Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 1 Mar 1990

Vol. 396 No. 5

Decimal Currency Bill, 1990: Second Stage.

Minister for Finance (Mr. A. Reynolds)

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

This Bill will allow the Minister for Finance to issue a set of coins to commemorate the Irish Presidency of the European Council and also permits the issue of a new £1 coin. It also proposed to amend the decimal currency Acts to permit a change in the metallic composition of the 1p and 2p. I am confident that the House will support the proposals in the Bill.

The Irish Presidency of the EC Council will see the putting in place of many of the final building blocks of the 1992 objective. Developments in Europe generally are likely to make this period one of historic significance. The issue of a commemorative coin will be an enduring reminder of the Irish Presidency.

The Government have decided to issue the coins in gold and silver. The coins will be purely commemorative and not legal tender. Other member states have issued commemorative coins in the past. Most recently Spain produced a set of five coins in precious metals to mark their first presidency of the Council.

The coins will be issued by the Central Bank and will consist of a series of three — a gold 50 ECU piece, a silver coin 10 ECU, and a silver 5 ECU piece. The gold coin and smaller silver coin will be roughly the same size as the 10p while the larger silver coin will be of "crown" size, that is somewhat larger than the old half crown. The gold coin will be 22 carat gold and the silver coins will be sterling silver. They will be issued in proof standard to encourage interest among coin collectors.

It is envisaged that the gold coin will be priced in the region of £250. The larger silver coin will cost £20 to £25 while the smaller silver coin will be priced at £10-£15. These prices are tentative since much depends on the value of gold and silver at the time of purchase of the metals. However, the intention is that while the gold coin and larger silver coins will be of interest mainly to collectors the smaller silver coin at £10 to £15 should be accessible to the ordinary citizen who wishes to have a keepsake of the occasion.

This is our first step into the market of specialised coins. There are certain risks associated with the issue of precious metal coins. The metals must be purchased in advance and may fall in price subsequently thus affecting market value. There is also the risk that market demand may not be as strong as anticipated.

On the advice of the Central Bank, it is proposed to issue 5,000 gold coins, 20,000 of the larger silver coins and 20,000 of the smaller silver coin. These are the minimum levels necessary to offset the manufacturing costs. An issue of this size will, it is felt, minimise, the risks and enhance the scarcity value for collectors.

The question of design is obviously a matter of importance. The Government decided that the design of the red deer selected for the £1 coin, on which I will comment later, should be retained for the ECU coin. Given the increased awareness about conservation of the environment, the symbol of the Irish red deer is very appropriate. The use of this theme will also increase interest in our coinage abroad.

On the obverse side, it is intended to reproduce the harp surrounded by the 12 stars which is the logo of the Community. The coin denomination will appear on this side also. The use of the stars is common to issues by other countries and again symbolises this country's adherence to the Community.

I now turn to the other main purpose of the Bill — that is the £1 coin. The question of a £1 coin has been under consideration for some time. The short lifespan of the pound note, combined with rising costs of production, has made it an unattractive proposition to continue to produce notes of this denomination. In addition, many people, including several Deputies in this House, have commented on the ragged appearance of our notes once they have been in usage for some time. It is not good for the image of the currency, or indeed the country, to have notes in circulation in a less than acceptable state.

The Government have decided that it is opportune to introduce a £1 coin. They considered this matter very carefully from all aspects. Many other States have coins of a denomination roughly equivalent to the Irish pound.

At present the bank issues roughly 59 million notes per annum and these have a life expectancy of only six months. About 50 million £1 coins will be issued initially and an issue of about 3 million per annum will be sufficient to ensure there is enough in circulation. The lifespan of 40 years for each coin is a considerable cost-saving factor. The cost of changing to the £1 coin will be recouped within five to seven years.

The Bill sets out the weight and metallic composition of the coin. The metals used are copper and nickel, similar to the existing 5p, 10p and 50p. The weight is 10 grammes — lighter than the 50p and the 10p, the coin will be 31.1 mm in diameter and 1.7 mm in thickness.

The Bill, however, does not mention what many would consider the most important aspect — the design of the coin. This will be the subject of an order under section 3 of the Decimal Currency Acts, 1969 to 1989 which I will make when the Bill is enacted.

The Government decided that a special design should be commissioned for the new coin. The design chosen for the coin, as I said earlier, is that of the Irish red deer. I have made sample coins available for inspection by Deputies. I am confident that the design will find favour with the public. The red deer is native to this country and is a striking and majestic animal of which we are proud. The deer has been under threat but active conservation is ensuring that it will be preserved for future generations. The Arts Council who were consulted at an early stage agreed with the choice of a deer.

Mr. Tom Ryan, President of the Royal Hibernian Academy, was commissioned to prepare the drawings based on photographs of actual red deer submitted by Mr. Seán Ryan of County Cork, an acknowledged expert in this field. Mr. Tom Ryan had already designed the motif for the 50p piece issued to mark the Dublin Millennium celebrations. I should like to thank both these gentlemen for the pains they took in advising the Government in this regard.

