Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 3 Dec 1930

Vol. 14 No. 3

Public Business. - Treaty of Commerce and Navigation with Portugal.

Mr. Milroy

I move:—

That the Seanad approves of the Treaty of Commerce and Navigation between Saorstát Eireann and Portugal, signed at Dublin on the 29th day of October, 1929, a copy of which was laid on the Table of the Seanad on the 20th day of November, 1929, and recommends the Executive Council to take the necessary steps to ratify the said Treaty.

This motion, I think, is also non-controversial, the main purpose being to secure reciprocal most-favoured-nation treatment between the two countries. However, I suppose the Seanad, or some members, will desire a little more detailed explanation, and I will endeavour to supply it. The commercial relations between the Saorstát and Portugal have hitherto been governed by the provisions of the Treaty of Commerce and Navigation between Great Britain and Portugal signed at Lisbon on 12th August, 1914. This Treaty was denounced by the Government of the Saorstát on 12th October, 1927, and the denunciation took effect as from 12th October, 1928. The Treaty has, however, been kept in force in the meantime by means of an exchange of notes, and it will be continued in force until the present Treaty is ratified. The present Treaty is based upon the principle of reciprocal most-favoured-nation treatment, and hence it ensures that the shipping and commerce of the Saorstát will receive in Portugal the treatment accorded to the most favoured foreign country. The Treaty consists of eight articles. Articles 1 and 2 provide for the mutual accord of most-favoured-nation treatment to imported goods. Article 3 reserves the position of the Saorstát in regard to preference accorded to any other member of the British Commonwealth of Nations. Articles 4 and 5 relate respectively to the grant of most-favoured-nation treatment so far as concerns import prohibition and commercial travellers.

In Article 6 the Government of the Saorstát "engage to recommend to the Oireachtas any legislation that may be necessary in order to give effect to the provisions of this Article." A Bill has been already introduced in the Dáil in this connection, and has received a second reading. The provisions of this Article deal with protection for the wine products of Portugal and Madeira entering and for sale in the Saorstát market, and guarantee to the consumer of these commodities the genuineness of port and Madeira wine. Article 7 provides for the mutual accord of most-favoured-nation treatment to the mercantile marine of each of the contracting parties. Article 8 is a simple one, providing for the ratification of the Treaty and for the date of its coming into effect. The Portuguese tariff prescribes maximum and minimum rates of duty, the former usually being two or three times greater than the latter. Apart from the desirability of establishing commercial relations on an amicable basis between the Saorstát and foreign countries, this Treaty with Portugal is necessary in order to secure that Saorstát products entering that country are accorded the advantages of the minimum tariff and any other privileges obtainable under the most-favoured-nation treatment.

Mr. Toal

I second.

Mr. Johnson

I support this motion, but there are a couple of points, not of outstanding importance, but which may be worth mentioning. There is a section in the Treaty which provides against the use of a trade term within this country in respect of wines which might be deemed to be a colourable imitation. For instance, it is provided that Madeira character, or type, or quality, or anything of that kind should not be used in respect of Portuguese wines. There is no reciprocal clause of that kind affecting Irish goods in Portugal. Perhaps there are no such goods being sent to Portugal at present which would require that kind of protection. But it occurs to me on reading this Treaty that if on reading this, having this line in regard to protection of goods against colourable imitations, false descriptions or deceitful descriptions, it might be useful for the Minister to follow that up in countries where many goods from this country are sold. I am thinking, for instance, of Irish-cured bacon. We have complaints even in this country at present of "Irish-cured" in respect of bacon that is merely cured here. There are many other commodities of the kind produced in this country, and have certain characteristics, imitations of which are sold in England with misleading descriptions. Perhaps the Minister will follow the example in this Treaty and seek protection against colourable imitations of the same kind in Great Britain.

