainly examine it.

I will inquire with regard to a number of issues in the context of how the haulage industry is affected. The haulage industry is extremely large and is vital to the economy. Do the speed limits that apply to trucks and so on have a negative effect on the industry? Does being obliged to drive at or below a particular speed have a knock-on effect in respect of costs?

The number of road tolls which must be paid is increasing and I am sure this is adding to hauliers' costs in a major way. On some of the main carriageways there can be two or three tolls. That obviously adds to the costs incurred by hauliers and by members of the general public. Are the checkpoints operated by customs officers and gardaí effective in the context of detecting those who are using laundered fuel? If so, is this proving to be of benefit to the haulage industry.

People continually refer to the carbon tax. Mr. Gavin stated that the way this tax is levied here is unfair when compared to how it is dealt with in other countries and that hauliers coming here from abroad are operating at an advantage. Will he comment on that and on the others I have raised?

Mr. Eoin Gavin

We have made representations to the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport in respect of speed limits, particularly that which applies - 80 km/h - in respect of motorways. We discussed that limit with the Road Safety Authority and the Garda and they indicated that they do not have a difficulty with it being increased to 90 km/h, which would bring it into line with the limit that applies across the rest of Europe. Such an increase would make it safer to drive on motorways. At present, trucks travelling at 80 km/h on motorways are what is termed as "stacking". If the limit were 90 km/h, it would be possible for them to overtake slower moving vehicles. The change we propose would be practical in nature and we are working closely with the Department in respect of it. We are very happy with the progress made to date.

We have a difficulty with road tolls. The tunnel in Limerick costs the taxpayer €130,000 per week as a result of the deal done under the PPP programme. Hauliers in the area from which I come are not using the tunnel because if they do so rather than travelling through the city, the differential for them is 80 cent to €1. A person who drives to Limerick from a local quarry or creamery ten times per day will not pay the toll because it will cost €5.90 each time he uses the tunnel. This would lead to an overall cost for the day of €118. We went the direct route and asked the company which operates the tunnel if it could do a deal for hauliers in the area. We were informed that this would not be possible and those whom we approached laughed us. We discovered that the reason for their amusement is that the Government pays the company €130,000 per week regardless of whether anyone uses the tunnel. This must stop.

We ask the Minister to revisit the matter of tolled roads, because many of the companies which constructed them are in NAMA. Other matters are being revisited, so why not re-examine the position with regard to the roads to which I refer? A motorway project relating to Cork has been cancelled because there is no funding available. If what is termed a "Eurovignette" system were introduced, hauliers and truck owners would be allowed to pay their road tax online or in a petrol station on a daily, three-day or weekly basis. If a driver in Belgium is caught without a vignette by the police, he or she will have his or her truck impounded and will be obliged to pay a fine of €5,000 to get it back. Therefore, he or she would dare not pay the €25 charge. It would free up the local authorities and it would put more money into the Exchequer. At the moment, people are avoiding road tax and then they are brought to court, along with the gardaí who are involved in their case. The cost of this is enormous. People would rather pay for what they use on the road. We are paying an average of €3,500 on 1 January to tax a truck for the year, but we have no guarantee that the truck will use the roads. International operators are paying €800 per week to go to Italy with Irish beef, and they are paying €3,500 here in road tax. That does not make sense. They use the road on Friday morning and on Friday evening and then they are back out on the ferry again. Many people in construction are now seasonal workers, working in the summer and off for the winter. The local authority trade has gone that way.

People do not mind paying. We are well able to pay our fair share, but we need to look at the way it is being targeted. We possibly might not have a problem with paying more, but we have a problem with a how it is paid and when we pay it. England is entering the European system in two years, so we should work with the English on it.

Mr. Gerry McMahon

Customs and Excise and the Garda Síochána were mentioned as authorities administering the sector, but the Road Safety Authority is the new department that looks after us. Customs and Excise do the job to the best of their ability, but unfortunately the dye is no longer detectable in fuel, so there is nothing they can do. We have to go to another level and that is the difficulty. We have no problem with the Garda Síochána. We are working during normal working hours. We have a problem with the people outside the net in the rogue economy, because they do not work the normal hours. They do not have a legitimate address. A registered haulier in this State must have a premises, and the Garda or the RSA can visit that premises to check his paperwork. A road smuggler does not have such a registered address in the public domain, and that is our difficulty.

