Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 27 Mar 1968

Vol. 64 No. 13

Control of Exports (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1956 (Continuance) Bill, 1968: Second and Subsequent Stages.

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

Minister for Labour (Dr. Hillery)

The purpose of this Bill is to extend for a further period of three years the Control of Exports (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1956, which will expire on 31st March, 1968. That measure was originally enacted for a period of three years and has been renewed at the end of each three-year period since then.

The Act empowers the Minister for Industry and Commerce to prohibit by Order the export of industrial goods save under a licence issued by him. Such Orders have a life of twelve months only and may be annulled by Resolution of either House of the Oireachtas at any time during this period. Control is at present in force on a range of goods under the Control of Exports Order, 1968 and the Control of Exports (Southern Rhodesia) Order, 1968.

Control on the export of industrial goods continues to be necessary for the following purposes:—

(a) to conserve supplies of scarce raw materials (e.g. scrap metals), for the benefit of home industry.

(b) to ensure that strategic materials (e.g. arms, ammunition, military and naval stores, etc.) are not exported from this country to undesirable destinations, or that this country is not used as a base for such trade from elsewhere,

(c) to implement the terms of the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Area Agreement which requires, inter alia, control on exports to the United Kingdom of textile goods containing cotton.

(d) to comply with the mandatory resolution adopted by the United Nations Security Council requiring member States to prevent the exportation of certain goods to Southern Rhodesia.

(e) to have immediately available a means of dealing with any emergency which might denude the country of essential materials before corrective legislation could be enacted.

It is, therefore, necessary to continue these powers and to enact the appropriate legislation, and accordingly I commend this Bill to the favourable consideration of Seanad Éireann.

Mr. O'Quigley

We on this side of the House agree in general with the purposes of this Bill. One can only regret the short time it has been before us for consideration. The House often-times has criticism of other people for not doing the kind of things they are required to do in time under various enactments, and I see that this Bill must be law by 1st April of this year if there is not to be a gap in the legislation, which seems desirable. One can only regret that this was not brought in earlier.

There are, indeed, good grounds for having legislation of this kind to enforce some kind of control on exports. One has seen from time to time valuable and rare articles exported from this country and one wonders whether it would not have been in the national interest to preserve them and keep them here. I am thinking in terms of works of art and rare books and objects of that kind. I do not know whether there is power under this particular legislation to prevent the export, for instance, of valuable libraries which are being exported from this country, and once gone cannot be replaced at home. It seems that this Bill is in the main confined to goods of an industrial character.

I observe that the legislation has been used in the past to ensure that strategic materials such as arms, ammunition, military and naval stores are not exported to undesirable places. I suppose such military equipment as we have is well safeguarded without the necessity of legislation of this kind. What I would like the Minister to tell me is this. I see there is also power under existing legislation to control exports to Southern Rhodesia. I am a fairly diligent Member of this House in reading various statutory instruments such as I have been dealing with —the trade mark amendment rules— but I have no recollection of any order in this regard being made or placed before the Houses of the Oireachtas or being circulated. Perhaps it was given on the back of this Order Paper which we are given from time to time, but that means nothing to anybody.

I should like to know in what way the making of these orders in relation to preventing exports to Southern Rhodesia is brought to public attention and particularly to the attention of the Oireachtas. A great number of people are of the view, I think, that there is too much evasion of the United Nations Security Council resolution dealing with the imposing of sanctions on Rhodesia, and I should like to know from the Minister in a somewhat more extended form than we have been told what goods are covered and how, in particular, we enforce these rules in so far as this country is concerned and what range of goods are dealt with under the powers contained in this legislation. It would seem to me that there are some things, like strategic materials, that ought to be under a permanent form of control in so far as exporting is concerned and it should not be the subject of a temporary provisions Act such as the 1956 legislation.

I do not see why it is necessary to make orders from time to time in relation to something that seems to be quite obvious that the Government, in common with other Governments throughout the world, should control.

In so far as paragraph 3 (c), implementation of the terms of the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Area Agreement, is concerned, I wonder is the Minister able to give us somewhat more information as to the range of textile goods which are the subject of control under the Act and under the orders made by him. As far as my Party are concerned I think the Bill ought to be enacted and it looks as if we should enact all Stages today.

Dr. Hillery

The first question raised by the Senator is in relation to the control of exports to Rhodesia. This is an order made under this legislation, made by the Minister for Industry and Commerce, on the 1st March, 1967 and renewed on the 1st March, 1968 and placed on the Tables of the Houses of the Oireachtas. Its Schedule has the list of articles covered—arms, ammunition, aircraft, motor vehicles, plant, machinery components and parts for the manufacture, assembly or maintenance of arms, ammunition, aircraft or motor vehicles; mineral oils and natural gases and hydrocarbons derived wholly or mainly therefrom or from coal, bituminous shale or other mineral, but excluding pharmaceutical products, insecticides and pesticides. I do not know whether that is all the information the Senator requires.

The control of cotton covers yarns and fabrics, household textiles and garments, containing 50 per cent or more of cotton. It affects only goods going to Britain and the Six Counties. It was introduced on garments in 1959 when the British expressed concern at the alleged extent of imports from this country of such goods containing cheap cotton from Asian sources. Control on yarn was introduced in 1963 when the British Government complained of an element of dumping in yarn exports from Ireland and they pointed out that other countries had agreed to voluntary limitation. We agreed at the time. These textile controls were revised and extended to household textiles from the 1st January 1966 under the Anglo-Irish Free Trade Area Agreement. It involved a quota allocation based on a datum year.

Dr. Sheehy Skeffington

Would the Minister amplify his reply somewhat in regard to Asian cotton? I am not quite clear why we in Ireland import Asian cotton and produce a cloth that can compete with the British product. Is what we produce too cheap?

Dr. Hillery

The British are protecting their own industry.

An Cathaoirleach

Could the Senator not raise this on Committee Stage?

Dr. Sheehy Skeffington

This arises out of the Minister's reply.

An Cathaoirleach

The Minister concluded the debate.

Dr. Hillery

If I may reply to the Senator's question, the British control imports to Britain from these cheap source countries and they want to limit any imports of cheap cotton to Ireland.

Dr. Sheehy Skeffington

For whose benefit do the British wish these controls?

Dr. Hillery

Their own cotton industry.

Dr. Sheehy Skeffington

Against whom are they protecting themselves?

Dr. Hillery

Against countries of cheap source.

Dr. Sheehy Skeffington

Then the crime is the cheapness?

Dr. Hillery

The imports might be from such a low cost country where there is cheap labour against which they would not be able to compete. They are protecting their own employment.

Question put and agreed to.

Agreed to take remaining Stages today.

Bill considered in Committee.

Section 1 agreed to.

SECTION 2.

Question proposed: "That section 2 stand part of the Bill".

Mr. O'Quigley

I wish to again call the attention of the House to the ludicrous titles that are given to the legislation coming before the House. I will continue to do this until the Parliamentary Draftsmen or whoever are responsible make a change. It is absurd to find a Bill coming before the House with a title such as Control of Exports (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1956 (Continuance) Bill, 1968. It would be quite simple to call it a Control of Exports Bill and anyone who wanted to know what it meant could look it up. These titles are becoming longer and longer and the whole thing is becoming more ludicrous and stupid. I cannot understand the stupidity of continuing with this line of drafting.

Question put and agreed to.

TITLE.

Question proposed. "That the Title be the Title to the Bill".

Mr. O'Quigley

I cannot agree with that. Take me as dissenting.

Question put and agreed to.

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