At present we have no power to license goods except they are goods that are not produced in Saorstát Eireann, and that are required by manufacturers to carry on their process of manufacture. There are one or two duties in respect to which we have wider powers, but speaking of the general range of duties in respect of which licence powers exist they are very definitely limited. We have had urgent representations from all sorts of interests, including members of the Party opposite that these powers should be extended because they are so circumscribed at the moment that they are practically valueless. In this Bill we are presenting an extended definition so as to make these powers more effective.
Section 12 of the Finance Act of 1932 is the main section in that regard. It gives general powers to the Minister for Finance on the recommendation of the Minister for Industry and Commerce to permit the importation of any article subject to duty if it is not manufactured in the Saorstát, and if it is required by a manufacturer to carry on the process of his manufacture. For a time that section worked satisfactorily. But recent cases that came up for decision necessitated the application to it of a much stricter interpretation than the Revenue Commissioners were previously prepared to accept. For example they decided that the construction of a building was not a process of manufacture, and that goods that might be required for the construction of a building could not be imported free of duty under licence under that section. Similarly it was decided that if any article of the same kind was manufactured in the Saorstát, no matter how different in character, or price or quality, no licence could be issued. The section is now extended so that the words "process of manufacture" shall be construed and have effect as including any industrial process and also including any industrial operation whether of the nature of construction, assemblage, repairing or other similar nature, and the word "manufacture" shall be construed and have effect accordingly. That will be found as Reference No. 3 in the Second Schedule. I am quite certain that if a miracle ever does happen, and that the Party opposite are entrusted with the responsibility of Government, that whatever member of that Party is appointed Minister for Finance will resist, tooth and nail, any proposal of his colleagues to divest him of those powers which he will acquire when appointed to that office.
It is alleged that these powers are sometimes used wrongly and that political pressure is exercised upon the Minister for Industry and Commerce, to make him grant concessions to one Party that he refuses to another.
My answer to that is: "I want a single example produced." Deputy Dillon has spoken about a flour importer in Donegal. There are Deputies opposite who know that they have frequently—if not frequently, on occasion, at any rate—written to me or sent wires to my office urging that special facilities for the importation of flour to Donegal should be given. At one period it was even stated that there was a shortage of flour there. Right from the beginning until we got matters straightened out we have always treated Donegal as a special area where the regulations would be applied much less rigidly than in any other part of the country, because, of course, there is no flour mill there or no flour mill near which is able to supply them. It took us some time to organise the rest of the flour millers in the Saorstát so as to ensure that a full and regular supply of flour to that county would be available, but we succeeded in doing that. The flour millers have combined to manufacture flour for Donegal under a common brand, and arrangements have been made with transport organisations which secure for that flour a very low rate indeed, so that it can be sold in Donegal at a price commensurate with the price charged elsewhere.
Deputy Dillon stated that one baker in that county got a licence to import flour, and that the flour imported was not used in his bakery but sold as shop flour in competition with his competitors. Let me say again that the implication there is that the competitors were at a disadvantage because they had to pay duty upon the flour which they were selling. That is not so. The flour which the competitors were selling, if it was not Irish-milled flour, was also flour that was imported free of duty. At present there is no duty on flour. There is complete prohibition of the importation of flour, and it cannot come in at all unless a licence is issued. If a licence is issued the flour is free of duty. Any competitors selling a corresponding brand of flour also had it free of duty. It is possible, I will admit, that some person who got a licence to import bakers' flour imported shop flour instead. In fact, in other parts of the Saorstát no such licence would have been issued. The practice we adopted was to issue those licences only to those who are regularly engaged in the importation of flour. Subsequent to the changes that were made following the dispute with Great Britain licences were issued only to those who could finance the importation of that flour themselves, and who had been regularly engaged in that trade prior to the introduction of the Cereals Act.