As with all new coins, many organisations have been consulted, for example, the users and makers of coin operated machines and representatives of the visually impaired. To help the visually impaired, the coin will contain special features to distinguish it from other coins.

Firstly, the size and weight alone will be of assistance to the blind. In addition, the milling on the edge has been so constructed that it will be recognisable by touch. This milling is unique to the £1 coin. In addition, the coin has a beaded edge around the circumference of the coin which is again unique to the coin.

The Government's aim is to overhaul the coinage fully over the next three to four years. The introduction of the £1 coin is but one of many changes which we will see. I am concerned that the coinage, generally, is too heavy and we will be endeavouring to reduce the weight of the coins where possible. The first priority in 1991 will be the issue of a new, lighter and round 50p. The coin will be reduced in size by about 5mm and will carry the current woodcock design.

Next it is planned to issue a new 5p and 10p on which the two existing designs, the bull and the salmon, will be reversed to face left. This will give a uniform orientation to all the motifs. Both coins will be reduced in size. The metallic composition of both coins will be altered to make them lighter.

For the 1p and 2p coins it is proposed to revert to the Metcalfe designs. The 1p will feature the Irish wolfhound from the old sixpence while the 2p will have the hare which appeared on the pre-decimal 3p.

My Department consulted the Arts Council on the designs and I have taken on board most of their suggestions. I am grateful to the Arts Council for their advice and we will consult the council further as appropriate.

The Bill also allows for a change to the 1p and 2p. These coins are made of bronze at present and cost more than their face value to produce. The Central Bank have recommended that the metallic composition of these coins should be altered in advance of the design changes I spoke about earlier. It is proposed that the current metallic composition should be replaced by a copper covered steel core. There will be no change in the dimension, size, weight or design of the coins.

This change in metallic composition will enable the bank to break even on the production of these coins. Coins of this sort are common on the Continent and I note that the UK Royal Mint have recently announced a similar change.

I now turn briefly to the provisions of the Bill. Section 1 deals with definitions and is self-explanatory. Section 2 relates to the ECU coins. Subsection (1) allows for the issue of coins in ECUs in such sizes, metallic composition, design and weights as the Minister for Finance may decide. Subsections (2) and (3) allow the coins to be sold through the Central Bank at a price determined by the Minister. Subsection (4) provides that the coins will not be legal tender.

Subsections (5) and (6) apply certain sections of the Decimal Currency Act, 1969, to coins issued under section 2. By virtue of these the Central Bank will bear the expenses of the issue and the income from the sale of the coins will accrue to the bank. The bank will also bear the cost of any redemption.

Subsection (7) applies to section 57 of the Copyright Act, 1963, and vests the copyright in the design in the Minister for Finance. This is a standard provision of coinage legislation. Section 3(a) inserts a new section 4A in the Decimal Currency Act, 1969, to enable the provision of 1p and 2p coins in the form of copper coins with a steel core.

Section 3 (b) is a technical amendment of section 14 of the Decimal Currency Act, 1969, to include a reference in that section to coins issued under section 2 of this Bill.

Section 3 (c) amends the First Schedule to the Decimal Currency Act, 1969, to provide for the issue of a £1 coin. The amended Schedule specifies the standard weight and composition of the coin and the permitted variation from these standards. The size and design of the coin will be dealt with separately by an order under the 1969 Act.

Section 4 is the Short Title and construction of the Bill.

Coinage is one of those issues on which everybody has an opinion. It is, I know, a subject on which some people have strong feelings. The coinage is an important symbol of our nationalhood and a symbol of which we should be proud. The designs on our coins are of a recognised high standard and the Government are anxious to ensure that these should remain so. I am happy that the new £1 coin, and the coins to follow in the future, will be well received by the public. I commend the Bill to the House.

Mr. Noonan

(Limerick East): I welcome this Bill which appears to be thorough and efficient legislation. It is also timely. I thank the Minister for explaining fully not only the terms of the Bill but the intentions of the Government in respect or our coinage. I have no difficulty with the Bill whatsoever. I am glad the Minister has decided to maintain and extend the Metcalfe designs. The motif of the stag, designed by Tom Ryan, is entirely appropriate. One of the ushers in the House has just distributed the sample coins which the Minister has arranged to have put on display. It seems to be a very attractive coin.

I do not intend to hold up the proceedings on the Bill — we are taking all Stages this morning — but let me ask the Minister one or two questions. Is it the intention that the £1 coin will be in circulation simultaneously with the £1 note or will the £1 coin replace the £1 note after a period of overlapping which is normal? Second, the £1 coin in the United Kingdom is a bit of a nuisance when one receives it in change. I think it is too small. One feels after they have chased £5 sterling that what they get back is useless and one ends up throwing it into the drawer, putting it on a shelf or trying to lose it in one's pocket. I am glad that what has been distributed here this morning is of larger size.

