Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 19 Apr 1950

Vol. 37 No. 16

Coinage Bill, 1950—Second Stage.

Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

The legislation that I have to bring before the Seanad at this moment, the Coinage Bill, 1950, is rendered desirable by the fact of the rather insecure position that prevails with regard to both the supplies of silver and the prices to which silver may go. The main effect of this measure is to allow for the issue of cupro-nickel coins of the 1/-, 2/- and 2/6 varieties in place of the silver coins of these denominations which have hitherto been issued.

The history of the token coinage in this country is contained in two Acts and one Emergency Powers Order. Before 1928—that is the date when our own token coinage was first introduced —the coins that were in circulation in this country consisted of British coins of either gold, silver or copper. The first Act we had was the Coinage Act, 1926, and it provided for the issue of Irish token coins and in the Schedule to the 1926 Act there will be found the denominations of the different coins set out—silver: 2/6, florin and shilling; nickel: 6d., 3d.; and bronze: Id. ½d. and ¼d. By an Emergency Powers Order, No. 140 of the year 1942, the Schedule was amended to enable cupro-nickel to be substituted for nickel in respect of the 6d. and the 3d. pieces. The Order lapsed when the Central Bank Act, 1942, was passed because there was a clause in the Act which replaces the Emergency Powers Order.

Under this piece of legislation there will be authorised the issue in cupro-nickel of the coins hitherto issued in silver, that is the 1/-, 2/- and 2/6. The lower denomination coinage, of course, Id., ½d. and ¼d., will still continue to be issued in bronze. The Central Bank will be authorised, at Section 10 (3), to keep in circulation silver and nickel coins issued under the 1926 Act and, of course, cupro-nickel coins issued under the Central Bank Act, 1942, but there is a later provision in this measure that, when the Bill becomes law, there will be permitted a calling in of the silver coins or any cupro-nickel coins—mainly silver coins— issued previously and their replacement by the cupro-nickel coins that are now being permitted.

This is mainly due to the fact that there is great uncertainty about the future of supplies of silver and, more particularly, uncertainty with regard to prices. The price of silver has risen considerably in the past and, although we are not at the point, or even very close to it, one could reach the point where the issue of silver coins would become unprofitable and, of course, in those circumstances, there would be great danger that the coins would be hoarded or melted down. The same considerations as regards silver supplies and prices have led to the complete replacement in the British token coinage system of silver coins by cupro-nickel. The use of the precious metals in token coinages is a rare occurrence these days. Nearly all continental countries are using base metals.

Cupro-nickel is considered to possess all the necessary qualities for satisfactory coinage. It is provided in this legislation that, to start off, the new coins will be exactly of the same design, diameter and weight as existing silver coins.

In the previous legislation and in this there is what is called a standard composition. Cupro-nickel coins ordinarily consist of 75 per cent. copper and 25 per cent. nickel. That particular composition is specified in this legislation as the standard composition. In Section 5, power is being taken to vary, by Order, the standard composition of cupro-nickel coins and there is also power being taken to issue coins of any metal or mixture of metals other than gold, silver or cupro-nickel. The second type of Order, which would make rather an important change, is the type of Order which would not become operative unless it was confirmed by resolution of the two Houses of the Oireachtas.

Section 12 is more or less a corollary to what is being pursued under this legislation. It is considered unwise or undesirable to have different legal tender limits for coins that are of the same metallic composition. It is therefore proposed, in Section 12, to remove the legal tender limit of 5/- in the case of 3d. and 6d. pieces and to make it lawful to tender these as well as the 1/-, 2/- and 2/6 for payment of debts not exceeding 40/-. After this legislation goes through, if it goes through in its present form, all cupro-nickel coins will have the same legal tender status. There is no change being made with regard to bronze coinage and, therefore, bronze coins will continue to be legal tender payment for an amount not exceeding 1/-. It appears that there have been doubts raised in respect of the early legislation as to whether British coins still circulating in this country are legal tender and it is proposed to put an end to that doubt by expressly reserving legal tender status to token coins issued either under the 1926 Act or the Emergency Powers Order or this legislation.

All token coins are issued through the Central Bank as agent of the Minister for Finance. The expenses of issue are charged against the currency reserve maintained by the Central Bank and the proceeds of issue are, of course, credited to that reserve. The proceeds of melting down of coins withdrawn from circulation and of coins held by the Central Bank and not required for issue or reissue will also be credited to the currency reserve.

