I move:—

(1) That in lieu of the duty of customs imposed by Section 4 of the Finance Act, 1945 (No. 20 of 1945), there shall be charged, levied and paid as on and from the 9th day of May, 1956, on all imported matches a duty of customs at the several rates specified in Part I of the Schedule to this Resolution.

(2) That in lieu of the duty of excise imposed by Section 4 of the Finance Act, 1945 (No. 20 of 1945), as amended by Section 15 of the Finance Act, 1954 (No. 22 of 1954), there shall be charged, levied and paid as on and from the 9th day of May, 1956, on all matches made in the State a duty of excise at the several rates specified in Part II of the Schedule to this Resolution.

(3) It is hereby declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution shall have statutory effect under the provisions of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1927 (No. 7 of 1927).

SCHEDULE.

DUTIES ON MATCHES.

PART I.

CUSTOMS.

PART II.

EXCISE.

I may say we are not proposing to divide the House on all the Resolutions to-day. We are opposed to all the Resolutions which involve increased taxes on the ground that the Government could have avoided the need for increased taxes if they had made a serious effort to reduce administration costs. That applies particularly to the taxes with which the remaining Resolutions are concerned, each of which is estimated to bring in only a comparatively small amount of money. One would think that a very small effort at economy in administration would have saved £170,000 per year and therefore made unnecessary the tax upon matches. However, we will discuss that in more detail on the Finance Bill.

I want to get clear upon one aspect of this tax. The price of the box of matches will, presumably, go up by a halfpenny—six shillings per dozen? The Minister is going to get 4/6 per dozen and the manufacturer will get 1/6 per dozen——

Not the manufacturer—the trade interest all the way through from the manufacturer through to the distributor.

One and sixpence per dozen is available to the manufacturer which he can keep for himself——

No. The Department of Industry and Commerce deal with it on that basis.

I take it, therefore, that, of the amount which the public will pay, something over £50,000 will go to the trade. One-third——

One and sixpence per gross.

Surely it ought to be made clear to the House and to the country that this is not the first time provision was made for margins, and nobody knows more about it than Deputy Lemass.

Deputy Morrissey's memory is a bit wrong. Twice this necessity for increased margins to the match trade arose but the Fianna Fáil Government met it by reducing the price.

The Deputy is trying to get it across that something is being done now for those engaged in the trade. The Deputy is trying to tie it exclusively to the manufacturer. That is not the fact and the Deputy knows it.

£55,000 is going to go into the hands of the manufacturers unless the Minister directs otherwise——

No.

May I assume, therefore, that the margin of the retail trader is controlled by the Government?

The Deputy is not assuming; he is pretending.

Is it? Does anybody know?

The Deputy knows.

I know it is not. In fact, the manufacturer will get £55,000 or £56,000 extra and it will be entirely a matter for himself whether he keeps that or uses some part of it to increase the trade margin——

The Deputy must be aware how certain branches of the Department of which he was previously in charge operate. The Deputy knows perfectly well in relation to these trading margins that they are allocated to the various parts of the trade by agreement with the Department.

I am not denying the possibility that the margins may have to be increased. That arose, as I said, twice before and on each occasion the Fianna Fáil Government met the situation by reducing the tax. This time the situation is met by increasing the tax. No doubt the additional allowance to the manufacturer is the same as before, but I do not know what point the Minister and the Deputies opposite are trying to make. The manufacturer will get, through a higher price, something like £55,000 a year, which he will probably find it necessary to lose in part, to rectify the margin to the wholesalers and retailers. But I take it it is a matter entirely for himself whether he does or not.

The margin is for the whole trade right through from the manufacturer to distributor.

May I ask how the margin was arranged when the Deputy and his colleagues were in Government and were going to put an extra 3d. on every loaf of bread? How was that met?

How much is the Deputy taking off the loaf of bread?

How much are the Deputies opposite taking off anything? Where are their promises now about lower taxes?

Do not get vexed.

The Minister for Finance can laugh.