I appreciate the remarks made by the Minister on the weight of coins. Our coins are too weighty. The normal fist of change drags at the lining of one's suit and clothes. They are far too heavy. However, we should distinguish between weight and size. It is quite possible to reduce the weight of the coin while maintaining a reasonable size. We should also maintain a variation in size so that if we put our hands in our pockets either in the dark or when buying a pint we can distinguish by feel alone the denomination of the coin.

I congratulate the Minister for dedicating a part of his speech to the problems faced by the visually impaired and for taking into account the real difficulties they encounter with coinage. I welcome the fact that the design of the coin incorporates features which will make it distinguishable by touch. I hope that this pattern will be used in respect of other coins in the future. Obviously there must be variation in the size of coins. As we have £1, 50p, 20p, 10, 2p and 1p coins, there must be a variation in size so that people will be able to distinguish them by touch. This is very important.

The design of our coins is very good. The original Metcalfe designs, which were introduced back in the twenties at the foundation of the State, were excellent and our coinage was much admired around the world. I do not think the Celtic scroll designs which were introduced more recently are as attractive. I understand the Minister intends to replace some of these designs and revert to the beautiful designs of the greyhound and various flora and fauna which made our coins distinguishable.

While there may not be an increase in the cost of living there will be an increase in the cost of paying one's way at Confirmations and First Communions. The silent collection in church will not be the same any more. From now on people will have to give £5 as the person rattling in the £1 coin will be easily distinguishable by his neighbours. There is always a downside to these matters. The Minister answered a question in the House recently put down by Deputy Harte and if I recall correctly the Minister stated that the present value of £1, using 1954 as a base, is about 2.5p. Therefore, there has been a huge diminution in the purchasing power of the pound. The normal progress, as purchasing power goes down, is to replace notes with coins.

There is only one question I have to ask on that section of the Bill. Will the £1 coins replace the £1 notes after a period of overlapping or will the two run simultaneously? I take the Minister's point that our £1 notes now are raggy and everywhere one goes one gets a fist of tattered notes in one's change. That arises from the fact that the £1 note does not have great purchasing power now and denominations of notes or coins which have low purchasing power have a very high frequency of usage. Because they have such a high frequency of usage it is virtually impossible now for the Central Bank to have crisp new £1 notes available on all occasions because £1 notes go around as quickly now as pennies did 30 years ago. Consequently the note cannot take the wear and tear.

I welcome also the Minister's proposal to issue coinage in ECU to commemorate the Irish Presidency. It is an honour for a small country such as ours to have pride of place in a position in Europe even though it comes simply by right of membership when our turn comes round and we hold it for six months. Even though it arises automatically we should note it and a good way of doing it is by issuing coins. I understand — and the Minister might confirm this — that the coinage to commemorate our Presidency is merely commemorative and will be available for coin collectors and souvenir collectors but will not be common currency. I am not quite clear if the Minister suggested that the motif on the ECU coins will be based also on the Metcalfe designs or if he has some new design in mind. Perhaps he would clarify what the design will be on the commemorative coins because I think it important that the sequence be maintained and that there be a similarity between the coins in circulation and any commemorative coins which are issued.

I think that is all I have to say. I welcome the Bill. I take the Minister's point about reducing the metal content in some of our lower denominational coins. Obviously it is not feasible to maintain a situation where the face value of a coin is less than the actual metal content of the coin. It stands to reason that the Central Bank cannot run a coinage at a loss. I remember in regard to the two shilling piece back in the forties one examined one's change to see if one had one because it was solid silver and was worth far in excess of the face value of the coin. It was great fun going to school as one got a great break if one got one of these because it was worth about four times the face value. I do not think we should have that kind of treasure hunt with our 1p and 20p coins.

Mr. A. Reynolds

It was in 1943.

Mr. Noonan

(Limerick East): It was the year I was born. It was probably a commemorative issue. There were very far seeing people in the Central Bank at that time.

I welcome the Bill. I welcome particularly the comprehensive way in which the Minister explained the issues involved and I thank the Minister's Department for dealing with this in a very effective and efficient fashion.

Mr. Taylor

There are two essential aspects to this Bill. The first is the question of the issue of the commemorative coins, the second the introduction of the £1 coin. It is fair enough and entirely appropriate that commemorative coins be introduced to commemorate the Irish Presidency of the EC. However, I think it borders on the indecent to include among that range a gold coin that will have a selling price of about £250. I would have thought that the commemoration arrangements could have been very well catered for by commemorative coins in silver or in an other base metal that ordinary people who might want to spend about £5 on getting one would have been able to afford. For the State to lay out a very considerable sum on the purchase of gold to make these 22 carat gold coins to sell to a very elitist group of people at £250 is not appropriate in the present economic circumstances. We are not told what volume of gold would be purchased or what the cost would be and I do not think, in the economic situation we have now, with the level of unemployment and the level of poverty, that we should be producing these £250 highly specialised items for a very wealthy few. It is not appropriate. The commemoration is appropriate but I would have thought that if we had the coin in silver, copper or bronze it would have been entirely appropriate. I do not know what kind of market there will be for coins of £250 each. There may be quite a big market. The Minister himself indicates that he does not know either. I often thought that the comparable area of postage stamps was never exploited by this country in the way it is exploited in many other countries. It is a far cheaper commodity to deal with and there is a much wider interest in postage stamps purchased for various interests all around the world than perhaps there would be for coins. This coin market has become a bit of a bandwagon. They are produced all over the place and, in many cases, they turn out to be a complete flop and do not at all achieve the level of interest that perhaps might be anticipated.

