COMMITTEE ON FINANCE. FINANCIAL RESOLUTIONS. - RESOLUTION No. 4. – Dáil Éireann (4th Dáil) – Friday, 25 Apr 1924

Mr. BLYTHE

I propose:

(1) That a Customs duty at the rate of sixpence on the pound shall be charged, levied and paid on all preparations made from or containing cocoa in any form imported into Saorstát Eireann on or after 26th day of April, 1924, in addition to any duty which may be chargeable in respect of any spirits contained in any such preparation, but in lieu of any duty which might otherwise be chargeable on any other ingredient contained in any such preparation.

(2) The provisions of Section 8 of the Finance Act, 1919, shall apply to the duty mentioned in this Resolution, with the substitution of the expression "Saorstát Eireann" for the expression "Great Britain and Ireland," and as though preparations made from or containing cocoa in any form were included in the Second Schedule of the Act in the list of goods to which five-sixths of the full rate is made applicable as a preferential rate.

This is the duty under which a large amount of confectionery imported into this country will come. As I have already said, along with the sugar confectionery, the revenue expected from this is about £40,000. The degree of protection will vary from twopence to sixpence. The goods are certainly a luxury type of goods.

Mr. JOHNSON

There is a change in this, is there?

Mr. BLYTHE

Oh, yes. Previously the goods were charged on their cocoa content. Now they will be charged a flat rate of sixpence, which, of course, in the majority of cases will actually be fivepence, in accordance with the existing arrangement for Imperial preference which we are carrying over. This duty is in substitution of the duty which was previously paid on cocoa content. Now it is a flat rate.

Mr. ALTON

Does this mean that drinking cocoa will be liable to tax? That, I think, is hardly a luxury.

Mr. HEFFERNAN

On a point of procedure. I would like to know how we are to act with regard to these Resolutions. I intended calling a division on the last Resolution, but according to the procedure I could not do so. If I propose an amendment as a direct negative——

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

There was nothing to prevent a Deputy from calling for a division on the last Resolution.

Mr. GOREY

Except lack of speed. He would want to be very fast, though.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

I do not know whether the Deputy has read the statement as to the Budget procedure. These Resolutions will have to be reported separately when passed in Committee, and when they are reported amendments can be proposed to them. After they have been reported and passed in some form or another they will have to be put into the Finance Bill. That will have to go through five stages, and in Committee on the Bill amendments can be proposed to each section, and in every stage a division can be called. So that the opportunity for calling divisions is exceedingly great in this matter.

Professor MacNEILL

Enough to satisfy anybody.

Mr. JAMES O'MARA

Am I to understand that chocolates made in England are to be charged fivepence, while chocolates made in France, say, are to be charged sixpence? Is there Imperial preference?

Mr. BLYTHE

Yes. We are not disposed to eliminate Imperial preference in making any change.

Mr. O'MARA

Is it on chocolate that is manufactured in an English factory, or is it if the cocoa is grown in an English Colony? Will that get a preference, and will the subsequent manufacturer get a preference—will the manufacturer in the English factory get another preference?

Mr. BLYTHE

There will be only one preference. It will be on goods as they come in.

Mr. O'MARA

Will it be on Imperial cocoa or on Imperial chocolate?

Mr. BLYTHE

We will be dealing with the manufactured article. It will be on the manufacture.

Mr. JOHNSON

There is a phrase of this Resolution which suggests to me possibilities of very interesting amalgamations. "A Customs duty at the rate of sixpence in the pound shall be charged... on all preparations made of or containing cocoa,"... "in addition to any duty which may be chargeable in respect of any spirits contained in any such preparation but in lieu of any duty which might otherwise be chargeable on any ingredient contained in any such preparation." Now the rate of sixpence in the pound is about threepence, I think, additional to the duty on sugar, is it not?

Mr. BLYTHE

Twopence three-farthings is the duty on sugar really.

Mr. JOHNSON

Yes, twopence three farthings on sugar. I wonder whether there are any possible combinations which would enable the cocoa to be a minor ingredient and the other stuffs a major ingredient on which duty would be higher than sixpence in the pound. I missed the point of the exemption in the case of spirits, but it did occur to me that there must be possible combinations which would allow cocoa to be the vehicle by which other things of more highly taxable content would be brought through.

Mr. HEFFERNAN

I would like to ask the Minister if this means that such articles as chocolates will have a double protection, that is the protection on sugar and the protection on the cocoa contents?

Mr. BLYTHE

No, they will only have the one protection; that is, the manufacturer of chocolates here will pay duty on his sugar and on his cocoa in the ordinary way.

Mr. ALTON

I do not think the Minister heard my question. Some Deputies do not understand yet whether drinkable preparations, like Van Houten's and Fry's, are exempt from the tax or not. I think they cannot be considered luxuries. Certainly they are the poor man's food.

Mr. BLYTHE

They are not exempt from the tax. The average rate paid at the moment on cocoa—that is cocoapowder—is just over threepence, so that this will mean an increase on the cocoapowder imported into the country. As a matter of fact, it is simpler to make than many of the other preparations which will be taxed by this. It is already made in the Saorstát, and there seems to be no reason, in view of the comparative simplicity of manufacture, why the output should not be very greatly increased here. It is not a luxury, but it is a minor part of the commodity so far as taxability is concerned, and I think there is no good reason for excluding it.

Major COOPER

Broadly speaking, the Minister wishes to encourage us to drink tea and discourage us from drinking cocoa, because cocoa is going to be taxed at a very much higher rate than tea, even China tea. Deputy Johnson on a previous Resolution asked the Minister if he had an analyst whom he could consult. I wonder whether the Minister has a doctor whom he could consult, because I think the general verdict of the medical profession is that cocoa is beneficial and that tea— particularly taken in large quantities— is not. Cocoa helps to build up the strength, while large quantities of tea— particularly the lowest taxed tea, strong Indian tea—is not good for the health of the people. I remember when we were discussing the Old Age Pensions Bill Deputy Lyons spoke of the Minister dragging the poor old age pensioners out and drowning them in bog holes. I am not quite certain if the Minister is not now taking all the people of the Saorstát, not excluding the old age pensioners, and driving them into lunatic asylums, by this encouragement of the consumption of tea to the detriment of everything else. I really am at a loss to see any principle, other than the narrow financial principle, that has guided the Minister in putting these proposals before us. I do not believe that the country will be happier or more healthy if this Resolution is carried.

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Friday, 25 Apr 1924