Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 11 May 1967

Vol. 228 No. 7

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Border Request Charge.

31.

asked the Minister for Finance if, having regard to his decision to abolish the 2/- request charge collected by the Irish customs and excise authorities from motorists crossing the Border between certain hours, he will state the legal basis the customs authorities had for collecting this charge, indicating the specific provision in the Act or regulations.

Section 7 of the Customs Consolidation Act, 1876, the provisions of which were applied to the Land Frontier by the Customs Land Frontier Regulations, 1923, empowers the Revenue Commissioners to appoint the normal hours of attendance of customs staff. In the ordinary way merchandise and vehicles are not permitted to cross the border except during the hours so appointed. The Commissioners may, however, allow traffic to cross the border at other times subject to special conditions. Provisions to this effect are, for example, contained in Article 2 (3) of the Customs Land Frontier Regulations, 1923, and Article 2 (d) of the Customs (Land Frontier) Regulations, 1924. In such cases, one of the special conditions imposed by the Commissioners is the requirement that the person concerned should pay a fee in respect of the extra attendance of customs staff outside normal hours. The same practice obtains, of course, at ports and airports.

I should add perhaps that while the majority of motorists will not in future have to pay the 2/- charge—thanks to Deputy Cunningham——

Thanks to Deputy Harte.

——when crossing the Border at night because they already hold valid passes the charge will still be payable if attendance has to be given by the customs outside normal hours to deal with merchandise traffic or with motorists crossing the border for the first time.

I wish to thank the Minister for having saved me the embarrassment of challenging the customs right and exposing that this Act was unconstitutional. Having congratulated him on his good foresight, may I now ask him if he does not consider that an Act introduced in 1876 and amended by regulation in 1923 and 1924, indicating that people were required to make a request to have customs officers made available outside the normal hours of duty was abused inasmuch as the 2/- was paid to the customs authorities for the hour for which customs officers were being paid overtime and that they did not have to ask the customs officers to provide this service outside the normal hours of duty? Does the Minister for Finance not now consider that the amount of money that was collected by the customs officials was collected falsely, that this Act has very sticky legal foundation and that the Minister——

It is a very long question.

It has been a very long time in operation—since 1876.

Perhaps Deputy Harte would ask Deputy Cunningham. He knows all about it.

Deputy Cunningham——

He is not here.

I saw him leaving last night.

He had done his work.

Will the Minister state categorically in this House that the money——

For the benefit of the Minister for Finance, it is "did", not "done".

The Minister said that Deputy Cunningham had done his work. Whatever about lessons in propriety, we do not want lessons in grammar from the Deputy.

When the Taoiseach was talking about the NFA, his grammar was not good. Let him check on it.

It went down well.

You are trying to break the NFA. That is what you are doing. It would be much better to get after the thugs and blackguards who are getting away with murder in the country—some of them your own friends, too.

Maybe we can now get to the "heart" of the matter?

Maybe the Minister for Finance might now answer the question which Senator Ryan, when he was Minister for Finance, refused to answer and which the Taoiseach, as Minister for Finance, likewise refused to answer. Maybe the Minister for Finance would convey to the House that the amount collected by customs by way of the 2/- request fee was collected illegally?

The true position is that it is a well-established principle of customs practice that where you want customs officers——

Outside the hours.

——outside the hours——

But this was not outside the hours.

Where you want a customs officer to clear goods outside the hours——

This is not in respect of goods.

Will Deputy Harte please listen to the Minister's reply? Will he please resume his seat?

The Minister is sliding past the question. I am asking a question in respect of motor traffic, not in respect of merchandise.

Will Deputy Harte please resume his seat?

Deputies

Chair, Chair.

I am calling on Deputy Harte to resume his seat. I am calling Question No. 32.

It concerned the Taoiseach also, when he was Minister for Finance.

As the Chair is personally interested in this matter, perhaps, at some later date——

On a point of order, is it in order for Ministers to turn around to the Chair and to say that the occupant of the Chair would himself be very interested in this and, before that, to mention the name of Deputy Cunningham whose name was not mentioned——

Never, in the past ten years, in the House——

We ask for a ruling on this. Is this procedure in order? Does the Chair claim it is in order? Of course, everything is in order, according to you, so.

I have addressed a supplementary question to the Minister for Finance. I want an answer to my question. The Minister for Finance will not give me an answer.

Deputy Harte would not let him.

On a point of order, is it right—I have nothing to do with this argument at all and I do not want to——

The Deputy is in it now.

Is it right that the Minister should try to compromise the Chair in this discussion as he did?

The Leas-Cheann Comhairle, as a Deputy for County Donegal, is vitally interested and fully understands it and will explain all the details to Deputy Harte.

I claim that when I address a supplementary question to a Minister, I should not get the reply that the Leas-Cheann Comhairle is also interested in the question. Has this money been collected legally or illegally? I am not interested in what Deputy Breslin has been doing in this House.

I am calling Question No. 32.

I want an answer to my question.

Deputy Harte starts shouting——

Deputy Harte will not listen. I have asked him to listen to the Minister.

Deputy Breslin is using his office as Leas-Cheann Comhairle to protect the Minister. The Chair does not wish me to expose the illegal situation which developed on the Border and which the Minister and the Fianna Fáil Party did nothing at all to correct until I embarrassed the Minister and his Party into abolishing it. It has been a disgraceful situation and the Leas-Cheann Comhairle is using his office to protect the Minister.

Deputy Harte will resume his seat or leave the House. The Deputy will please resume his seat.

There would be no Border at all only for you fellows.

What? Oh, Lord bless us.

A Leas-Cheann Comhairle——

Am I not entitled to ask the Minister this question which I have addressed to him and to his predecessor and which, since I came into this House, has not been answered?

Question No. 32, in the name of Deputy Ryan.

The Minister for Finance has not a clue where the Border is.

Barr
Roinn