asked the Minister for Finance whether his attention has been drawn to a report which appeared in the newspapers of 24th November, 1939, of the destruction by the customs authorities in Galway of a quantity of boots and clothing; if he will state whether such destruction did in fact take place and, if so, whether he will take steps to discontinue such practices; and, further, if the destruction took place, if he will state what quantity of boots and clothing were destroyed, whether the goods destroyed were in good merchantable and wearable condition, what was their approximate value, and under what authority, regulations or instructions, statutory or otherwise, the destruction was carried out.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Destruction of Boots and Clothing.
My attention has been drawn to the report in question. The destruction did in fact take place as far back as the 10th August last, and the quantities destroyed were as follows:—boots and shoes, 145 pairs; proofed coats, 23 articles; hats, ten; stockings, 28 pairs. They were an accumulation of seizures by the Revenue Commissioners in 1937, 1938 and 1939. The values of the goods at time of importation were:—boots and shoes, £25; wearing apparel as above, £24. The values at the time of disposal would be considerably less in view of deterioration since seizure. Some of the goods were secondhand and some were of little value. On the whole they could be regarded as being in wearable condition, but not fully merchantable.
All these goods were prohibited goods under various quota orders made by the Government under the Control of Imports Acts, 1934 and 1937, and they were destroyed on the authority of the Revenue Commissioners under the powers given by Section 42 of the Customs Consolidation Act, 1876.
The difficult economic position arising from the outbreak of war is being borne in mind and the recurrence of a similar set of circumstances is improbable.
Might I ask, in view of destruction of this kind having taken place so often, would it not be feasible to take some steps, by legislation or otherwise, by which destruction of commodities of this kind could be avoided, particularly in the present circumstances?
In view of the amount of destitution in such places as Galway City, where there are so many unemployed, would it not be possible to amend the legislation so as to hand over goods such as these for some charitable purpose, instead of having them destroyed on several occasions in Galway since the 26th August last?
I do not think it is true that they have been destroyed on several occasions. I have not heard of any but the one instance in recent times, and that covers three years' stores.
Mr. Brodrick
Has it not occurred on a second occasion in the customs shed?
Not in the last five years, so far as I am informed.
Mr. Brodrick
Will the Minister ask the Revenue Commissioners to hand such goods over for some charitable purpose instead of destroying them as they are doing?
The Revenue Commissioners have no power to absolve people from paying the duty—the duty must be paid. As a matter of fact, there was an effort made by the customs office in the area to make an arrangement with the local Vincent de Paul Society to get the goods disposed of in Northern Ireland, and they reported that they failed.
Is it correct to say that without an amendment of the law it would have been impossible for the Revenue Commissioners to pass these goods on to the poor of Galway, or anywhere else, and that in fact what is required in this case is a suitable amendment of the law——
Yes.
——empowering the Revenue Commissioners, by leave of the Minister for Finance hereafter, to take steps with a view to giving these goods to the indigent poor, if that course recommends itself?
Has the Minister not sufficient power under the Emergency Powers Act to dispose of these goods in any way he wants by order?
The Deputy heard my answer, which stated that these goods were disposed of in August last and there were no emergency powers in existence then.
I am asking if it is not possible now in present circumstances?
Mr. Brodrick
Is it not a fact that the goods in question were burned not later than five weeks ago?
No, that is not true.
Mr. Brodrick
Six weeks ago then?
On the 10th August.