Vol. 7 No. 5
I beg to move the following amendment to this Resolution:—
To delete the words "bottles of glass coloured green or black," and insert in lieu thereof "glass bottles of the kind ordinarily used for bottling beer, wine or spirits."
The intention of the resolution was to protect the sort of bottles that are manufactured in this country; loosely called black bottles. There is no intention of departing from that.
On a point of order has not Deputy Johnson's amendment got precedence. His amendment is number 11, while the Minister's is No. 12. Surely we ought to decide whether we are putting a tax on empty bottles or not, before we come to a decision on this amendment of the Minister's. Will it be possible for Deputy Johnson to move his amendment at a later stage?
I do not know if Deputy Johnson would be in order in moving his amendment. It would certainly be extending the scope of the Resolution and imposing a charge.
This is a case of the rushing of business. I would really appeal to the President to ask the Minister for Finance if it is not possible to take these resolutions on Tuesday. My papers are ten miles away. I got the Order Paper at 9 o'clock this morning. I had to be at a Government Committee at 10 o'clock, and had to leave my house at 9.15 a.m. In the interval I had not time to read the Order Paper. I have not the resolutions with me, but it is not fair to ask the Dáil to do business under these conditions unless there is going to be a serious loss to the revenue. If this entailed a serious loss to the revenue I would not press the matter, but as it is a protective duty and as the Minister did not express the hope of getting much revenue from it, I think he ought not to ask us to go on with this now.
I do not want to be unreasonable to the Dáil in any way. If I were allowed to explain perhaps the Deputy would be in a better position to judge of the line of action he would take. There is no intention of changing the effect of the first resolution, but we find that this word "coloured" is an exceedingly difficult one to describe. There is general talk of black bottles and black glass, but that really seems to me as almost any colour of glass. There is no intention that ordinary clear bottles, whether you call them white flint glass, or whatever they may be called, shall be taxed. There is no intention of taxing any but what are called in the trade dark metal bottles, the sort of bottles that are being made here and used really for beer or porter. When we have the words "glass coloured green or black" it might be said some bottles are really coloured yellow or brown, and should be let in without duty. That is why we are putting in this new formula. Between the Report Stage of the resolution and the introduction of the Finance Bill we will be able to go further into this matter of a definition and provide the exceptions that may be necessary from the general resolution and achieve the effect we are aiming at. For instance, I propose certain concessions in regard to canned fruit, but I have not been able to get the form of words yet. I propose that a form of words shall be put into the Finance Bill, and that any duty overcharged should be refunded. In the same way in the case of bottles this resolution in the form in which I am now proposing it will be wider than we intended, and when we get a satisfactory form of words they will be put into a Finance Bill, and any duty overcharged will be repaid. It is felt that owing to the vagueness that exists on the question of colour, and as the duty is due to be collected next Monday, it would be better if I had a wide resolution that would enable us to collect the duty on all sorts of beer, wines and spirits bottles. We have to put in some words to exempt clear bottles. We will get some phraseology to exempt them, and any duty overcharged will be returned. The reason I am pressing the matter is simply that the duty comes into effect on Monday, and the wording of the original resolution is unsatisfactory.
What I am suggesting now is not really the final wording, but it is the wording that will, at any rate, enable us to collect the duty which it is desired should be collected on bottles. It is really only a drafting amendment to enable us to do what was intended to be done. I understand that it is quite common that financial resolutions are somewhat wider in their scope than in the ultimate law that is passed. Exemptions and other special provisions are put in a Financial Bill, which restrict the somewhat too wide scope which the original resolutions may have had. That is the reason that I suggest to Deputy Cooper that perhaps he might hear my explanation of the proposed amendment. I do not want to rush the Dáil at all. As a matter of fact, if there is really serious objection to this particular resolution and the amendment to it being taken to-day, we would not like to persist. I suggest that this will enable us to do something which will not be irrevocable or irreparable, and there is no intention of extending the scope of what was originally passed, and it might, perhaps, be allowed to be dealt with to-day.
I would like to ask the Minister whether he has consulted, before this resolution was put before the House, experts on these matters. I objected to the wording of the original resolution, and afterwards I consulted certain people interested in the matter, and I promised to let them know what the amendment of the Minister would be as soon as it was before us. I have been out this morning since before 9 o'clock, and I came here at 12, and I never saw the amendments, so that personally I should like to object, because I have not had time to read them. I do not like to raise an objection, but I think it is rather a serious matter that amendments which have been in our hands only this morning should now be discussed. We had promised to consult certain people as to whether these amendments would meet with their approval. I do not want to press the matter, but I think Deputy Cooper deserves support in objecting to this matter being rushed. I think that the Minister will remember that the very evening on which these resolutions were discussed he asked us not to talk too much about them, and stated that he would give us an opportunity later to discuss the amendments. He pressed on us not to keep up the discussion too long in order to allow the resolutions to be carried. I would like to have all these postponed if possible. I will not press my objection, but I think there is a good deal in what Deputy Cooper has said.