The opportunity has been taken in this Bill to consolidate the law relating to Irish token coinage. Senators will find in the First Schedule a series of enactments that are being repealed. These are being repealed because similar provisions to what are contained in the repealed Acts or sections of Acts in that Schedule are to be found in this legislation. We are repeating whatever it is necessary to keep alive and repealing this dead material. The main provisions in these repealed Acts are to be found in sections of the Bill. There is one which preserves the copyright in Irish coins to the Minister for Finance, which will continue to vest the copyright in him, and the Minister for Finance has control of the publication of reproductions of Irish coins. That is prohibited unless the Minister for Finance allows it. There are also provisions relating to expenses and the disposal of the proceeds of issue—a matter to which I have already referred.

Ba mhaith liom, ar an gcéad dul síos, a rá nach dtaitníonn liom gur cuireadh an Bille seo os comhair an tSeanaid sa chéad áit. Tá muid sásta gur cheart Billí de shaghasanna áirithe a thabhairt isteach sa tSeanaid ar ócáidí áirithe don chéad uair, ach nuair a bhí an cheist sin á plé tamall ó shoin thuigeamar nach mbeadh i gceist ach Billí a bhain le abhair neamh-achrannacha agus go háirithe le dlithe a raibh gá le cóiriú orthu nó le codification orthu. Is féidir leis an Aire a rá go bhfuil roinnt codification sa mBille seo; is féidir leis é sin a chur os ar gcomhair mar leithscéal ar an mBille seo a thabhairt isteach. Tá roinnt den fhírinne ansin aige ach tá prionsabail i gceist sa mBille. Thairis sin, is dóigh liomsa, ar aon chaoi, gur os comhar na Dála is ceart iad a chur den chéad uair. Is prionsabail iad a chaitfheadh na daoine sa Phairliméid a dtoghtar ag an bpobal iad a scrudú agus teacht ar thuairim ina dtaobh. Bhí mé i gcoinne an nóis sin ón chéad lá agus, do réir mar thugam faoi deara anois maidir leis an saghas Bille atá ag teacht os ar gcomhar, tá mé níos láidre fós ina choinne. Ar aon chuma, tá an Bille os ár gcomhair agus caithfidh muid é a phlé. Tugaim faoi deara go bhfuil sé i gceist sa mBille roinnt athruithe a dhéanamh ar an mBanc Ceannais. Is fíor nach Acht leasuithe é seo ar Acht an Bhainc Cheannais ach de thoradh an Bhille seo athrófar an tAcht sin. Tá fhios againn nach bhfuil an tAire féin sásta le Acht an Bhainc Ceannais, nó má tá sé sásta leis an Acht nach bhfuil sé sásta leis an dóigh a riaraigh an Banc Ceannais a chuid oibre ins na blianta atá caite. Ba mhaith liom ceist a chur ar an Aire anois an bhfuil Acht an Bhainc Ceannais scrúdaithe aige agus an dóigh leis, tar éis an scrúduithe sin, gur ghá dó leasú a thabhairt isteach air agus cén uair a bhféadfadh muid a bheith ag súil leis an leasú sin a theacht os ar gcomhair.

Sul a dtagam go dtí forálacha an Bhille fhéin ba mhaith liom ceist a chur ar an Aire ar cuireadh an socrú i gcrích, an socrú a rinneadh i 1929 maidir le mion-airgead Shasana a íoc ar ais ar fad leis an Mint Ríoga. Socraíodh go gcuirfí an oiread sin ar ais in aghaidh na bliana. Tá a dóthain ama caite anois go mbeadh na forálacha comhlíonta; is dócha go bhfuil siad comhlíonta ar fad.