The problem arising from this is one of competition. We have no problem paying any charge if we can recoup it, but in an unfairly competitive environment, it is impossible to recoup it, so the haulier must sustain that cost himself and this puts him out of business eventually. That is the spiral we have now entered. There is a domino effect with fuel being a factor. We all know it is a world factor and is not created by one element of taxation, but taxation is a major element for us in Ireland. If we can have a fair environment where we can compete on a level playing pitch with everybody in the haulage sector, we can pay any cost coming down the line. We need the assistance of the Government. We are here today to get that message across. We cannot sustain a professional transport sector on our own any more, because we have hit the wall. We are at the end of our tether in all aspects, and not just fuel. We have picked up the tab to date. We have not been able to pass it on, because there is unfair competition in the market place.

The carbon tax element comes under this as well, in response to Deputy Ellis. Why should I be penalised for carrying someone else's goods from A to B? I am being penalised because I am paying the carbon tax. The people moving the goods - the exporter or the importer - pay nothing. They do not care whether I pay that carbon tax. They will get somebody else to do it. That somebody else may be using washed diesel. Is that person worried about a carbon tax or the environment? Absolutely not.

Mr. Seamus McGowan

I make a point from a different angle. Deputy Ellis asked about the effectiveness of Customs and Excise. The Government is putting at risk the lives of people working with Customs and Excise by colouring fuel. We hammered at the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport and said that we wanted it all cleaned up. The pressure is being put on people from Customs and Excise. They are telling us off the record that they have lost the plot in this area and can do nothing about it. The Government is asking them to deal with extremely hardened criminals. This is not about the ordinary farmer or haulier who might put in the wrong colour diesel. It has gone to a different level, and expecting those people to be able to deliver is just the Government absolving itself of all the responsibility. The Government is causing this problem.

This did not happen in the 1950s but it changed. Perhaps there was a difficult rebate system that did not work. This system has worked for 40 years, but it has just gone to a different level. Hardened criminals are lapping this up and making a great deal of money, and hauliers cannot compete. We cannot pass on the carbon tax to our customers because there is an element within the haulage industry that will use it. We are representing the legitimate hauliers. Let us stop the tinkering with fuel, and stop asking questions like how come they can do it in England and not in Ireland. It is irrelevant.

There was a very interesting article in the Irish Farmers’ Journal last Thursday week by Mr. Colm McCarthy. He was the man who was asked by the Government to look at all areas and all possible savings in public expenditure. Perhaps he just missed it when he was doing the original bord snip nua calculations, but he stated very strongly last Thursday that we have to look at the issue of laundered diesel. If the Irish farming lobby were dead against this, I doubt the Irish Farmers’ Journal would encourage Mr. McCarthy to write such an article. He pointed out that there is a cost saving for the taxpayer. The Government is giving away €600 million - that is the gross figure - with no strings attached and no tax clearance certificate required. We have seen the embarrassment suffered by various Ministers when it came to reducing incomes for handicapped people, yet €600 million is being thrown away here. Criminals love it and we wonder whether we can try a different dye. It has gone past that at this stage. We are here to say that this is a “no-brainer” and that the system really should be changed as soon as possible. There is time to do it in this finance Bill.

Mr. Gerry McMahon

In 1998, the number of haulage licences in Ireland reached a peak at 5,474. That equated to just short of 20,000 vehicles. Mr. Gavin has given us the figure of 2.5 jobs per vehicle, which is the average across the industry. Today the number of such licences stands at 4,200, so 1,300 SMEs have been wiped away in this country, along with 3,500 jobs. If a factory were closing tomorrow with the loss of 3,500 jobs, every Department and every Deputy would be asked to sort out the problem. This is an ongoing problem for us. It is so serious and our backs are to the wall. We need reality to be brought to the situation.

Even in the good times, road haulage was a vulnerable industry. Survival in the industry was always precarious, because the margins are very tight. We need to be open-minded about some of the suggestions made, because there is still much employment in the industry and it is very important to protect that. We have to look at the totality of the situation. If we sustain the existing number of people in the industry, we keep people off welfare. The point made about the sustainability of colouring fuel requires careful examination.

I thank the delegates for sending all this material - the report from Deloitte - because it is really useful. Does the report indicate that this could be cost neutral? It is easier to make the argument if the delegates say that it is cost neutral. I would like to understand what they mean by the pay-as-you-go system. A pay-as-you-go system will not stop people filling up in Belgium or wherever is cheaper before returning here.

It was mentioned that diesel accounts for 50% of the cost base. The VAT should be deducted from this in most cases and it would be rare enough for people not to receive a refund. I am confused by the concept of a pay-as-you-go system. If it existed I presume it would be based on fuel. How would this be done? One would still be able to fill up in Belgium if a pay-as-you-go system existed here. I am interested to hear about the mechanics of how it would work. I presume work has been done on this and I am happy to wait to receive the information later. I am not entirely clear why the gross vehicle weight matters with regard to road tax and I would like clarification on this.