So far as the £1 coin is concerned, here again I have reservations about the advisability of it. It seems to be the old story: the British have brought in the £1 coin so we copy that all along the line. I do not know what it is about our approach to these things that we have to slavishly follow whatever they do in Britain in the coinage area and in many other areas as well. My view is that it is not a great success in Britain. Quite honestly I find it irritating — may be it is because one is not used to it — to be at the loss of the £1 note when visiting Britain. The £1 note has a very good role to play. It has served us well and I do not think it should be written off just yet.

Great care should be taken about the size and description of the new coin if there is to be one. Many people, shopkeepers in particular, have said to me that the 20p coin, for example, has been a source of considerable disquiet and there is a great deal of complaint about it because it is much too similar to the 2p coin. I have been shown a specimen of the £1 coin for which I am grateful to the officials. There is no doubt about the fact that it is a very attractive piece. I am a bit concerned again that there might be some confusion there with the 10p coin. The size is bigger certainly but not much bigger. I have discussed the matter with a number of blind people who are concerned about it. In some countries they have very clearly distinguished coins by having a hole in the centre. I do not know whether that was ever considered but I have seen those in many countries and they certainly are a tremendous help to people who are blind or who have difficulties with their eyesight.

So far as the commemorative coins are concerned I would have thought we would have been better off trying to broaden the market in that respect. There would be a much bigger market if we concentrated on silver and other less high flown metals than gold. We would have done better out of it economically and there would be a much wider spread of these commemorative coins.

Proinsias De Rossa

As has been stated by the Minister and other speakers to this Bill, there are three main points in it, the proposals to issue a £1 coin, the proposal to vary the weight of the material of the 1p and 2p coins and the proposal to issue commemorative coins in ECUs to mark our Presidency of the European Council.

The explanatory memorandum opens up by saying that the purpose of the Bill is to allow the Minister for Finance to issue commemorative coins denominated in European currency units. It seems to me that a far more important provision of the Bill is the issue of the £1 coin, which is a fairly dramatic change in the currency of this State and is probably a more important aspect of what we are doing than the issue of commemorative coins. The Bill does not confine the issue of these coins to the EC Presidency, nor does it define the coins as commemorative in any way. It talks about the coins simply as ECU coins which will have no monetary value. The Minister may discover a market which we are generally not aware of for the coins and if that is so then the best of luck to him and the Central Bank who presumably will bear the cost and have the benefit of whatever gain there will be. It is curious that the memorandum describes the main purpose as the issue of commemorative coins while the Bill gives precedence to the change in our currency from £1 note to £1 coins.

I welcome the proposal in relation to the 1p and 2p coins; I presume this change is to make them less costly to produce and less weighty to carry. I do not know to what extent they will be of any value in a few years' time given the way the value of coins and currency generally has been declining over the years. Maybe in a few years we will be talking about eliminating them completely because they are of very little value except as change in supermarkets and so on.

The proposal for a £1 coin is following a trend which most countries seem to be pursuing presumably because coins have a longer life than paper currency. It is obviously also because, as a result of inflation, the £1 note while not worthless, does not have the same value it had some years ago.

I remember having £1 in my pocket about 30 years ago, and I could get a bus into town, take a girl friend to the pictures, get a single and a fish maybe for two afterwards and get the bus back home. I do not know whether you could have done that in the west, but you could do it in Dublin.

Mr. Daly

We had no buses.

Mr. Noonan

(Limerick East): You could do two nights in Clare.

Proinsias De Rossa

To realise how devalued our currency is we must look at what it can buy. This is one reason for the proposal to change the £1 note to the £1 coin. I have seen the sample the Minister had circulated, but it was not possible to get it out of the plastic container to test the weight or to learn what it feels like. The £1 coin the British Treasury produced is quite heavy and bulky and will not be confused with any other coin. Nevertheless, if you have half a dozen of them in your pocket along with other change it is quite a weight to carry. For that reason many people may be reluctant to switch over to the £1 coin.

I ask the Minister to clarify whether it is intended to withdraw the £1 note and replace it with a coin, presumably over a period of time. I feel that for a considerable period people would prefer the option of one or the other. Because the coin I saw was in a plastic container I am not sure if people who have poor sight will be at a disadvantage when handling them. There was considerable concern when the 20p coin was introduced because it was confused easily with the 2p coin until people became accustomed to it. Looking at the £1 coin it seems similarly sized to the 2p and 20p coins. I wonder if sufficient thought has been given to the differentiation required. The difficulty would not be confined to people with sight disability. Generally when paying for items in a shop you tend to do it automatically and you need to be able to distinguish easily between one coin and another and not have to take each coin and examine it before you pay it out.