An chéad rud eile ar mhaith liom tagairt a dhéanamh dó: an chaoi atá mion-airgead Shasana nó monaíocht na Breataine Móra ag teacht isteach agus ag cúrsaíocht an oiread is atá sa tír seo. Tá sé socraithe ag an Aire nach mbeidh an t-airgead Sasanach sin ina dhlí-thairiscint sa tír tar éis dáta áirithe agus deireadh a chur le feidhm an airgid sin mar dhlí-thairiscint, ach ní chuirfidh sé deireadh le cúrsaíocht an airgid sin sa tír. Tá fhios againn nach bhfuil nótaí Shasana ina ndlí-thairiscint sa tír le tamall maith anuas ach mar sin fhéin tá an-chuid de ag cúrsaíocht sa tír i gcónaí. Is rud tábhachtach é má ligeamuid don airgead sin teacht isteach agus dul sa gcúrsaíocht mar a rinneadh sna blianta atá caite. Mar shampla, an bhfuil an tír seo ag cailliúint de bharr an airgid sin a theacht isteach? De bharr monaíocht den tsórt seo a bheith á chur amach ag an Aire nó ag Banc Ceannais na hÉireann baineann an Stát gnóchan amach. Tá sé sin ar cheann de na gnéithe is tábhachtaí a bhaineann le monaíocht den tsórt sin. Ó tharla go dtagann monaíocht Sasanach isteach in Éirinn agus go mbíonn sé ag dul timpeall sa gcúrsaíocht, go háirithe an oiread de a bhí agus atá, caithfidh go raibh cailliúint ann don Stát. An bhféadfadh an tAire inseacht dúinn an fíor go raibh an chailliúint sin ann ? Muna raibh beidh an scéal ceart go leor, ach tá faitíos orm go bhfuil rud éigin ins an méid atá mé ag rá. Thairis sin, d'fhéadfadh buntáiste a theacht as an airgead sin a ligint isteach san tír. Chuideodh sé le daoine a bheadh ag taisteal idir an dá thír agus chuideodh sé b'fhéidir le lucht gnótha. Níl fhios agam an bhfuil a aigne socraithe ag an Aire go bhfuil buntáistí mar sin ann agus gur cheart dúinn, d'ainneoin nach mbeadh an t-airgead sin ina dhlí-thairiscint, cead a thabhairt don airgead sin a choinneál sa gcúrsaíocht sa mbealach a bhí sé agus atá sé. Caithfidh go bhfuil machtnamh déanta ag an Aire ar an scéal agus má tá buntáistí le fáil ba mhaith linn iad a chloisteáil. Má tá an t-eolas aige tá mé cinnte go dtabharfaidh sé an t-eolas sin dúinn.

Maidir leis an mBille fhéin, níl aon amhras go bhfuil an scéal mínithe go sásúil ag an Aire. Do réir mar atá luach an airgid ghil ag laghdú is cinnte gan mórán achair go mbeidh luach an airgid fhéin níos airde ná a luach ainnmiúil. Ba dhí-chéillí an chaoi é sin agus caithfear iarracht a dhéanamh ar a leitheid a chosc. Bhfuil aon tuairim ag an Aire cé mhéad a bheas ann mar ghnóchan don Stát? Tá beart aige fiúchas an mhiotail san scilling, an dá scilling agus an leath-choróin a laghdú agus do réir mar laghdaíonn sé fiúchas an mhiotail atá sna coineacha beidh gnóchan ann don Stát, sé sin don Bhanc Ceannais agus pé ar bith sochair a bheas ag an mBanc Ceannais is dóigh liom go dtiocfaidh sé ar ais don Aire féin ar ball.

Tá sé socraithe freisin faoin mBille go gcuirfear deire ar fad leis an scilling, an dá scilling agus an leath-choróin, mar atá siad i gcúrsaíocht faoi láthair. Tarraingeofar siar iad do réir mar'bheas Sé feiliúnach é sin a dhéanamh. Do réir mar tarraingeofar siar iad, tá údarás á thabhairt go leaghfaí an miotal. An mbeidh gnóchan ann don Stát de bharr na hoibre sin chomh maith? An mbeidh gnóchan de bharr na coineacha nua a chur amach agus de bharr na sean-choineacha a tharraingt siar agus iad a leaghadh. Má bhíonn gnóchan ar an mbealach'sin an bhféadfadh an tAire inseacht dúinn cé mhéid a bheas i gceist.

Tá sé socraithe mar adúirt mé cheana agus mar adúirt an tAire go dtarraingeofar na coineacha atá anois ann siar agus an luach atá ar airgead geal faoi láthair agus an chosúlacht atá air go rachaidh luach an mhiotail i méid. Bhfuil aon bhaol ann nach dtiocfaidh na sean-choineacha isteach go dtí an Banc Ceannais ar an mbealach ba mhaith leis an Aire go dtiocfaidis isteach? Bhfuil aon tseans dá ndíbreofaí na sean-choineacha as cúrsaíocht go gcoimeádfadh daoine iad le súil go mbeadh gnóchan acu féin? Tá sé ráite ins an mBille go mbeidh sé mí-dhlisteanach ag duine ar bith coineacha mar seo a leaghadh. Tá fhios againn gur rud amháin é an dlí agus gur rud eile an dlí sin a chomhlíonadh agus má chítear do dhaoine go mbeidh gnóchan ar fáil acu ar ball bímís cinnte go mbeidh siad ag iarraidh an oireadh de na sean-choineacha agus is féidir a choinneál siar ionas go mbeidh siad i ndon pé ar bith gnóchan atá ann a bhaint amach dóibh féin.