It was stated that administration would be associated with a rebate system. How would this work and would it be factored into a cost-neutral approach? What do other countries do with regard to colouring fuel and are we at variance with them?

With regard to tolls, I am a former member of Kildare County Council and that county has more motorway than any other. We were well used to discussions on road development and tolls often featured as an issue. Diversion rates were factored into the tolling system, whereby it was expected that people would not use the road because they would be over and back several times a day. It is different if people use it only occasionally. Ireland has some toll roads and I am not a great fan of this way of developing a road system. Many roads on the continent are tolled. Does the road haulage industry treat those tolls in the same way by diverting around them or are the tolls paid? What is the experience of the industry of the tolling of roads in other countries?

I will come back to the Deputy.

I have one more question.

You have asked nine already.

I have two more questions. The plastic bag tax was used as an example and it is very easy to conceptualise how this works. What was meant by using it as an example? I presume the answer to Deputy Ellis with regard to the amount of €130,000 a week on a particular tolled road was based on a certain guaranteed threshold. How many tolled roads throughout the country do not reach that threshold?

Mr. Eoin Gavin

The pay-as-you-go system would be predominantly for road tax and would have no association with fuel. Perhaps it is a flippant term but it means the day one uses the road is the day one pays for it. Under the existing road tax system one pays one's road tax before ever going on the road and this causes financial and cash flow problems. With regard to how a pay-as-you-go system could be administered, in Germany the road taxation system is based on kilometres travelled and engine emissions. Therefore, the more environmentally friendly one's truck is the less one pays per kilometre. The same system is in place in Austria, and it works through satellite communication with a little gadget on the windscreen of the truck.

In Belgium, Holland, Luxembourg, Sweden and Denmark the eurovignette is used. This is a tag one sticks on one's windscreen and it is valid for a day, three days or a week. It can be bought on the Internet or at fuel stations in those countries. It is also based on vehicle emissions. The difference between this and the German-based system is that the German system is distance-based and the eurovignette is a total charge per day regardless of distance travelled. However, it does take into consideration the environmental impact of the engine.

Under the road tax system in Ireland if I buy a truck in 2012 I will then go to my local weighbridge to weigh it with the heaviest trailer I have in my yard. A flat trailer could weigh 12 tonnes, a tipper trailer could weigh 14 tonnes and a refrigerated trailer could weigh 22 tonnes. It depends on the manufacturer whether aluminium or steel is used and the covers. I will then go with the weight docket I received to my local tax office to register the truck and I will pay tax accordingly. Regardless of how many accidents one has, the size of the engine or the type of equipment involved, the tax is calculated on the weight. This goes back to the 1930s when vehicle manufacturers did not plate the weight on them. One may have noticed a weigh lever on roundabouts in small towns. This was used to weigh trucks because manufacturers did not have the facility to do so. Now, every truck is stamped with its weight and its empty weight is known, and this is also true for trailers. However, our system, which dates back to the 1930s, insists on a truck being weighed with the heaviest trailer.

I will describe an anomaly. I could have a refrigerated trailer in my yard which with the truck has a combined weight of 20 tonnes. I could receive a call from a shipper in Dublin with a low loader with a big machine that needs to be moved to Cork. On my way I could be stopped by a garda who sees my tax disc is for 22 tonnes but believes the trailer weighs 25 tonnes. In court, although the truck has not been weighed, a judge will accept the garda's expert opinion and I will be deemed to have broken the law by not taxing my vehicle properly and the new tax will be backdated to when the vehicle was bought. This is completely ridiculous.

Gross vehicle weight is the combination of axles and trucks one can bring. For a tipper sand and gravel truck one can bring 32 tonnes and 42 tonnes can be brought for a refrigerated truck and trailer with five axles. Why not base it on the gross vehicle weight of 42 tonnes or 32 tonnes? The country has approximately ten categories of trucks. Category one comprises the two axle rigid trucks that go to shops and are 18 tonnes. Category two comprises three axle trucks such as those one sees on a building site. Why not base the system on this? It would eliminate the issue of people having to weigh their heaviest trailer when they are not sure whether it really is the heaviest.