I have now got the £1 coin. I presume the Minister wants it back.

Mr. Daly

I do.

Proinsias De Rossa

It is quite a light coin, in terms of weight it is better than the British coin, but there seems to be a close similarity to the 20p and 2p coins. Nevertheless, I like the deer design. I had better hand the coin back before I am tempted to put it in my pocket.

The section which puzzled me most is that proposing to mint a special commemorative coin in a currency that does not exist in reality. We are told this is proposed in order to commemorate this country's Presidency of the European Council. A number of things need to be said about this. I have no problem about this country marking in a special way the fact that we have the Presidency of the European Council, but it should be in proportion to the importance of the position. It is an important role for this country to have this task, but it comes by rotation as a matter of right and we get it in the normal way when our turn comes. The largest and the smallest countries also get their turn. It has no bearing on the competency or otherwise of the country or the State, or the persons who hold office at a particular time. We should bear that in mind so that we do not became over-enthusiastic about the whole idea.

There is a contrast between that and our failure last year to produce any kind of official recognition, for instance, of the French Revolution, a major event in the history of Europe. We failed to produce even a stamp to commemorate that event which has had an impact on Europe to the present time and continues to reverberate on society in Ireland and everywhere else. It seems extraordinary that we are capable of producing a coin or coins to mark our own Presidency of the European Council but we were not capable of producing a stamp or a coin to celebrate the French Revolution, which arguably had and will have a far greater impact on Europe than Ireland's six months Presidency of the European Council.

I make these points because it appears to me that an attempt is being made to portray Ireland's Presidency of the European Council, and especially the role of the Taoiseach, as something quite out of the ordinary. As I have said, the Government and the Taoiseach were not selected from a panel of applicants for this particular job but it came to us, quite rightly, because it was our turn. I regret the way the Government have reacted to the Presidency with the special Presidency flags, Presidency stickers on buses and trains and at railway stations and airports and the array of press officers who, arguably are required though I am doubtful about that. It reflects an over-reaction and a tendency towards gimmickry. The proposal to mint this special commemorative coin is the latest in a series of gimmicks. It has more to do with the need to boost the image of the Taioseach than with the reality of the European Council and our Presidency of it. Although it is not specified in the Bill, the way things are going, I would not be at all surprised that the commemorative coin will bear the image of our Taoiseach with the logo, Charles I of all Europe.

Mr. J. Mitchell

What about Camp David?

Mr. Noonan

(Limerick East): There will be a tent on the obverse side.

Mr. Daly

This is jealousy.

Proinsias De Rossa

I wonder whether reserch has been carried out to find out if there is a market for such commemorative coins particularly in the denominations as announced by the Minister where one coin is valued at as much as £250. Given that we are already two months into the Presidency, and I presume it will be some weeks before the Bill is passed by Seanad Éireann and that it will be some weeks before the coins can actually be produced, there will be only three months remaining of our Presidency in which to sell them. There may well be a market for them after that but it seems to me that it will be a very limited market. The Bill states that there will be no cost to the Exchequer and that the Central Bank will carry the cost of producing the coins. Presumably they will carry the cost of any losses as indeed they would carry any profit. However, if there is a loss that would be an indirect cost to the Exchequer because the Central Bank return their surpluses to the Exchequer and any loss they make, whether large or small, is an indirect charge on the taxpayer because it reduces the Central Bank's contribution to Government funds.

Finally, I think the cheapest coin which will cost £10 to £15 is quite expensive. Despite my criticism of what I regard as the gimmickry of this Presidency, there will be an interest among ordinary people to have a keepsake. It seems to me that £10 to £15 is too much to expect the citizen to hand out for a commemorative coin of this type. It would make far more sense if we had a coin costing less than £5 so that the people could purchase a keepsake of our Presidency.

I would appreciate if the Minister could respond to the various points I have raised. I hope that people will be given the option of retaining the £1 note in their purse or wallet for some considerable time and will not be forced willy-nilly to take the £1 coin on board.

Mr. G. Brady

It is unfortunate that we have not really got enough time at our disposal to discuss this legislation because I think it has some profound significance for availing of the opportunity to take a look at our coinage and to critically examine the manner in which it has been the subject of great neglect since the foundation of the State.

I welcome the legislation. It is a great opportunity to bring into focus the need for gold coinage. In fact, the only known gold coinage dates back to the great rebellion of 1646, a very long time ago. Our coinage has been debased over the years and has had little value if one makes a critical study from Viking through to medieval times.