Is maith liom nach bhfuil aon athrú beartaithe ag an Aire maidir leis an nós ina gcuirfear an t-airgead amach. Cuirfear an t-airgead amach i gcónaí tríd an mBanc Ceannais agus sin mar is ceart. Is dóigh liom gurab é an cur amach sin tríd an mBanc Ceannais an bealach is fearr is féidir leis an phobal a chosaint ar aon dainséar a bheadh ann go mbeadh an tAire nó an Rialtas ag iarraidh an gnóchan faoi leith a bhaint amach dóibh féin.

An tagairt a rinne an tAire don athrú atá beartaithe sa mBille maidir leis an teora a bhí ceapaithe don airgead cupro-nickel ó thaoibh dlíthairiscint de níl fhios agam ar chuimhnigh an tAire ar airgead páipéir a chur amach ar luachanna chúig scilling.

You would hardly do that in a Coinage Bill.

Tá fhios agam sin, ach os rud é go ndearna an tAire tagairt don scéal san mBille is ceistoí a mba mhaith liom a thuairim d'fháil uirri. Ar mhaith an rud é go gcuirfí a leitheid sin de nótaí ar fáil má smaoinaíonn tú ar an airgead páipéir is lú againn—an nóta deich scilleacha nó an seicín mar tugtar air—má briseann tú é gheibheann tú méid mór de choineacha ar ais arís mar shóinseáil. Níl aon amhras ná go bhfuil buaidh ag baint le páipéar agus feictear dom féin go minic go mb'fhiú é dá socróimis ar a leitheid sin de nótaí a chur amach mar ábhar sóinseála nó ábhar mionairgid.

Sin an méid, is dóigh liom, a theastaíonn uaim a rá i dtaobh an Bhille do réir mar atá sé mínithe ag an Aire maidir leis an riachtanas atá leis. Tá sé riachtanach ionas go mbeimid ullamh ar eagla go dtiocfadh athrú ar fhiúntas an airgid ghil an oiread nár bhfiú coineacha den tsaghas atá i gceist a chur amach ar an mbealach a cuireadh amach go dtí seo iad. Is maith liom nach mbeidh athrú ach a laghad agus is féidir ar na coineacha nua ó thaobh brí an mhiotail, ó thaobh meáchain, méid agus uile. Is buntáiste mhór é sin, na hathruithe sin a bheith chomh beag agus is féidir iad a bheith.

I have listened carefully to the Minister's explanation of the Bill and I agree with the proposals in it. I am sure that the decision to replace the coinage before silver becomes more valuable is a wise one and I suppose that the fact that the new coins are to be made of cupro-nickel and are therefore less valuable will not encourage forgers to get on with the job. I do not think that is a very real danger. I also feel that the time has gone by when any nation is going to be taken to task in respect of the intrinsic value of its coinage.

I am approaching this matter purely from a business and mechanical point of view and there are a couple of questions which I should like to put to the Minister. Most of us are concerned only with the coins we have in our pocket and these are very easily dealt with.

Too easily.

The Minister said that the new coinage is to have the same design as the old. I do not attach very much importance to the design, so long as it is a bold design which makes a coin easily distinguishable from the nearest coin in value to it; but there are many people who spend practically their lives counting coins and there are also coin counting machines. We are all familiar with the teller in a bank who puts a £5 packet of silver on the scales to see its weight. That is a rough and ready way of taking the value, but I would appeal to the Minister to try to keep as far as possible to the existing diameter and weight of the coins. The weight does not seem important when counting coins, but, in the case of a packet, and especially a packet of mixed silver, I should like to see the two interchangeable, so far as diameter and weight are concerned.

I do not know whether I failed to notice it or whether the Minister did not mention the existing sixpences. They are a sort of half-way house between the old sixpences and the shillings, and, in the case of these coins and also of the threepenny-bits, I appeal to him to try to get back to the weight and diameter of the former coins. We must remember that the mechanical handling of money has become a big proposition. It probably will increase and the easier and the cheaper it can be made for the people handling the money, the better.