A temporary system could be introduced overnight. It is how it is done in the UK. It would also take into account the environmental impact of engines. Many trucks here have Euro 5 engines and the fumes emitted from these are like from a kettle boiling. A blue substance is added to the exhaust system which neutralises the fumes which then emerge like steam. This engine weighs 250 kg more, so someone buying such a truck pays more road tax because the empty weight of the truck and heaviest trailer is greater than that of a 1983 truck which does not have the system in place. People purchasing new trucks in Ireland pay more road tax even though they contribute more in fuel economy and to the environment. The long-term objective is the introduction of a pay-as-you-go system and that the environmental impact of engines would be taken into account.

A question was asked about whether agricultural fuel is coloured in other countries. We know it is done in the UK. The Germans, Dutch and Austrians do not do so and neither do the French. The Spanish have some coloured fuel. Most countries do not dye the fuel and instead give rebates to farmers, industries, schools and churches. A report by Deloitte found in the worst case scenario it would not cost the Exchequer anything.

It was suggested that if a rebate system were in place hauliers would still fill up in Belgium. At today's prices there is only a 10 cent differential and the index could be matched; when the price of a barrel or the consumer price decreases then let the rebate percentage also decrease. Three years ago in Belgium it was only 1.2 cent and now it is up to 10 cent. Let it fluctuate; it helps industry and exports. Why would I buy my fuel in Ireland? The answer is I would receive better credit from my local oil supplier and there is the matter of loyalty to the supplier. My driver telephoned me this morning from Luxembourg and said there was a three-hour queue there for diesel because it was cheap fuel. He asked me what he should do. I said he needed to be in Milan in the morning but that he was to stick it out, that we were not paying here. That is a problem. I would like if he could have filled up with 1,200 litres of diesel in Cork yesterday, went straight on to Milan and returned home to fill up with diesel. The VAT and rebate could be repaid in a much shorter time here. How do we get the rebate in Belgium? We register with the oil company and it processes the rebate and it comes into our account as a credit at the point of purchase. There is some paperwork involved because one is outside the country. One has to prove one's VAT No., haulage licence and so on. If a scheme was in place that matched that of Belgium - Belgium or France are the first borders we enter after the UK - international hauliers would buy diesel here. There are 5,000 trucks in the North each week. Some 5,000 trucks are filling up with 1,200 litres of diesel each day in Europe when they used to buy it in Dundalk. That is another loss. At the very least, even with the administrative cost, Deloitte says it will not cost anything. If I were going into business in the morning in the current environment and were told it would not cost anything, and that I would make a profit without knowing the margin I would give it a try. That is what we ask.

Mr. Gerry McMahon

On the cost base for fuel - it is net of VAT. As we are all VAT registered we obviously claim the VAT back, therefore, it is a net figure of VAT. The rate is 50% but not for everybody. It is above 40% for everybody, therefore it is net of VAT.

How does one pass on the carbon tax levy? It is quite simple. As business people we are a collector of tax for the Revenue Commissioners. We charge VAT and return same to Revenue. For example, if we are invoicing for the movement of the goods from A to B, the VAT rate is 23%, plus 1% carbon tax - that is returned to Government. We do not pay it - the user pays. That is a simple mechanism. The principle we want to get to is that we could become the collector of the tax, not the payer. This is not difficult. Given that within the sector there are about 4,500 licensed hauliers in the sector, it is not difficult to administer or manage.

In regard to EU tolls, we pay the tolls on the continent and have done so for the past 25 years but we get preferential rates, as hauliers and users. There are several companies who sell credits for tolls. DKV, a credit card company, is one that comes to mind. I can register with DKV. I have its card and I pay all my expenses in Europe on its card. As Mr. Eoin Gavin said, the same applies for the fuel, it will collect the VAT. As my bill is net of VAT at a preferential rate, it is cost effective. As an organisation we approached the toll companies in Ireland with a view to setting up a similar system but we were told to sling our hook; there was no interest. They do not want to talk to us. They want to cream it off the top all the time. Unfortunately that is reality.

That was for €130,000. What is the experience with the other toll roads if there is a -----

Mr. Eoin Gavin

The M3 in Meath is the other one we are aware of that is not cost effective.

What amount of money is being transferred?

Mr. Eoin Gavin

I do not have the figures.

Does the delegate consider there is some money?

Mr. Eoin Gavin

Yes.

They are not meeting the target.

Mr. Eoin Gavin

Absolutely. People are avoiding it.

