This is the Resolution which deals with the increase on motor taxation. The question was put to me the other day whether this duty would apply to taxis and hackneys. I indicated that provision would be made in the Finance Bill which would expressly exclude taxis and hackneys from any increased duty. One further point which I would like to make is that the concession for Irish assembled cars is continued, so that a car assembled here will have an over-all duty relating to a 16 h.p. car.

Does the duty affect lorries and commercial vehicles?

They are not affected. Lorries, commercial vehicles, taxis, hackneys and tractors are not affected.

Does not that apply to vehicles for hire?

Taxis are not affected.

The Minister has completely ignored the private user who can barely afford to run a car, but who must run a car in the course of his business, the user who has a very small mileage in many cases. The cost of running a car at present and the cost of servicing is very high. The Minister has even provoked the insurance company to raise the premiums, but he is making a gesture in regard to taxis because the taxi man might be a good propagandist for Fianna Fáil. He might discuss the question with his passengers and he might be a useful political agent. The Minister has made up his mind to make concessions in that case. The private man who has to run his car and face the cost involved, the man who does not run it for pleasure, the man with the mileage of only 200 or 300 miles in the month is mulcted. The Minister has no sympathy with that individual. The Minister has made no case for the imposition. It is a penalty on the people who already find it extremely difficult to live by adding a further burden in regard to the cost of living. Very few cars are run for pleasure, they are run mainly for business, and he will pile this on the man who finds a car essential for his livelihood. The Minister has not worried about that situation, but he makes a concession to the people whom he may want to buy.

I would like to add my voice against this proposition. The motoring community as a community bear already a very high proportion of the taxes and, as the previous Deputy has said, a large majority of motors are not used for private purposes. Many cars even if they are used partly for private purposes are also used as part of an individual's business. I would like to point out this fact to the Minister— a fact of which he is apparently not aware. Each car is in fact a tax producing unit for this country. Quite apart from the annual tax which he pays, the owner of a car, every time he buys the petrol necessary to run the car, is paying revenue to the State. Let the Minister be very careful that he is not killing the goose which lays the golden egg. It may very easily happen as a result of this tax which in appearance looks like money being produced for the State, so many cars may be driven off the road that by virtue of the loss of revenue from the petrol tax the Exchequer may be in a worse position than before. Quite apart from that fact that the total taxation may fall, there is the very great, and in my opinion, unjustified tax which the motoring community is asked to pay.

I do not think that the Deputy should assume that I am making these proposals for fun.

I stated why you made them and I did not suggest fun.

Deputy Hughes is making the usual little insinuations which are the sole and only stock-in-trade of his Party.

Your own stock-in-trade is not too good to-day.

You would never know. If it was to be sold wholesale it would be worth something.

I think you may be seeing Abraham Lincoln's quotation coming true.

We will see.

We know the Minister's tricks.

Does Deputy Hughes want to change the tax on cars to a tax on petrol?

Do not tax the taxi man.

The reason that hackney men as well as lorry owners and tractor owners have been excluded is because tractor and lorries are a portion of the cost of business, the cost of production and distribution. If we were to increase the taxes on those, it would tend to be passed on and result in an increase of prices.

What about the private user's costs?

The private user cannot pass on the tax. He has to pay it if he desires to use his car.

The Minister wants to strike at the private man only.

No more than anybody else. The ordinary lorry-owner and tractor-owner are "private men" and we are not striking at them, because we know that, if we did, it would cause damage. We have to get the money somehow. If we were to implement a thousandth part of the Deputy's suggestions, we should have not to double the tax on motor cars but to increase it a hundredfold. Deputy Hughes wants to have matters every way. The fundamental proposition in the Budget, of which this Resolution is part, was fully explained and I do not propose to say any more about it at this stage.