The Minister has said that he will not in future allow English coins to be given as legal tender for certain amounts. I have no symypathy with the person who collects English coins and passes them as legal tender, but the fewer burdens put on the ordinary public and the commercial community the better. There is a tremendous flow of tourists from the other side to this country and I should be sorry to see any difficulty put in the way of these silver coins circulating freely. I think there is an arrangement with the British Treasury by which so much British silver can be sent back each year, but it is inadequate to take up the amount of silver that is accumulating in this country. I am not now speaking of the English silver in circulation which is more or less an unknown quantity. I am speaking of the amounts held by people and I understand that there are over £250,000 in English coinage held here which cannot be sent back to the British because they will not take it at more than a certain rate. If any arrangement could be made for an acceleration of the process, so much the better and so much the easier for the flow of money. I entirely approve of the provisions in this Bill.

I approve of the proposals in this measure, too, but, at the same time, I regret to some extent the departure from the old tradition that the actual metal content of the coin approximated the face value. I realise that we have come to a stage at which the note is a much more convenient medium of exchange than the metal coin, and, in connection with these metal coins, there are a few points I want to make. All my life I have been receiving and paying out moneys and I must say that never in Ireland have I had occasion to receive or pay out a farthing. If there is any useful purpose served by retaining the farthing in our currency, I cannot see it and my approach to it is that, since it is not used here, we should drop it.

In connection with the threepenny bit referred to by Senator Dockrell, I disagree entirely with his suggestion of going back to the threepenny bit of the size of the old coin. It was regarded by everybody as a nuisance and even the present coin, while convenient in so far as it saves one carrying a big quantity of coppers, is a nuisance because of its size. I feel that the proper approach would be to adopt something of the type adopted in France—a coin with a hole in the centre, but of the same size as the sixpenny piece. This matter of the threepenny bit should be given consideration because, while people will accept it, they will still feel that something is being forced on them that they would rather not have.

I agree with Senator Dockrell that using nickel as the metal will encourage people to counterfeit coins of the 2/6 denomination and so on, because, as the metal will be cheaper, they can use the proper metal now. I am not sure whether it will be so easy to manage, but there is that danger. I do not think, however, that it is worth bothering about.

I feel that it is wise to abandon the use of silver in our coinage. I believe that the metal coins are a matter of convenience in relation to what one carries in one's pocket, and I have always felt that we might have a smaller note such as a note for 4/- or 5/-. I know that this has worked with great success in America. When the dollar was worth something in the region of 4/-, it was the most popular medium in general use and such a note here would save people having to carry a quantity of silver. I feel that there is nothing in the world against having such a note, although I should not like to see here notes as low as those used in France and other countries. We might, however, safely consider the advisability of adopting a smaller note than the 10/- note which became very popular immediately it was introduced.

With regard to the design on the metal coins, I think the present design is very good and I would not advise any change, but with regard to the design and colouring of our note issue, I feel that the time has come when it ought to be seriously considered whether a change should not be made. I personally dislike, though I am not saying more than that, the colour of most of our notes and would much prefer to see them issued in some other colours. I have many reasons for that view which I do not propose to develop. I have no great objection to the design on our note issue, but I think that at this stage in our history we should change it and incorporate in it the heads of the seven signatories of the Proclamation of Easter Week. I hope the Government may at least consider that very simple suggestion, if they have not already done so. It would be a very popular thing and would keep in the minds of our young people the memory of those great men and the sacrifices they made.

With regard to the British notes—I am not concerned very much with their silver or copper coins—people in trade often have difficulty with them. They have a certain familiarity with them, but are not sufficiently familiar to be able to distinguish between good ones and bad ones. Perhaps it would be possible to ask visitors to go to the bank and change the British notes before going to shop. It surely would not cause them any great inconvenience.

I doubt if I might be allowed to refer to the manufacture or minting of our coins. I would like to know, as a matter of interest, whether it is a practical proposition for us to mint our own coins or whether that is still outside our scope. I am raising that point so that we might hear something from the Minister about it.

I would like to follow up the attack on the threepenny bit. This Bill gives us a very useful opportunity to say something about that peculiarly irritating coin. I know there is an enormous amount of sentimentality attaching to it and that it is said to be the unit of subscription in a silver collection. It is far too small, it is extremely troublesome to handle and very hard to pick up with a glove on. Furthermore, its diameter is almost the same as that of the British sixpence and I am certain that I, as well as others, have lost a certain amount in change through inability to distinguish these coins. Possibly we could enlarge our threepenny piece to the size of the British one. We could continue the hare on it, but change the outline of the coin and make it dodecagonal, like the British one. The fact that the British sixpence is milled helps to some extent to distinguish it, but it is hard to feel the milling in the dark.