The Commission set up in 1927, significantly under the chairmanship of the poet, Mr. W. B. Yeats, to examine the question of a coinage for a new emerging State published the Coinage of Saor Stát Éireann in 1928 with a foreword by the then Minister for Finance, Mr. Ernest Blythe and gives a very good account of the amount of trouble that was taken to reflect the culture and heritage of our country. At that stage a competition was set up and artists and sculptors were invited to submit patterns and designs for the proposed coinage. The patterns selected were, as we realise, the work of Percy Metcalfe but some other magnificant designs were also submitted, one in particular by an Italian sculptor, Mr. Publio Morbiducci. These designs are lying dormant and have not been taken up or ever used. Before I move on to the main point of my contribution I would like to pay tribute to Mr. Tom Ryan, the designer who, apart from being an artist of some renown, is also a keen collector of medals and has put a particular significance into marrying the design with the Metcalfe designs. I suppose that was his brief, and he had to go along with that but he has made a great success of it. It is a most magnificent design. The red deer has great significance for our ecological as well as environmental protection at this time when animal life is in conflict with Homo sapiens on the planet. We are cheating on our animals to a very great extent. This coin projects an animal under siege once again, an animal species that might become extinct.

I think we have lost an opportunity by not grasping the significance of the total design of a new coinage for the country. Since decimalisation we tried to link in with the Metcalfe designs, or the farmyard coinage as they were called, by bringing in a large 50p coin with a very small woodcock on the front, and we also used Celtic designs, a total hotch potch of the original idea. Let us look at the original designs. We have seen the £1 coin this morning and I have with me a complete set of the initial designs, the Metcalfe designs with some other designs as well. They blend in beautifully but what we have done to our coinage since 1927 at the time of decimalisation and also in other respects is wrong. We are adding another dimension by complementing the Metcalfe designs, twisting them around and half using them to introduce other points. This is a great mistake and the Minister for Finance should use the opportunity to introduce a totally new set of coins. It is long overdue.

I am not in any way taking from the fact that a commemorative coin is being introduced to commemorate the EC Presidency. That represents innovative thinking; it is excellent for the country and is the right move to make. Nevertheless, it is an isolated incident and we must think of our entire range of coinage. We are not facing up to that question the way other countries are. We have the opportunity and I propose that the Minister for Finance should form a committee and invite Irish and overseas artists to produce designs for a whole new series of Irish coins. This is the only way we can stop interfering with the original Metcalfe designs.

The 20 pence coin is rather small which depicts the famous Goldfinder racehorse of the early 1920s which Metcalfe used for the old half crown. This is totally out of proportion to the initial intention of that artist. It is an insult to the artist to use his design to introduce other coins. It is a mistake. It is a case of the Department of Finance not addressing themselves to the need for a new coinage and taking shortcuts. They are not being brave about the matter and facing up to it. We all know it is needed. Anyone who is interested in numismatics would readily see that our nation is lagging behind other countries in that regard.

On the question of philately, An Post and before them the Department of Posts and Telegraphs did grasp the nettle and became quite innovative and original in their thinking. Although they yet have to set up a philatelic museum, nonetheless they have commemorated many important events by stamp issues. Here we have the Department of Finance needing some kind of fillip but perhaps they are playing this one to safely. Perhaps they feel the coinage has served us well for so many years that it should be left as it is and additions made. That is debasing the whole principle of the original designs.

This has nothing to do with the commemoration of an event and we compliment the Minister on his intention in that respect. This is a very beautifully designed coin and will be a great international advertisement for his country. That is what coinage can do. People will have a keepsake of this coinage and that is their prerogative. We as Irish people like to take pride in our coinage, our art and our stamps. The idea is good but it falls short of the need for an entirely new series of coins. The Minister should set about bringing out a new coinage which is so long overdue. Perhaps it would be timely to think in terms of 1992. It would take about two years to set in place a new legal tender. It is a pity it has been decided to issue these coins without any legal tender. That is perhaps unfortunate, but so be it.

I now refer to the collection of coins in the National Museum. Through lack of funding, this magnificent collection which is the finest in the world is not displayed to advantage. It is absolutely disgraceful. There is a display which was set up 50 years ago or more from the collection of the Royal Irish Academy. We have great treasures, including gold ring money, Viking coins and the earliest Irish trading tokens, but these are not on display in the museum. I request the Minister for Finance to use his good offices to set about providing funds for that purpose. We are not talking about huge sums. The staff are very willing and they have published many finds. It is a huge area of neglect. A magnificent television film was broadcast recently on the treasures of the nation, edited by Michael Ryan of the National Museum. It is a pity we are not doing something about improving this whole area as a showcase for our nation — the coinage.

W. B. Yeats was the chairman of the original commission. Among the artists were three or four with Irish names, one with a Swedish name and an Italian. There is also the magnificent Mestrovic design which is used as a seal of the Central Bank. It is a pity that design was not used for coinage. There are some designs in plaster cast form in the vaults of the museum produced by Albert Power, Jerome Connor-Sheppard and some others which would still be used. Perhaps the finest of all are the Morbiducci patterns which show movement within the animal life of this country. There are many other aspects of our nation that could be depicted on our coinage. The question should be addressed immediately.