I have raised the fuel laundering issue on the floor of the House, under the Topical Issue debate and by way of parliamentary questions. The article to which the delegate referred by Mr. Colm McCarthy mentioned me as one who was trying to work with the farming organisations to consider the rebate system. The farming organisations are open to looking at a system but they do not want to countenance something that will increase their cost of production, which is a problem. They will look at a rebate system but I am meeting resistance with regard to the system which apparently is open to abuse. This is a still a major issue in the North and in Britain. I am a member of the British Irish Interparliamentary Body where the matter has been raised and is becoming a huge issue. The British authorities are now considering going down the chemical route where a radioactive isotope can be added to the fuel and cannot be removed. I take the point that we could be three or four years away from that solution but it is critical that a solution is found. To find the solution we need the Government, the Irish Road Haulage Association, oil distributors and the farming organisations to come together to find a solution that suits everybody. What I do not appear to get across and what the representatives have brought to us today is that there is a time element here. A solution needs to be found, not in four or five years time - we cannot wait that long - and we cannot do without the taxes that should go into the Exchequer, especially in the current economic climate.

I was interested in the reference to fishery rebate. The Minister said rebate systems are vulnerable to abuse and likely to be exploited by the criminal elements. I want to explore that issue. If the Irish Road Haulage Association feels there is a simple system, I want to hear about it as I have been told otherwise. I have written to all the Departments saying we need to find a solution on many levels - loss to the Exchequer, criminal elements, damage to people's cars and so on. Fuel laundering is becoming an issue not only across the Border but in every constituency. We have gone beyond the talking stage, we need to find a solution. Any help the representatives can provide to try to find that solution, or explore how we could find a solution, would be welcome.

Mr. Eoin Gavin

I thank Deputy Phelan. We have acknowledged her support and have read all her articles. In fairness, she is the Deputy who is shouting the loudest in the House about the problem. I am a farmer. In July, when I met the Minister of State at the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Brian Hayes, in Bunratty I outlined the problems about fuel laundering. All I know is that a rebate system encourages tax compliance. For example, in Belgium, my VAT is up to date, my trucks are in order, I pay my Eurovignette and the road tax and I get rewarded. I ask whether a similar type system can be put in place for agriculture. I begin to think, I am a farmer and I have enough forms to fill out. I have cashflow issue, having to pay 23% VAT plus an extra 50 cent and will have to claim it back at the end of the year. My DKV invoice from the oil company in Belgium shows the full price, including fuel rebate and VAT rebate. It is administered at point of sale. Why cannot a farmer or construction company register with the supplier? I did not know that this happened. I tried to do searches in the Department of Finance and I could not find where it was being done. At a meeting in Donegal last Sunday evening a haulier, who is also a trawler owner in Killybegs, said he had three trawlers. Four years ago trawlers had an issue and blocked the ports of Cork and Rosslare because the fishermen could not survive. The Government introduced a rebate system which is currently running at 9 cents. They are buying the green diesel but they are also getting 9 cents. He said the scheme is administered through his local oil company. He explained that he must be tax compliant, fishing quotas must be in order, landing slips must be right, and he must have licences for all his boats but it is cutting the guy who goes out fishing twice a year and tries to blow him out of the market on price.

I spoke with Mr. Tom Murphy, director of the Professional Agricultural Contractors Association. As a part-time beef farmer, I burn approximately 150 litres per year. The larger tillage farmers burn more. The contractors are the major users of the fuel. Mr. Murphy asked me to forward the document, saying he wanted to see the model and how it was done on a cashflow basis. He said his association conducted a survey and found his members use approximately two to three oil distributors and that is it. They are very loyal to their suppliers. The oil distributor knows our business and how much fuel we used last year. He can estimate what we will use this year. If the local contractor suddenly starts to use double the amount of fuel from his local oil distributor, the onus is on the distributor to ask what the contractor is doing with the rest of it, and whether he is selling it to a guy down the road who the distributor should be supplying, and not getting a rebate, so that the distributor is losing out. Suddenly, the onus would be on the oil distributor. Second, it would be highlighted in the local contractor's tax return. If his or her tax return was lower than the rebate, there would be a problem. It is a matter of cross-compliance. That is the position for agricultural contractors. They wish to see a legitimising of their industry. Contractors are probably suffering in the same way as we are on the legal side and I have spoken to representatives of the Irish Farmers Association about the matter. They have told me this issue must be resolved and they are keen to reach a solution. Cashflow and the administrative burden are the two issues involved. Last night I was at the funeral of an old farmer in Sixmilebridge, County Clare, where I was surrounded by four top IFA people, to whom I explained the position. They said the system would be fiddled by farmers, that if they used a diesel car, they would be able to claim. I said that was happening already. People are using green diesel in their jeep and car. I asked whether they would start driving to Dublin every day because they had access to cheap diesel. The fact is they will still only burn €40 or €50 of fuel per week. There will possibly be some dishonesty, but if one moves above the threshold for fuel in the tax return, it will appear as an anomaly. The cost of what is happening to the environment and in lost revenue considerably outstrips the possibility of there being a small anomaly. Most would be honest.