I would have thought that the change over to cupro-nickel alloy would have protected us from the activities of forgers. I do not know if that can go on with nickel coins as the cupro-nickel would be far harder to work and would require a very hard process. I take it that the 1/-, 2/- and 2/6 will be magnetic and can be separated by a magnetic separator in a way in which it cannot be done with the silver coins. I hope that the threepenny piece will be knocked out or its shape changed.

Like Senator Loughman, I am more concerned with the farthing than the threepenny piece and have tried to discover its purpose. Recently I set out to discover who would sell me anything for a farthing and in the whole city I could not find one thing that could be purchased for a farthing. There was a time when I could be put off with a farthing, but I do not think there is any use in retaining it now. Even drapers have abandoned it, though there was a time when everything was 11¾d. Now no draper will condescend to take a farthing. I think you could not offer him less than 48 and if you attempted to offer 48, he would probably have you arrested, if he did not assault you himself.

I suppose it does not matter what our money might be like, if we can get enough of it and get enough for it, but we seem to be drifting towards that dreadful calamity from which we were once saved—brass money. I do not know if the cupro-nickel will be any better. Will it affect the machines? Will the new coinage do for telephones, electric light and gas meters, which will not take any coins now but those at present in circulation? Has any provision been made for size and weight, so that the new coinage will operate in those machines, or must the companies concerned have the machines altered or provide new ones?

In one section of the Bill, Section 10 (2), it is made illegal to make any piece of metal which is exchangeable for any value marked on it. How will that affect the Mount Street Club tallies or people like Guinness, who issue brass or copper discs to their men, entitling them to so many pints in return? These are only small things, but when we are considering currency we should consider difficulties that may be created.

I notice that the silver coins are to be called in. No doubt, the Central Bank will provide for the melting down of those coins. Silver melted down, though the intrinsic value of the coin at the moment is not as good as it was, may result in some traffic in silver coins, just as there was a traffic, and there is still, in gold coins. Gold was hoarded at one time. I remember when to ask more than 20/- for a sovereign was a criminal offence, but nowadays to exchange a sovereign for less than three times that amount would only qualify you for a lunatic asylum. There will be traffic in silver unless it is called in, and if all the silver is called in, must we not make arrangements for the acceptance of silver coming into this country from Great Britain or the Six Counties? People coming from the Six Counties cannot conveniently bring our new coins, even if they are willing to do so. The shopkeepers will continue to accept the old ones and I assume the banks will take them from the shopkeepers. Is it not possible under this Bill that the Minister or the Central Bank at any time might say that, as and from such and such a date, no coins but our own will be accepted? That would cause considerable difficulty.

The Senator knows that six months' notice must be given?

Even so, inside the six months, some arrangement should be made that these coins coming in could be sent to a bank and exchanged for our own currency.

I am not a crank about currency, though I may be a crank about other things, but I have often heard and read of lectures about the advantage of a decimal coinage. I wonder if that was considered in the reshaping of our coins. Since we are making so many changes, which do not seem to affect our trade and intercourse with other places adversely, and there has been no calamity on that score, surely it would not cause any calamity if we changed over to the decimal system? I am not advocating that we should, but I wonder if there is any merit in it, whether it has been considered. A nation like America considers the decimal system ideal and we go so far as to say we would rather have their dollars at the moment than any other currency that is available.

I wish to draw the Minister's attention to a misprint or mistake in the Second Schedule, column 2, under Standard Weight—"Metric Weight Grains." There is no such thing as metric weight grains.

It often appeared to me to be desirable in regard to decimal coinage that there should be ten pence to a shilling. That would facilitate accountancy and if it were done, with the present devaluation of money, the reduction of two in the shilling would not be any hardship. It would be a step in the direction which Senator O'Farrell has advocated.

Now that the threepenny piece and the farthing have been disposed of effectively, I would pass on to another point. What is really present to most people's minds is that there is danger of counterfeit with any base coinage. Tinkers have been working a lot in the country promising the people that they can make £40 if they get £10 or £5 to buy certain materials. I remember a case where a licensed trader made a speciality of keeping long rows of fine pewter measures. They looked very nice but he found they were disappearing gradually. His complaint was that it was bad enough when they disappeared, but when they came back to his business in the form of half-crowns it was carrying the joke too far. Care must be taken that the metal used will be of such a kind that it cannot be used easily by the counterfeiter. I am sure the Minister and his technical staff will keep that in mind.