I rise in protest, as I did a few years ago, on the debasing of the original designs by the attitude that our coins have served us well and we should add on a few more. That is not the road to follow. It should not be a question of clapping ourselves on the back because we have introduced a few more coins in the Metcalfe design. That must stop forthwith. It is a mistake. I cannot understand how the Department have not put the brakes on. Looking right through the series of Irish coins and the dates and numbers one sees that most of them were issued back in 1928. I think it was Deputy Michael Noonan who referred to the 1943 florin and he is quite right that there are other rare dates as well. Apart from the numismatic value, it is the show case, the advertisement for the country that matter in coinage. This will be much more significant within the EC. The Minister for Finance and the Department have shown initiative. It is a brave initiative within the context of the EC, but why not take it one step further now and avail of 1992 to bring about the necessary change. I know from contact with artists that there is a great willingness to participate in a design of this kind.

The Minister's speech is very thorough and very much to the point. I welcome the legislation. I express my discontent quite candidly when we are talking in terms of coinage overhaul and consultation. The Government are not actually addressing that problem in the manner in which they could. The Minister will have to take a very careful look at this whole question of coinage to see what best can be done. The Central Bank has actually taken stands at international numismatic fairs and have been to the forefront with other countries in coinage. This shows a willingness to listen to criticism. I hope my criticism is taken to be constructive and objective and that it will be acted upon in the not too distant future. I would like the Minister to give a commitment that he will at least examine the question of a new coinage to get away from the present hotch-potch approach. I warmly welcome the issuing of a long-overdue gold coinage. Let us hope it will be the start of a renaissance of a rekindling of the initial spirit of W. B. Yeats when he chaired the commission for the design of our first national Irish coinage.

Mr. J. Mitchell

It is always a great pleasure to listen to Deputy Gerard Brady, whom I have observed in this House for several years and before that on Dublin City Council. The Deputy always makes a worthwhile contribution. He has shown his great knowledge and feeling not only for design in coinage but also in stamps. The Deputy referred to improvements in philatelic design, in which I was glad to play a part as Minister for Communications. That having been said, Deputy Brady has missed the central point of this legislation. This Bill is a milestone in relation to inflation. It is not a Bill we should seek to celebrate. When I first entered politics 20 years ago one could buy ten pints of Guinness for £1 but today it would scarcely buy a half a pint. I predict that this £1 coin is a precursor of the abolition of smaller coins. The penny coin, the 2p coin and the 10p coin will be a thing of the past before many of our children reach adulthood. That is the real significance of this Bill. It is a regrettable memorial to the fact that our currency has lost so much of its value during the past 20 years.

I am gratified to have been a member of a Government who reduced inflation from 21 per cent to 3 per cent, from twice the European average to half the European average. Everyone knows how much our currency has lost its value. When this Bill is enacted and becomes common knowledge, depending on media coverage, the general reaction will not be an esoteric one on the merits and demerits of this design but will relate to what the £1 in the pocket will buy now and in the future. There are international precedents for what is happening with our currency. Not so long ago the French had to eliminate the old franc and introduce a new one several times the value of the old one. It would be alarmist at this stage to anticipate that we will eventually have to restructure our currency unit re-value it and introduce a new punt, so weak in value has the current punt become.

I do not wish to delay the passage of the Bill but it would be wrong if Second Stage passed without us at least mourning the fact that the Bill has come about because of the inflationary spiral, a spiral brought on by ineptitude and political opportunism. In the weeks before the 1965 general election the Taoiseach, Deputy Sean Lemass, offered the country a 12½ per cent national pay agreement, our first ever national pay agreement. This was welcomed. That was the beginning of what was to be an inflationary spiral lasting the best part of 20 years and it was only brought under control in 1985. The present Taoiseach, in a previous Government motored up to meet the national executive of the FUE, although uninvited, to twist their arms to grant more in pay increases than was justified by the economic circumstances, because another election was in the offing. Of course it was popular because we all like to believe we will get extra money in our pay packets. However, we were fooled because the effect of inflation is to give the impression that we have more money in our pocket but it is not good when it buys less and less.

I mourn the introduction of this Bill although I suppose it is necessary because of the profligacy of the past. It gives us an opportunity to reflect on past mistakes and to understand that in any prognosis for economic growth no progress is possible unless inflation is kept under control. I hope that this Bill will be the last to be brought into this House to adjust currency or to make changes in our coins or notes because of inflation and political opportunism in that regard.

There is another significant point in connection with this proposal. Even though we broke with sterling in 1979, this is the first time that any of our coins are distinct from the size and shape of coinage in the United Kingdom. Perhaps the fact that our two currencies have gone their separate ways and will never again be united is the ultimate step. I do not think that is particularly important, the fashion now is to attach ourselves to the Deutsche Mark——

Proinsias De Rossa

What about the reunification of Germany?

