Vol. 176 No. 11
I move:—
That a sum not exceeding £1,414,850 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1960, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Revenue Commissioners, including certain other Services administered by that Office.
It is some time since I made a note on this Estimate, but I have done so this year. It appears that collectors of taxes are being paid substantially more in the current year. I thought they were paid on the number of items and not on the results of their collections. I made this note when the Book of Estimates first issued. It comes under subhead E.
I understand collectors are paid largely commission on the amount collected, but other factors come into it also.
I understood there was no question of commission on the amounts collected.
A good many factors enter into it—the number of items, the expense of the office and other factors as well. It is a very complicated system.
I should like to have the point cleared up. There is an increase of £4,400 under subhead E. Is that increase due to the fact that more people are coming into tax this year? How does the increase arise? My information is that the amount collected has nothing whatever to do with it.
Personnel has not increased. The increased expenditure there has been calculated. The number of items come into that. As I say, it is a very involved system and I am not prepared to explain it at the moment.
I want to know whether it is anticipated that substantially more people will be coming into tax this year? Is that the reason for the increase?
I think that is the reason.
I want to make an appeal with regard to parcels of secondhand clothing coming into this country from emigrants to either Britain or the United States to their relatives at home. I do not think such parcels should be subjected to duty. I raised this point before, but it would seem that Ministers for Finance are far removed from actual facts. I should like the Minister to take some steps to ameliorate the present position.
As far as the Revenue Commissioners are concerned, they administer the law. I am afraid the Deputy will have to make his representations to the Minister for Industry and Commerce. It is he who is responsible for any charges made on these parcels.
Could the Minister tell us on what principle is the Chairman of the Revenue Commissioners paid less than the Chairman of the Office of Public Works? I consider he should be paid more.
He is paid the same.
According to this Estimate, he is getting less this year.
As a matter of fact he is paid more, but it does not appear here.
If the Minister will look at page 20 he will see the figure for the Chairman of the Revenue Commissioners which is the same as last year. If he looks at page 32 he will see the figure for the current year of the Chairman of the Office of Public Works. Last year they were the same but this year they have been changed.
That figure would have reference to the outgoing Chairman of the Board of Works. Children's allowances come into that and they did not come in in the other case.
I thought the Chairmen of both bodies were on a fixed salary and that they were not like the up and down of the ordinary Civil Servant.
They are entitled to children's allowance.