A stronger rebate could be given in the agriculture sector to help Irish food exports. As Deputy Timmy Dooley suggested, the sum of €600 million could be used for other things.

Absolutely. Also, the rebate could be used to try to get farmers to comply if there were a 5% or 10% increase. If someone were to signal a 5% or 10% increase in the rebate, perhaps they might be subject to an audit, which would encourage compliance also. There is a will, but we need to harness it to solve the problem.

Mr. Eoin Gavin

Everyone agrees. Politicians, including Deputies across party lines, the agriculture and fishing communities and hauliers are all keen to solve the problem.

Mr. Eoin Gavin

As a farmer, the greatest problem I see is that matters would get so out-of-hand that some day they would stop dying the fuel. That is what would happen suddenly if there were no rebate.

Mr. Gavin has made the point well.

As a good deal has been covered, I will try not to repeat what the deputation has stated.

I read the Deloitte report. The average indirect tax figure in Ireland per 1,000 litres used by a haulage truck is €450. In Italy and Germany the figures are roughly the same. I looked at the figures for the Netherlands where the Eurovignette system is in place and it is missing from the graph. I would prefer to compare like with like. In the United Kingdom the take is a great deal higher, at approximately €650.

The deputation has referred to the savings that could be realised under the system for road taxation by usuing gross vehicle weight rather than unladen weight. It has also referred to the administrative savings to be made for local authorities and the Garda. Has anyone conducted a survey to establish what it costs local authorities to administer the system? Has anyone carried out a survey to establish the Garda time taken and manpower used to bring lorries to a weigh-bridge under a system dating back to the 1930s? There should be no need to do this when the weight of a five or six axle truck is available on the web.

Having a cost benefit analysis is the only way to change policy. The deputation has stated it would have no problem in paying a little more, but it wants the system to be fair. That is a good argument. Sometimes those making an argument suggest they should pay nothing; the deputation has stated it would have no problem in paying but it wishes to do so properly. I see a good deal of merit in what it is stating but figures would convince me more, especially if I could see the savings to be made. The graph in the Deloitte report shows Ireland at the midway point across the board. It is not above or under, whereas the level in the United Kingdom is well above it, at €650.

The green diesel issue has been discussed to death. It is the major problem here, but I like the phrase used by the deputation. Everything is recorded, but off the record; Customs has lost the plot. We recognise this.

What the Senator is saying is being recorded, too.

I have no problem in saying it again. Customs has obviously lost the plot on this issue because the system is not working. We should put our heads together and do something about the matter. There are issues relating to the targeting of carbon tax and the fuel user rebate. The deputation has referred to the polluter pays principle as enshrined in the plastic bag levy scheme. I see nothing wrong with this. The matter should be discussed further. I note that the polluter-pays principle was discussed previously, as was the issue of charging the tax at the petrol pump. We should investigate why it was decided not to run with the measure at that stage. I thank the deputation for a most informative presentation.

Mr. Gerry McMahon

The issue of the polluter-pays principle was raised. When the carbon tax was being introduced two or three budgets ago, we made a submission. It was conceded and recommended by the Department of Transport, as it was then called, that those involved in the haulage industry should not pay, but this recommendation was overlooked by the Department of Finance. This issue is not new; this is not the first time we have dealt with it. It is an ongoing issue on which our position is known.

Something came to my mind when Mr. Gavin was referring to gross weight. I will try to make the issue in respect of gross vehicle weight simple. We call the payload the amount of product one is allowed to place on the back of a trailer. As matters stands, in Ireland we pay more to carry less. This is because we pay on the weight of the empty vehicle, which means I am allowed to carry less product because I would go above the legal limit. We want to change this to gross vehicle weight in order that there would be a balanced payment system. There is a serious anomaly. It is historical and ancient and we are stuck with the system, but we should examine it. We must move on and get modern.

Mr. Eoin Gavin

The issue of indirect taxes per EU member state was raised. The figure in the Netherlands is between €400 and €500, the same as in Ireland, but there is a rebate. The indirect taxation figure stays the same and there is a rebate to essential users such as hauliers. Taxis, buses and so on burn fuel, but people will soon be unable to eat in this country if trucks do not move. People have a choice; they can choose to get a taxi or walk and whether they should take a bus or train, but in the case of the haulage sector the country would come to a stop. In other European countries there are canals and train services, but these countries recognise that the haulage sector is important.

An argument is always made when one raises the possibility of a rebate for farmers. Mr. Gavin mentioned to one of the other speakers that the system would be abused. How does one counteract this argument?

