The purpose of this Bill is to confirm an order under the Emergency (Imposition of Duties) Act which was made by our predecessors, enlarging and expanding the scope of an originally protective duty on electrical storage water heaters. These electrical water heaters are manufactured by the A.E.T. in Dunleer, County Louth. That firm has enjoyed protection for electrical water heaters and electrical storage heaters up to a capacity of 28 gallons. They have recently enlarged their activities and are now in a position to produce these storage heaters in sizes up to 100 gallons capacity and we are informed that they are in a position to meet the full requirements of the market for these sizes. Accordingly, it has been decided that the scope of the duty should be extended now to cover the range of sizes which the company is in a position to produce.
Imposition of Duties (Confirmation of Order) (No. 2) Bill, 1951 ( Certified Money Bill )— Second and Subsequent Stages.
Mr. O'Farrell
Is it too late to ask the Minister whether he has any assurance that, if this duty is imposed on imported water heaters, the home-manufactured articles will be sold at competitive prices? Have we any guarantee that when the firm has got this monopoly the prices to the consumer will not become prohibitive? I am in favour of protection wherever it can reasonably be given, but I should like an assurance that when you do give protection you will get an efficient article at a reasonable price.
May I ask if only one firm is concerned in the manufacture of these articles? Is one firm getting the virtual monopoly in Ireland?
I hope that I have not put the Seanad under a misapprehension as to the actual position of the firm to which I referred as the manufacturer of these articles. At the moment only one firm manufactures electric storage water heaters up to a capacity of 100 gallons, but that firm has no monopoly except such as arises from the fact that no other firm had the enterprise to go into production and compete for the Irish market.
On the point about which Senator O'Farrell asked for some information, I should like to say that in consequence of the expansion of its activities as a result of this additional protection, this firm actually reduced its prices in May last so that they compare very favourably with the prices charged in February, 1950. It has been able to do that, notwithstanding the fact of which the House is, no doubt, aware, that there have been considerable increases in the prices of copper and other raw materials which this firm requires for its products. The present position, I understand, is that the home-manufactured article compares very favourably indeed in price with the imported article. In fact, the larger-sized storage heater which the firm is selling here is being sold at two-thirds of the price at which a corresponding article was listed in the catalogue of outside manufacturers.
Mr. O'Farrell
I am very thankful to the Minister for his explanation. The reason I asked the question was, first of all, to get the information I have got and, secondly, to anticipate any adverse comment that might be made. The tendency sometimes exists to say of protection that, sheltered behind that protection, one finds inefficiency and over-charging. I do not share that view, and I wanted to give the Minister the opportunity of saying that this state of affairs does not exist in this case.