Mr. J. Mitchell

I am glad to see my European colleague back in the House on one of his rare visits to Dublin.

Proinsias De Rossa

That is unfair.

Mr. J. Mitchell

With his European experience and double jobbing he knows the value of money.

Proinsias De Rossa

Is the Deputy proposing the reunification of Germany?

Mr. J. Mitchell

It is now fashionable to link our currency with the Deutsche Mark but that may not always be the case. I hope that this Bill will be the grave of inflation.

Minister of State at the Department of Finance (Mr. Daly)

Today's debate has been most constructive and useful. I would remind Deputy Mitchell that we are dealing with reality and he should not expect miraculous changes in coinage to produce the same money as he got a few years ago for his pound.

The Bill is very timely and I should like to thank the Deputies who contributed so constructively and made suggestions as to how this whole area might be dealt with in future. It is proposed that the £1 coin will almost immediately replace the £1 note in circulation. The reason is that if you allow the two to continue indefinitely it inhibits the changeover to the new currency. The advice we received is that the experience in other places where similar changes were made showed that the same thing applies. If you allow the old currency to continue the new coinage will not be acceptable. The new £1 coin is far superior to the old £1 note and, when it is available, we will phase out the old £1 notes as quickly as possible.

A point was made about the necessity to facilitate the visually impaired and people who have difficulty in distinguishing coins because of their similarity. The bank have consulted the principal bodies representing the visually impaired and the coin incorporates features which will be of benefit to the blind, such an size, weight and the unique milling around the edges, in identifying coins.

Deputy Taylor was critical of the fact that we concentrated on gold, which is very expensive, in relation to the commemoration coin. He also criticised the £250 coin but there are two other denominations, the 10 ECU and 5 ECU, which will be silver and less expensive. One will probably cost about £20 and the other £10 to £15. It is clearly evident that we have provided for the people about whom Deputy Taylor is concerned.

The unique facet of this development is that we are going into an area of coinage and commemoration which had not been entered into before. This is the first step in that direction and it has been researched by the bank. The research clearly demonstrates that there is an ever increasing market for this coin. It has already been taken up by other countries and if we go ahead with the development it will pave the way for further developments in this area which can be a very lucrative business and provide employment opportunities.

The criticism that in some respects we have over-reacted to our membership of the Community by embarking on this development is one I reject. It is a very positive and meaningful way in which to commemorate our Presidency of the Community and it opens up an opportunity to branch into an area of activity which has not been exploited up to now and which can be very beneficial.

I should like to reply to the points made by the various speakers. Deputy De Rossa was concerned that the 1p coin and 2p coin would disappear over he next few years. There is no intention to do away with these coins even though there have been suggestions that they are difficult to find. However, I understand that there are about 700 million of those coins in circulation.

Deputy Brady made a very constructive and objective contribution, he obviously has detailed and specialist knowledge in this area and I should like to record our appreciation of the benefit of his detailed knowledge. This is a first step and one which can be further expanded and we certainly will fully consider his views. I do not think there is any suggestion at this stage of introducing any new coinage per se. However, I take his point and we will certainly have the matter examined. His vast experience and views are worthy of consideration.

I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge Tom Ryan's contribution in the design of this new coin. It is actually acknowledged on the coin itself; if your sight is good enough you can see his initials under the deer's hoofs on the left hand side. This is in recognition and acknowledgement of his contribution to the design of this coin.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I would indicate to the Minister that the order requires me to put the question at 12 noon. If the Minister has any concluding comments perhaps he would make them now.

Mr. Daly

Deputy Brady made the point that we are playing very safely in the whole coinage area. There may be a difference of opinion about whether we should play very safely or whether we should embark on new initiatives. We have got the advice of the Arts Council and of professional people in this area. I would not accept that we are in any way debasing Metcalfe; in fact, it could be argued that we are acknowledging him and not only that, we are also ensuring that Metcalfe continues to dominate our coinage. I believe that is the right thing to do because of the very valuable and worthwhile contribution he made to the original design of Irish coinage. I would like to express our appreciation to the Deputies who contributed.

Mr. Noonan

(Limerick East): What is the intended date of issue?

Mr. Daly

June.

Mr. Noonan

(Limerick East): For both coins?

Mr. Daly

Yes.

Mr. Noonan

(Limerick East): What is the intended date of withdrawal of the note?

Mr. Daly

Over a period of several months.

Mr. Noonan

(Limerick East): Ending when?

Mr. Daly

I do not think there is any definite date for ending. Presumably it will depend on how quickly it can be withdrawn.

Mr. Noonan

(Limerick East): Will the Central Bank not issue new notes after June?

Mr. Daly

No.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The question is: "That the Bill is hereby read a Second Time, that sections 1 to 4, inclusive, and the Title are hereby agreed to in Committee, that the Bill is hereby reported to the House without amendment, that Fourth Stage is hereby completed and the Bill is hereby passed".

Question put and agreed to.