Mr. Eoin Gavin

It would be done through encouraging tax compliance. If the fuel rebate were to suddenly outstrip the VAT return and one was claiming for more fuel than one was using, there would be a problem. It would be done through the oil company. The onus would be on the oil company, the user and Revenue to ensure compliance.

I am referring to when the farmer or the husband would go to the shops with the children rather than-----

Farmers have to pay tax and complete returns also.

Mr. Eoin Gavin

If one's tax payment on farming and fuel was €10,000 last year and suddenly it went €20,000, although the single farm payment and the cheque from the factory were the same, something would be wrong somewhere. The oil companies are key in this case. They managed to do it in the case of the fishing industry. If an oil company suddenly realises one is taking on board fuel and reselling it, it will lose out.

What was the other question?

It was related to the cost to local authorities.

Mr. Eoin Gavin

That is something we must undertake. There is a substantial cost to our industry because we must drive the trucks. Last week I went to my local tax office to tax five trucks and was informed I could tax only three.

There is a cost in terms of staff time and so on.

Mr. Eoin Gavin

I stayed for one and a half hours to tax them. I was presenting a cheque for €11,000 and told I could only complete payment for three trucks. My drivers would have had to go on the road without having been taxed that day.

Why was Mr. Gavin limited to taxing only three trucks?

Mr. Eoin Gavin

There is a ruling within local authorities that they only tax three at a time, but I stood my ground and wrote to the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Phil Hogan. I was delighted to hear this week that they would tax as many as we want to bring in. I would love not to be able to tax them and I would love to give that money to my local oil supplier and my tyre man on the first week in January when everybody is looking for money but I knew the drivers would not go out on the road without the tax. I agree this study should be undertaken and I thank the Senator for that recommendation.

Mr. Seamus McGowan

As regards the cost-benefit analysis we had a meeting with the Department of Finance and we brought the Deloitte document with us. The Civil Service response is, "Prove it, give us the sums". How can I get my hands on the overtime records of the customs service or on the salaries and overtime paid to policemen arguing with hauliers on the side of the road? The Irish Road Haulage Association can produce the general idea of setting up systems which do not confuse people, do not cause more work nor result in policemen up against hauliers in court with the only benefit going to the lawyers and perhaps the policemen who are earning the overtime. We need to create a society where there is less work and where the simplest solution is chosen to avoid all this ambiguity. This would avoid the IRHA having to do all the calculations and provide information on costs that as hauliers we cannot access.

Mr. McGowan has said we still have time to do this as regards the Finance Bill.

Mr. Gerry McMahon

It is in process at the moment and I believe it will be in mid-February.

I understand from the Minister that a review of the taxation system is being undertaken. We will ensure that all these aspects are considered.

Mr. Gerry McMahon

We are making a direct submission.

It is under review at the moment so we are just pre-empting responses at this stage. I thank the Senator. Many important issues have been raised but there are other issues. I refer to two people, a former past president and an active current member of the Irish Road Haulage Association, one of whom sells trucks and the other of whom is trying to buy them. He said his business can no longer afford to invest in new trucks. The other person says he could sell 20 more trucks a week if people could get finance. Is the issue of the availability of banking credit causing any problems for the association?

Mr. Eoin Gavin

Yes, it is.

The other issue would be that of costs. We all realise and appreciate the importance to the country of the road haulage industry. This is an island nation and our goods have to be transported to the mainland markets. I refer to the cost of ferries and access to them. We do not wish to make this discussion a case of the road haulier versus the farmers because they depend on each other. The hauliers depend for business on productive farmers and such farmers would not last long without the services of the hauliers to bring their products to market, as 98% of agricultural produce goes to export.

As regards the laundering of fuel, one of the major issues which was not referred to is the fear among farmers. They would be very envious of hauliers losing only 35 gallons in the year. Farmers are worried about fuel theft from their diesel storage. It is bad enough with the coloured diesel but if it were all to be the same colour, this would present a significant problem. I know there are ways around this problem but it is a major worry for the farming community. The association's members' trucks are on the roads all the time whereas agricultural machinery is often parked overnight in isolated locations. Theft is a significant problem for the farming community.

I refer to the stuff on the side of the road which the local authorities have to clean up.

Mr. Eoin Gavin

I meant to raise that issue when Deputy Phelan was speaking about radioactive dye. Imagine if that were to be dumped. Where there is a will there is a way and if €600 million is being given out by fuel being coloured, there will always be a way. Washing fuel is not new; it has been happening for 40 or 50 years.

I am referring to the fear of theft of white diesel. The farmers cannot stay up all night to keep watch.