In his opening statement, the Minister said there would be no change in the design of these cupro-nickel coins. I wonder would he consider making a small but significant change? When we got our own coins, though most people admired them very much, some objected that the old custom of putting the name of God—or some intimation that we were a Christian country—had been omitted. I am not very familiar with the coins of other countries, but the English coins bear in the King's title the name of God—Dei gratia. I think they do something like that in America, too. If we could have, over the harp or somewhere else, a Cross, that would be a great help now when the world is formed into two camps; and if we could show in our coinage that we are on the side of God and His crucified Son, that would be a splendid thing. I would like also if the Minister would consider using the words Poblacht na hEireann instead of Eire on the coins, and if he would take the advice of the other members of the Cabinet and make the change I have suggested, he would do something that would earn the proud gratitude of the people.

I would like to make reference to one point made by Senator Ó Buachalla about this Bill. This Bill is a Coinage Bill introduced on behalf of the Government into this House and it will go from this House to the other House. Senator Ó Buachalla said he was against the practice of introducing Bills in this House, and more particularly, introducing Bills of this kind. It ought to be made clear that, from the point of view of the Constitution, any Bill may be introduced in the Seanad except a Money Bill. The relevant Article is Article 20 and paragraph 2 says:—

"A Bill other than a Money Bill may be initiated in Seanad Eireann, and if passed by Seanad Eireann, shall be introduced in Dáil Eireann."

It should be explained that a Bill, therefore, could be introduced in the Seanad which contained proposals for a charge on public funds, provided that it was not exclusively dealing with public funds, so that the power of the Seanad in regard to the initiation of measures is, under the Constitution, very wide, and I would like to express my own strong approval of the practice of bringing in Bills and particularly important Bills in this House. I suggest to Senator Ó Buachalla that he has taken the same view as that taken by the first Government of this State, a view of which I never approved. That Government consistently refused to introduce Bills in the Seanad. I was able to express my view privately against that attitude, and I am sorry to see that Senator Ó Buachalla is still in that rather peculiar frame of mind a long time after.

From the point of view of discussions here recently, there was no suggestion made of any kind that there should be any restriction on the type of Bill save the one to be found in the Constitution. I welcome the departure, and I think the House, as a House, and all members of the House, irrespective of their views on a particular Bill, and irrespective of their political views generally, should be glad when important measures are introduced in this House. No question of principle is involved; it is entirely a matter of expediency. The Senator said that this kind of measure should be introduced first before the elected House. It could be argued that this House, as far as a considerable part of it is concerned, is elected and, in any event, the other House will have, under the Constitution, the final say about this Bill, and, indeed, about any Bill at any time, but the notion of introducing Bills in this House is based upon having a more intelligent distribution of work between the two Houses and a more expeditious dispatch of public business. I would like to emphasise that the Government is free, and so are Senators themselves, to introduce Bills of any kind in the Seanad, provided they are not Money Bills and these Bills, if they are passed in this House, must be considered by the other House. I would like to go on record as being entirely in favour of the intrduction of Bills in this House and to say that we should all, as a House, welcome a procedure of that kind on the part of the House and the Government.

I wonder if I might raise a question which may not be entirely relevant to this Bill? It is one on which we have not had an opportunity of commenting—the question of our postage stamps. This is going to be very brief. It does affect the good name of the country, and I would like the Minister to say a word or two about it. We have an excellent coinage which, unfortunately, remains at home. It is not current outside the four seas around Ireland. Our postage stamps, on the other hand, go abroad, and unfortunately their design, in the opinion of many experts, is not as good as the design of the coinage. Might I briefly ask the Minister whether in preparing these postage stamps ——

The Minister is not responsible for postage stamps, Senator.

Perhaps he might, of his omniscience, see that due care is taken in designing these stamps to get the advice of philatelists and experts in this matter because, quite frankly, I think our last issue of 2½d. brown stamps, carrying a picture of Leinster House, is entirely unworthy of the good name of this country, both in colour and design. There are other excellent stamps which have been a credit to the country, especially the ½d. stamp with the scribe at his desk. In emphasising these points, I would point out that these stamps go all over the world while our coinage stays at home and we should have better designs and better colours. That is all I will say on it and thank you for allowing me to say it.