I do not know if there were any such persons in Donegal at all, but in Donegal we had to vary that procedure by issuing licences to persons who had been engaged in the wholesaling of flour even though they had formerly imported that flour through agents in Dublin, Cork or Limerick. That was done following a conference of the interested parties held in the Department. A list of those who were to get that facility was drawn up by agreement with everybody in the county interested in the flour trade. Those people would get licences to import flour without any condition as to the nature of the flour being imposed. We have no power to impose such conditions. If a baker in some part of Donegal got a licence to import 500 sacks of flour, as Deputy Dillon said, he may have got that licence on making representations to the Department that the flour was required for his bakery, but he was fully entitled under the licence to import flour for any purpose that he liked. The sole consideration that comes into account when licences are being issued is as to the total quantity of flour that can be permitted. Not merely has that quantity not been exceeded, but it has never been reached in any of the quota periods up to the present, with the exception of one period, when, in order to enable us to assess the position, a very low quota was fixed, and a second quota was issued before the period had ended.
Deputy Dillon also talked about cotton hosiery, and the difficulties for the poor which the imposition of a minimum duty upon cotton hosiery was going to produce. There are two answers to that. One is that the cotton hosiery, which was causing serious dislocation in the market here, was coming mainly from Japan. It was coming in here at a price which the manufacturers in this country could not possibly get down to, under any circumstances. I think Deputies are aware that every industrial country in the world is at the present time gravely perturbed by the nature of the competition they are meeting from Japan. In this morning's paper you will read an account of a discussion on that subject which took place in the British House of Commons yesterday. In the papers of every country you will read of the special measures that are being adopted by Governments in order to protect their industries against the extraordinary competition arising from that country, where the standard of living is very low, where the rate of wages, calculated in our money, is frequently not more than a 1/- or 2/ per week, and where industry is so organised that prices can be achieved which are completely impossible in any other country. We can, if Deputies wish, get the advantage of all those cheap goods, allow our own industries to disappear, and terminate the attempt to revive them. I see no reason why we should adopt that policy in relation to cotton goods and not in relation to other classes of goods. There is not the slightest doubt that there is not a single product we produce, whether agricultural or industrial, that we cannot buy cheaper from some other country. If our only policy is to get goods at the cheapest price at which they can be got anywhere we are going to have a position in which we would produce nothing. We would all be living on outdoor relief, knowing that goods were cheap, if we had the money to buy them.
That is not our policy. We are trying to secure the development of industry here, to secure it with the utmost speed and at the same time to secure it with efficiency. In fact, the production of cotton goods in this country costs no more than it costs in Great Britain. We can produce those goods here as cheaply as they can be produced in Great Britain. In respect of some hosiery goods, because of the very up-to-date equipment of the Irish factories at present, they can be produced here cheaper than they are being produced in Great Britain. Deputy Dillon attempted to quote Dr. Ryan as saying that we had increased the price of the things the farmer had to buy by 100 per cent. I do not believe Dr. Ryan said anything half so foolish, because we have not done it. Deputy Dillon's argument was that because industrial costs were increased by 100 per cent. the Minister for Agriculture was increasing agricultural prices, and the cost of living goes mounting up. In fact, the cost of living has come down. Deputies who read the papers will read of the protests made by Deputy Norton and other representatives of different branches of the Civil Service against the substantial cuts which have been made in their cost-of-living bonus because the cost of living was fallen so rapidly. In fact, with the exception of one or two branches, since protection was afforded to Irish industry, prices have been reduced all round. In respect of some of those goods the prices prevailing here are lower than in Great Britain. You can buy a Dodge motor car in this country—completely assembled in this country, body and chassis—£50 cheaper than you can buy the same car in Great Britain. There are other classes of goods of which that is true. One reason is that our industrial equipment is new, and being new, is most up-to-date. We have been able to take full advantage of the technical experience of other countries to instal the most up-to-date machinery, to devise means to eliminate costs which have prevailed in other countries and which still operate there. Another reason is that we are starting our industrial development at a time when capital equipment is remarkably cheap. At present you can erect and equip a factory for any class of production at one quarter the price at which a factory of the same size was erected and equipped in Great Britain only five or six years ago. That very low capitalisation permits again of lower selling prices. The fact is that not merely are we succeeding in getting industrial development with efficiency but, in many cases, we are beating our main competitors in respect of prices, designs and quality, as well as efficiency in production.
Let us deal with the particular matters that were mentioned. So far as grass seed is concerned, the section of the Bill imposes a duty on grass seed, but power is given to the Minister for Agriculture to permit the importation of such seed under any circumstances that he thinks justified. Consequently the suggestion made by Deputy Haslett has already been met. In so far as it is necessary to import small quantities of seed it can be done. That is, in fact, what is contemplated by the section as it stands.