The Minister for Finance is the last Minister in the Dáil to whom I would like to offer any objection, as he is invariably courteous and anxious to meet us; but I am not satisfied with his explanation. One reason is that it must raise many matters which are contentious. He tells us that he is not going to tax white bottles, but he puts in his resolution that he is going to tax certain classes of bottles. I do not know whether the Minister is an authority on spirits, but gin is invariably bottled in white glass bottles, and so is Jameson's whiskey. We ought to have time to consider what the amendment would mean. My second point is that we cannot consider this amendment without considering Deputy Johnson's two amendments. We would be forced to commit ourselves in the matter, and both amendments are contentious. The Minister will be forcing us to come to a decision on these points without consideration. He tells us that these are his second thoughts, and that this is not necessarily the final form. The Minister suggests that his first thoughts were bad, but that in the Finance Act he is going to give us the final form. What reason have we to trust the Minister's second thoughts any more than his first? If he was wrong in the first instance he might be wrong again. I am afraid I must make it as difficult as I can for the Minister to pass his resolution.
My objection arises from a different source. The Minister is limiting his powers, and though he assures Deputy Cooper that there are such things as rebates or refunds if too much is taken off under the resolution from what is allowed in the Act, the proposal in the amendment of the Minister is to limit his power to tax bottles. He now suggests that he should only be allowed to tax bottles used for bottling wine, beer, and spirits. Under the old description bottles used for the bottling of mineral waters would come under the description. It may be that it is not the most accurate description, but nine out of ten mineral water bottles used in Ireland are green, however pale, and under the resolution which was passed earlier in Committee, these bottles would come under the duty. Now it is proposed to limit the duty upon these glass bottles used for bottling beer, wine, and spirits. It seems now to be the Minister's intention to delete from classification what are commonly known as mineral water bottles, but we have not been told whether that is the intention. I do not want to argue the case at the moment, but it would be far better to have a wide classification under the resolution than a narrow one, if it is finally decided that mineral water bottles shall come under the duties.
I think that the discussion that has taken place so far has shown that the settlement of this question of colour cannot be done off-hand. What Deputy Johnson has said about mineral water bottles is quite true. I take it that the foundation of this charge on bottles is to shut out bottles that are not, but can be, made here. Mineral water bottles used to be used very largely here, and whether you call them green, white, or blue, they seem to come under the protection clause. It is not a simple matter.
What are we discussing now? Is it Deputy Johnson's amendment or that of the Minister?
I am not ruling out Deputy Johnson's amendment No. 11. When amendment 12 is disposed of I shall consider what is meant by Deputy Johnson's Amendment No. 11.
I think I stated when the original resolution was proposed that it was not the intention to include clear bottles, but what is roughly termed black bottles. It was not the intention at any time to include mineral water bottles. There is, for instance, an export trade in mineral waters, and serious difficulties would arise in respect of that trade if mineral water bottles were included. One of the difficulties that has arisen is that there is this pale green tinge in some of these bottles which might bring them within the terms of the original resolution. What I have now suggested will, at any rate, exclude that particular type of bottle, and will indicate more clearly what we are actually trying to achieve. I was inclined to put in "glass bottles except white flint glass bottles," but when you come to deal with experts, to whom Deputy Craig referred, it is difficult to get anything final. One contradicts the other. One would eliminate certain bottles and one would tell you differently, and it is extremely difficult to get over this question of colour. I am reluctant to press for consideration of this matter to-day, but I feel there will be certain administrative difficulties if it is not considered.
The Minister is worse than the experts. The experts contradict each other, the Minister contradicts himself. He says it is not his intention to tax mineral water bottles. Does the Minister drink ginger ale? Does he know that Cantrell and Cochrane's ginger ale is enclosed in bottles which resemble wine bottles, and so will be liable to be taxed. The whole thing is complicated, and we are not doing ourselves justice to discuss it on the spur of the moment. I think it was Napoleon who said that difficulties existed to be surmounted. That would be a good motto for the Government when it is dealing with the boundary question. I think it is wrong that we should commit ourselves to a formula which has not been thought out and which presents an extraordinary number of loopholes for criticism. As I say there is one particular case of mineral water bottles which will come under this. There is the case of peculiarly-shaped bottles. I do not know whether liqueurs are included. Liqueurs have a certain trade mark, and they are peculiarly-shaped bottles. For instance, you have Benedictine and Quantreau. Even though liqueurs are spirits, I do not know what the Treasury definition is. Jameson's whiskey is put up in bottles of a certain shape. I do not know whether those bottles will be taxed, and I do not know whether they are produced in this country. Those are all matters we should give some consideration to. I admit I am not making as strong a case as I should like to make. I am at a distinct disadvantage. I have, practically speaking, to think those things out on my feet. I protest emphatically. The Dáil is not doing itself justice, and the Minister for Finance, swayed by Departmental influences to smooth their way, is not fair to the Dáil. He is not personally unfair; he never is, but he allows the Departmental point of view to rush this thing on us now.
