asked the Minister for Finance if he is aware that customs officers at Dublin Airport are extending the practice of demanding receipts for the purchase price of articles of clothing in the possession of passengers arriving there so as to prove the origin of the goods, notwithstanding the fact that the goods may have been purchased several months previously and that receipts are not normally retained by individuals; and that goods bought in Ireland have, pending the production of receipts, been seized as suspected contraband from persons who have spent short periods in England; and if he will arrange for the discontinuance of this practice which is causing hardship and resentment.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Customs Examination at Dublin Airport.
6.
It is not the general practice of the Customs to demand receipts for the purchase price of articles of clothing in the possession of passengers arriving at Dublin Airport. Where, however, a passenger claims that a dutiable article was acquired by him in this country and the examining officer has reasonable ground to suspect that it was acquired abroad, it is the officer's duty to ask the passenger to substantiate his claim, whether by the production of the relative receipt or otherwise. The detention of articles in such cases pending investigation is rarely resorted to and only where the circumstances fully warrant it.
Customs requirements at the Airport are kept under constant review and, I am satisfied, are no more onerous than is necessary in the interests of reasonable security.
Is it not a fact that on several occasions recently the Revenue Commissioners have had to apologise to persons from whom they wrongfully seized goods and retained them? Furthermore, is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that the recently-appointed lady customs officers at the Airport are discharging their duties with aggressiveness and insolence and have mishandled this whole matter?
It is not correct to say they have had to apologise.
I have seen the apologies.
As a matter of fact, out of seven cases in which articles were detained within the last three months, six were subsequently found to have been smuggled. In the one remaining case it was found that the person concerned actually had other smuggled goods in his possession at the time. It is true to say that lady assistants have been appointed to the service. That was done as a result of very definite information that privileges afforded in certain cases were being very much abused. I am not satisfied that the officers are carrying out their duties otherwise than as expected.
Will the Parliamentary Secretary cause further inquiries to be made? Is he aware that, to my personal knowledge, recently a lady entering here, a resident of Ireland, had a dress extracted from her case and was charged with smuggling it? On being assured that she bought it in Dublin, she was required to show a receipt, which of course she could not get because the dress had been six months purchased. She got a letter from the firm which supplied the dress and it was subsequently surrendered by the Customs authorities. Is the Parliamentary Secretary not aware that there is a considerable volume of complaint at present of excessive zeal in this matter, and would he not cause a special inquiry to be made so that a more reasonable attitude might be adopted?
Would the Parliamentary Secretary interest himself in a case where a person coming into this country presented himself to the Customs and submitted a piece of clothing alleged to be a gift? The Customs authorities accepted it and have refused to return it to him. Surely that is not in the spirit of the Act?
The Minister is perfectly satisfied that everything possible is being done to ensure that the utmost courtesy is extended to the people concerned and particularly to tourists, but Deputies will appreciate that these investigations were found necessary because there was what I might call a racket operating and, if some action had to be taken, it was taken with the least possible upset to passengers or to traffic generally. If there were exceptional cases where people suffered as a result, possibly that could not be avoided but these were very exceptional cases. In fact, information would go to show that such cases were practically nil.
The Parliamentary Secretary now concedes that additional measures have recently been initiated. May I ask if he will not call for some review of the situation in the light of present information in order to see that zeal is not being carried to excessive lengths? Nobody wants to protect smugglers but at the same time ordinary people should not be affronted at the airport and other landing places.
I have not denied that special measures have been taken in that lady searchers have been appointed but I have also pointed out that the position is kept under review constantly to ensure that there is no excessive zeal on the part of those carrying out such duties.