Mr. Eoin Gavin

I do not think green diesel is a big issue. Green diesel is approximately 85 cent a litre at the moment and the average farm storage tank holds 1,000 litres. Anything bigger must be bunded. The bigger contractors get direct deliveries from the oil trucks on to the field or the site. That is how it works.

I do not wish to get into an argument about it.

Mr. Eoin Gavin

I would not say it is a valid argument.

It is an issue with them.

Mr. Eoin Gavin

An average of 1,000 litres stored on the farm is 50 cent more expensive; it is €500. Any farm will have a lot of equipment which is easier to sell such as equipment, livestock, all worth more than €500. The bigger contractors get direct deliveries from the oil companies. A farmer with a self-spread silage harvester is burning approximately 600 litres a day so his oil truck is following him around to all the farms. I do not see security as a big issue. The value of green diesel will increase in any case because of the way oil is going. The sudden increase in the value of their oil products stored at home would not be a big security issue. There are a lot more valuable things in farmyards that could be subject to theft. I would not consider this a valid argument against a loss of €600 million to the Exchequer and the damage to the environment.

As regards finance for truck purchase, we had to put forward a business plan when applying for finance this week. We had to detail our plan for the vehicle and we are predominantly exporting agricultural products. The bank was happy enough to accept our plan. We would encourage more businesses to have business plans. The banks should discuss plans with hauliers to see which area they plan to work in. During the boom times, finance for trucks and haulage licences was given out by financial institutions and by the Department of Transport to drivers who never produced a business plan. All they had was work driving a load of stone or a load of beef and they were given the finance to buy a jeep, a car for the wife. We have seen what happened and now we see all the sales on the side of the Naas Road. We do not want to go back to that situation where money is given out left, right and centre. We need a bit of stability in our industry and we need support. There is a need for a business plan approach in the industry. I would love to buy ten new trucks in the morning. This is an export-led economy so I know the business is there for me but the problem is there is no confidence in the industry. The association held eight meetings across the industry in the past ten days and we could see the lads' heads are in the sand. The budget imposed a carbon tax of two cent and washed diesel costs 30 cent less. People cannot compete and they will give up the business.

If our guys give up, all the exportable beef, computers and dairy products will not be got off the island. There is no point in relying on an English or European-based company. Three weeks ago when the storm blew in Holyhead, eight Dutch trucks sat there for four days because they would not cross the Irish Sea. Our drivers, the Irish hauliers, travelled on the boats. They are used to the conditions. We are island people and we are used to crossing the sea. It is essential to have a locally based business, a local haulage fleet. We need confidence back in our industry. I guarantee if there is a rebate system provided in the Finance Bill, the guy who has the new trucks for sale will see a queue outside his door. There are men willing to take the risk. There are great transport opportunities in Europe. In the Shannon region we are looking to bring air freight from all over the world into Shannon Airport and then trucking it across Europe. We can do it because we are already doing that journey in reverse as it is. We could make Ireland a distribution hub. We could provide storage for the big UK and European multinationals. We can service Milan in 36 hours and London in nine hours. We can service Frankfurt and Belgium in 24 hours. We are next door and we are very good at delivering a service. Much of our business started in the 1960s when Irish beef and lamb was trucked across to North Africa and the Middle East. This expertise is still in our industry. In my case, a German company wants me to send two trucks to work between Germany and France. I asked why they did not ask companies in Romania and eastern European countries. They told me that those companies do not have the expertise or the quality of staff or the commitment of the Irish industry. We need support. Our men's heads are in the sand. The Finance Bill is the ideal opportunity. We are lobbying the Minister for Finance and local TDs on this matter. They must sort out the problem of the laundered fuel. It is a small thing that will not incur any cost. Our tax returns and the rebate on haulage will be returned in profits and go back into the economy.

I thank the Irish Road Haulage Association and its representatives, Mr. Gavin, Mr. McMahon and Mr. McGowan, for their attendance. They have raised a lot of issues which are the responsibilities of various Departments. The committee will forward a transcript of this meeting and of today's presentation to the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport in order to receive a co-ordinated response. We must have a focal point and that will be to ensure the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport is briefed in this respect. He will then return to us with a co-ordinated response and we can decide what action we need to take after that.

A recommendation should also be made by the committee.

That is what we will do. We will send it to him.

I propose that we publish a copy of the presentation and associated material on our web page. I thank the delegates for their presentation and attendance. The select committee will meet tomorrow.

The joint committee adjourned at 3.40 p.m. until 2.15 p.m. on Tuesday, 24 January 2012.
Top
Share