I am sure the Deputy knows that all those resolutions have to be embodied in the Finance Bill. That will go through five different stages in the Dáil, and there will be a good deal more opportunity for considering it. I might be accused of rushing this particular resolution, but I am not going to rush any of the other resolutions, or attempt to rush them or urge the Dáil to take them more quickly than it would be otherwise inclined to take them. If this particular resolution is passed, the only serious thing it would do is to eliminate things like mineral water bottles, which were not intended to be included, but which Deputy Johnson thought were intended to be included. That would amount to a change of substance from his point of view, but otherwise it would not. When some formula that we can stand over will be found to include those pale green bottles and absolutely clear bottles, we will put that in the Finance Bill. We found when we went to the people in the trade that it was almost impossible to get definite views or opinions from them. There was the uttermost confusion in advice as to the definition. There is only a limited time in which we can deal with this matter at this stage. The resolution to be effective must be reported within ten sitting days of the Dáil from the time it is first brought forward, so, to some extent, the report stage will be rushed. There will then be twenty days of the Dáil before the Second Reading of the Finance Bill, and there will be a considerable time before the Committee Stage, so that we will have an opportunity to deal with all the difficulties that are involved.
Are we going to take this amendment now?
I was going to withdraw my objection in view of the statement made by the Minister. I raised a small objection, and was going to appeal to Deputy Cooper to withdraw the objection he made, because the Minister stated that there are various stages through which those resolutions had to pass, and that consequently there will be ample opportunities for any change to be made that will be considered necessary.
I understood the Minister to say that if the Dáil objected he would not press this resolution, and what I would like him now to inform the House is whether he does intend to press it. We have listened to objections, and certainly there does not seem to be a general opinion in favour of going on. I would like to hear his decision. There is a good deal in what Deputy Cooper says in regard to the necessity of altering it at a subsequent date and even if this altered resolution will have subsequently to be altered, as evidenced by some of the illustrations given by Deputy Cooper, I suggest it would be a far better thing not to take it now, but to yield to the pressure of the members here, and to bring it forward at a later date.
I think from what we have heard in the discussion that nothing is going to be lost to anyone whether they have an interest in those bottles or not, so long as the matter is to come up on the Report Stage, and the Minister has agreed that if there is any error that the people will get the necessary drawback or rebate. That being so, I think we should consider the resolution at the present moment, and I think the Dáil should take the word of the Minister for Finance, that if serious objections are raised by anyone affected they will get a rebate, so that they will not be at any loss.
Deputy Hughes's point misses the case that was made— the phrase in the resolution "without amendment" allows the Minister to draw a tax from all bottles imported which may come under the classification of black or green. If at a later stage, we limit that classification, there may be a refund made, but if we do not levy the duty according to the classification of the unamended resolution and we amend it in this limited way the Minister now proposes, there will be nothing to refund, and he will have lost some revenue. I am very anxious that the Minister should keep up the revenue, and I am now helping him to get a few pounds. I have amendments here, which, if this is persisted in, will require to be discussed, but the proposal I would suggest is that the Minister should act upon the resolution already adopted in Committee, have that resolution reported to the Dáil, and then let there be amendments made in the Finance Bill.
There is just one reason why I do not propose to do that. It is that while the word "black" is a very loose word in the trade, covering all sorts of bottles that are not just clear bottles, there might be some difficulty for the Customs authorities to act upon it, because there are bottles that might better be described as an amber colour rather than black.
There are no black bottles.
There is none that is really black. They are all shades of brown down practically to black. That is really the difficulty that causes us to introduce an amendment at this stage rather than later on.
The Minister will find that the same difficulty will arise. It is a trade description—a general description—which the Commissioners have to interpret. That same remark applies to green or black, or bottles ordinarily used for bottling wine, beer and spirits. There has to be a discretion to the Commissioners in either case, so that nothing is gained, but there is a possible loss of revenue.
I would ask the Minister to be good enough to answer my question: whether he does intend to go on with this resolution or not?
If the Minister insists on going on with this resolution, and if Deputy Cooper protests against his going on, I will take a motion from Deputy Cooper to proceed to the next business. I will put it without discussion. It has been discussed already, and those who have discussed it have made three speeches. Otherwise we would really have a discussion as loose as the original wording of the resolution.
I think my appeal to the various Deputies to withdraw their opposition has not been successful, so I will not proceed with the amendment. Amendment postponed until Tuesday.
Does the Minister desire to take Number 7 first on Tuesday?
Yes.