The comments in the main in this debate have been directed to the design of the coinage, and, of course, that is a matter which will arise at a later date. When the legislation is going through, I have no doubt that attention will be paid to what is said here. I am sure that what has been said about the threepenny bit and the difficulties that people have in regard to it will be borne in mind. As to the farthing, the mere fact that there is an authority for a coin of the type to be put into circulation does not mean of course that there must be any minimum number of these coins minted and put into circulation. They will be put into circulation as they are required, but it has been the position, I am informed, over the years that demands have come from provincial towns in connection with the supply of bread. It was said that the sale of bread, or rather the business of selling bread, was held up because there were not enough coins of this kind in particular areas and the Central Bank had to provide specially for some of these places. The farthing still comes into the prices of two or three commodities and does count still in the fixing of prices. Bread is one of the things into which it comes, and it is also involved in calculations with regard to the price of milk and certain other things as well.

The question of counterfeiting coins will be attended to, but I am informed that, in fact, there will be greater difficulty in counterfeiting in respect of coins of this particular alloy than in connection with coins made simply from silver. Points were raised about notes—whether we should have notes issued for 5/- or even less. That can be considered, but I do not think it could arise in this particular legislation. No provision is made for it here. The suggestion was made that we might have our own mint. That question I know as a Minister was often talked about, but it was regarded as entirely uneconomic and it was felt would add to costs generally. That was the position when I was a Minister before, and whether it was considered in the meantime I cannot say.

I think that covers all the remarks, except perhaps Senator Ó Buachalla's complaint with regard to legislation of this type being introduced in the Seanad. I can say, in reply to that, that there has been a good discussion here to-day on this particular piece of legislation—a discussion good in itself, but it was a surprise to me to hear Senator Ó Buachalla and members of his Party slavishly adhering to the views of my late chief, Mr. Cosgrave, over the years. That is what makes the suggestion still stranger.

Is the Minister in a position to reply to some of the questions I put to him?

The main point, I think, was whether there was any loss suffered in the repatriation of British coinage. With regard to that, there was an arrangement in 1929 for the repatriation of coins to a certain amount over a ten-years' period. When that arrangement was running out in the year 1938, a new arrangement was made operating as from 1940, again for a ten-years' period. That has lapsed, and it is time we should look for a further agreement. There may be some difficulty this time in achieving the same results. Under the repatriation arrangement, silver coins were withdrawn by our banks and were passed over to the Currency Commission or to the Central Bank. The commercial banks were reimbursed by the Central Bank issuing to them coins of the equivalent face value to what they took in. Then the Currency Commission or the Central Bank exchanged with the Royal Mint. They were paid by the Royal Mint the equivalent of the face value of the coins.

There were two other questions that I asked the Minister. One was, what gain he hoped would be made by the Central Bank on the switch over from the present metal to cupro-nickel. The other was, what gain he hoped would accrue from the melting down of the present coins and the transfer of their value to the reserve fund of the Central Bank.

These are points of detail. I will try to get replies on the Committee Stage. I have not the information now. I am afraid I cannot reply in regard to the stamp matter.

I would like to ask the Minister if it is a fact that the Central Bank would take coinage from the commercial banks only at the rate at which they could repatriate it on the other side—in other words, that the commercial banks would be left holding the baby?

The arrangements that were in operation previously were to the effect that there was a certain ceiling. £150,000 was the amount to be repatriated in the first year and then over the remaining nine years of the first ten-year period there would be such a sum as in the end would amount to £750,000. There was a similar arrangement—I do not know what the values were—in the second decade but, quite clearly, the Central Bank would not load itself with coins that it could not get rid of in a particular year.

In other words, the commercial banks are holding the baby to the approximate extent of £240,000,000 of British silver?

The commercial banks can reissue any such coins they hold. There has been no calling in. We are trying to withdraw gradually from circulation British coins and to transfer them to the other side but, as far as commercial banks hold British coins which the Central Bank will not take from the commercial banks, the commercial banks will reissue.

In practice that is not really possible. I understand that they have to hold the British silver. Whatever the difficulty is, they cannot reissue.

I do not know about that. I will inquire.

There is no way of preventing the introduction of British token coins here or of having them in circulation. You may make a law saying that it is illegal to introduce them or to have them in circulation, but they come in and they circulate. That must involve loss to the State.

If there is a callingin under Section 11, and with six months' notice for the promulgation of the Order, which might be annulled, I doubt if the coins would circulate if they were no longer legal tender.

Notes are circulating although they are not legal tender.

They are exchangeable for legal tender. That is what the Senator's Party did.

I asked a question. Since our coins are not exchangeable or negotiable outside our own territory, is there any difficulty, if there was any advantage, in having a decimal currency here?

It can be done.

Is there any advantage in it or any reason why it should not be done?

I am afraid it does not arise here.

Question put and agreed to.
Committee Stage ordered for Wednesday, 26th April.
Top
Share