Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 15 Mar 1955

Vol. 44 No. 11

Customs (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1945 (Continuance) Bill, 1955—Second and Subsequent Stages.

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

The Seanad will recall that in 1945 the Oireachtas passed a Bill providing, on a very approximate comparison, for some of the difficulties that arose in respect of the restriction of exports in the same way as, prior thereto, there had been in the Customs Acts provisions for the restriction of imports. The circumstances that arose in the emergency were extended and there had not been, up to then, any necessity to have customs provisions dealing with exports. The Act of 1945 which was then introduced was introduced with emergency experience only. It was introduced at a time when we were changing over from the Emergency Powers Act to the Supplies and Services Act, enacted the following year. It was in that emergency picture that it was deemed desirable that the Act would only be introduced for a period of five years to see if, at the end of that period, we would come out of the position as it then was and whether it would be desirable or necessary to have permanent legislation on the same lines.

When 1950 came along, and that Act was ending its period of five years, it was thought that the best thing to do was to enact it for a further period of five years. That second period of five years ends on the 31st of this month.

The Bill which I am now asking the House to deal with is merely continuing the present position for a further period of 12 months. I hope I will be able to come to the Oireachtas before this time next year with more permanent provisions. I hope I shall be able to come with a Bill which will embody those provisions which are really necessary to prevent export smuggling. At the moment, it would be both premature and undesirable to bring that Bill to the Oireachtas.

I think members of all Parties in the Dáil and members of all sides of this House—where Parties are not quite aligned, perhaps, in the same way— would agree that in the permanent legislation it would be desirable to have as few restrictions as possible. Just at the moment, I feel it would be unwise from every point of view to relax any of the restrictions that are there both because of the physical effect of such restrictions and also because of the psychological effect. By and large, I think we can say that the administrative machine which we set up in the 1945 Act has worked reasonably well. The prevention of export smuggling is a difficult thing and for it are needed special restrictions— restrictions with which we should like to dispose of as soon as possible.

I should be misleading the House if I said I thought we could dispose of and avoid these restrictions at the present juncture. Therefore, I would ask the House to extend the life of the present legislation for a period of a further 12 months on the assurance that I hope to be able, if circumstances continue to improve, before this time next year, to come in with a more permanent measure.

Would the Minister be in a position to give the House any idea of the range of smuggling or of what value could be placed on the amount that would be smuggled within a period of 12 months?

The question that has been put by the Senator is similar to one put to me in the other House not on quite such a broad general basis but in respect of one commodity. As I said in the other House, the fact is that the gentleman who smuggles does not fill up a statistical return to show what has gone out in that way. However, on the basis of the information which we have available to us, there is, in fact—because of the restrictive administrative machine that has been built up under this Act—very little export smuggling, I am glad to say. It is impossible for us to give it in terms of an estimate but the Revenue Commissioners are reasonably satisfied that the amount involved is not, comparatively, very substantial. They are, however, quite clear that if they do not get these powers again in the present circumstances then it might become substantial. I appreciate that that is not a very definite or specific reply but it is the best we can give in the circumstances.

Question put and agreed to.

As this is a continuing Bill, perhaps the House will give all stages to-day?

Agreed to take the remaining stages now.

Bill put through Committee without amendment, reported, received for final consideration and passed.

Top
Share