I move:—
That Seanad Éireann hereby approves of:—
Control of Imports (Quota No. 13) (Women Woollen and Synthetic and Artificial Fabrics) (Amendment) Order, 1958.
Control of Imports (Quota No. 13) (Amendment) Order, 1958: Motion of Approval.
The need for this amending Order arises out of certain evasions of the principal Order which was being operated. The original Order, Quota Order No. 13, restricts the importation of woven piece goods and synthetic and artificial fabrics. There was an exemption for brocade and tapestry cloth. That exemption was designed to exclude from the scope of the Order furnishing fabrics of a kind which was not produced by the Irish mills. It was reported, however, that bedspread material of synthetic composition was being imported under that exemption and the effect of the amending Order is to bring within the scope of the control of the No. 13 Order brocade and tapestry cloth which exceeds 56 inches in width. Bedspread material which is similar in type to the material being imported is being manufactured by a couple of firms here.
There is a customs duty on made-up bedspreads and on bedspread material and, of course, bedspread material is subject to the import restrictions on another quota Order. That protection is being rendered ineffective by the importation under that exemption in Quota Order No. 13 of these synthetic brocade materials up to 90 inches in width, which is described as material for making into bedspreads and quilts. Furnishing fabrics and tapestry cloths do not normally exceed 56 inches in width and therefore the bona fide importation of such materials will not be affected by the change made here which limits the exemption in the Order to brocade and tapestry cloth less than 56 inches in width.
There are two short points arising from this proposal. I notice that the original Order was apparently not drafted in such a way as to meet the situation, and that some of what the Minister himself described as "sea lawyers" in the commercial world soon found a way out. The second point is that when, just now, I suggested that a certain Order was not sufficiently clear, the Minister assured me in tones of sarcasm that the Revenue Commissioners were quite competent to see to that, and that they are extremely good at detecting this and that type of attempted evasion. Within five minutes, he comes before us and tells us that there was originally an exemption in this Order for brocade and tapestry cloths, and that the commercial people interested found a way out and evaded the provisions of the Order, and now he comes back with an amendment. I am not denying that an amending Order may be necessary, but it rather lessens the Minister's right to suggest that the previous Order is couched in such language that the Revenue Commissioners are quite certain that it cannot be evaded. Here, we have an example of an Order which was so evaded.
It is my duty as Minister to take responsibility for these mistakes.
Question put and agreed to.