There is another feature of this Treaty to which I would like to draw attention which, again, may not be of supreme importance, but may be indicative of a state of mind. It is provided in Article 2 that for the application of this most-favoured-nation treatment the Irish Free State may not invoke the agreements that Portugal may enter into with Spain or Brazil. That particular provision is embodied in Article 2, which deals with other matters. This is a kind of tail-end covering Portuguese trade with Spain and Brazil. A reciprocate Article respecting similar exceptions in the British Commonwealth is given the honour of a special clause. I wonder what is the state of mind that leads to that change in form? There is all the appearance, of course, of real reciprocity, but the fact that this special clause is inserted in respect to the British Commonwealth preference suggests that we have not got away from the notion that we are economically united with all the rest of the States of the British Commonwealth. There is something very exceptional when we are dealing with the British Commonwealth States in contrast with Portuguese treatment of Spain and Brazil. It is not an important point, but, as I said, it may indicate a state of mind and an attitude towards non-Irish communities or States which we ought to be getting away from, and I think the form might have been altered so that reciprocity should be shown even in the phraseology of the Treaty. With that comment, I support the motion.

Mr. Wilson

I would like to ask what is really the meaning of "the most-favoured-nation treatment."

Minister for Finance (Mr. Blythe)

Kamarad!

Mr. Wilson

I would like to have it examined in all its ramifications. Does it mean that the minimum tariff on any article must be given to the Free State, or are they at liberty to interpret the phrase "most-favoured-nation treatment" as they like? That is the only point I would like the Minister to explain.

Mr. Blythe

I am incapable of explaining it, because as a matter of fact it is one of the points about which great endeavours have been made recently to get international agreement. It is clear that it does not mean that the minimum tariff must, in all cases, be given to goods of the Free State because, as has been indicated by Senator Johnson, it is specifically provided that Brazilian or Spanish goods might be given less. The broad and general meaning is that goods should be given the minimum tariffs and best treatment, but there have been growing up in these most-favoured-nation Treaties a great number of exceptions which have tended to obscure the original clarity of the meaning of the phrase.

Mr. Comyn

I have not this Treaty before me, but when I read it it seemed to me there was one thing in it which rather indicated that we have only a very elementary knowledge of geography. I refer to the description of what is called the Island of Madeira. I think the Madeiras are a group of islands, and in order to show that we really know something about geography that correction should be made. There is one good point about this Treaty. I understand under the Treaty it will not be possible any longer to sell prune wine or logwood or other things as port. For that reason I think this motion ought to be accepted and that the Treaty ought to be ratified.

Dr. Gogarty

There is one point about the Treaty I would like to have inquired into. When I was in Portugal two years ago, I understood from the shipping in the river that harbour dues had to be paid in gold, and that the docks, which are very extensive, were filled with the goods of Lisbon merchants who were unable to redeem them, such were the tariffs against other goods. It occurs to me that this most-favoured-nation treatment might be used by some shipping clearing from the port of Dublin to obtain a reduction of these harbour dues or permission not to pay them in gold by pretending that they were of Irish harbour origin. I think we have only one small mercantile marine left, and it would be a pitiful thing if, for instance, the British and Irish could obtain a reduction of harbour dues in Lisbon by proving that they were an Irish company or were likely to give any benefit to this country through a reduction of those dues. I would like the benefits to be reciprocal and not to have the benefit taken by other lines of shipping on account of their clearing from an Irish port. An inquiry into what perhaps would be a fair comparison with other nations would be very beneficial before we decide.

Mr. Douglas

I would like to know from the Minister if this is the first country that has given us most-favoured-nation treatment. I thought it was included in other Treaties we made. I would like to discover a Treaty between any two nations that does not say so. I am afraid Senator Gogarty's hopes as to non-payment in gold will not materialise, for I feel certain Britain has a similar Treaty. Senator Johnson is worried about the Commonwealth, and thinks that the different nations should be enumerated one by one.

Mr. Johnson

No.

Mr. Douglas

I thought that was so. There was a point with regard to trade terms which is one I think we could not go into without intimate knowledge, because there are some terms so long in use in the trade that they have a special technical meaning, and you cannot get away from that. Quite recently I heard of an English gentleman who proposed to open a factory here for the purpose of finishing tweeds with a London finish in Dublin.

Question put and agreed to.