Michael Noonan (Limerick City, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

When we discussed this previously, I was going through the Bill section by section. I had completed section 10 and was about to comment on section 12, so I will recommence at that point.

Section 12 provides for the control by customs of persons entering or leaving the State and of their baggage. The section also provides for the operation of a red-green channel system, with which Deputies will be well familiar. The blue channel is, of course, for persons travelling within the EU and does not need to be legislated for here. The section also provides for an offence for contravention of the provisions of the section and for the penalty that applies.

Section 13 provides for the continuation of the existing control by customs of postal traffic into and out of the State. The section provides for an offence for contravention of the provisions of the section and for the penalty that applies.

Sections 14 to 24 deal with customs offences, penalties and court proceedings. Section 14 provides for offences relating to improper import or export of goods, that is to say, without payment of any duty or contrary to a prohibition or restriction on their import or export. The section reflects provisions in current legislation. The section also provides for the penalties that apply.

Section 15 provides for a number of other customs-related offences, primarily related to non-compliance with a requirement imposed by a customs officer performing his or her duties, or interference with customs property or equipment, or adapting conveyances for smuggling purposes. The section also provides for the penalties that apply.

Section 16 provides for determining whether a customs offence is to be tried summarily or on indictment. The key to this determination is the value of the goods which are the subject of improper import or export.

Section 17 provides for forfeiture of goods which have been illegally imported or attempted to be illegally exported, that is to say, without payment of duty or contrary to a prohibition or restriction. Any conveyances or any goods which are packed with or used to conceal goods liable to forfeiture will themselves be liable to forfeiture.

Section 18 provides for a notice of seizure to be given to the owner of goods, where the goods are seized by a customs officer. The section is a restatement and modernisation of existing notice of seizure provisions.

Section 19 provides for a notice of claim to be made by a person who claims that something seized as liable to forfeiture was not so liable. The section is a restatement and modernisation of existing notice of claim provisions.

Section 20 provides for court proceedings for condemnation of seized goods as forfeited. The section specifies the appropriate court of jurisdiction for such proceedings and also provides for the course to be followed in such proceedings.

Section 21 provides for the rules for court proceedings in regard to customs offences.

Section 22 covers the question of damages and costs in civil or criminal cases where judgment is given against a Revenue official as the defendant on account of the seizing or detention of any thing. No change of substance is involved.

Section 23 provides for presumptions and onus of proof in proceedings under the Customs Acts, that is to say, where certain things may be presumed to be true until the contrary is proven. The section represents no change to the current law.

Section 24 provides that a person may be liable to other penalties in respect of the same offence under either customs legislation or other legislation.

Sections 25 to 35 deal with customs powers. Section 25 provides for powers to enter, inspect and patrol certain places for a customs officer, and any person assisting a customs officer, without a court warrant. The power to patrol in this way along the coast and the land frontier, and in customs ports and airports and other approved places, is an essential control mechanism to combat smuggling.

Section 26 provides for powers to stop vessels, aircraft, vehicles and other means of transport in different circumstances. The possibility of stopping conveyances in this way is an essential control requirement to ensure compliance with the customs Acts and to prevent smuggling.

Section 27 provides for powers to board and search conveyances that are entering or leaving the State, as well as away from ports and airports and the land frontier.

Section 28 provides for the power to examine goods under customs control. Examination of declared goods is a standard part of customs controls and a clear requirement under Community customs rules.

Section 29 provides powers to a customs officer, and any person assisting the officer, to enter and search a specified premises or land under a search warrant issued by a judge of the District Court, and to seize and detain anything found in the course of the search which might be required as evidence in proceedings for an offence under the Customs Acts or any other enactment.

Section 30 provides for the search of persons in certain circumstances. This power is a necessary control provision in regard to smuggling. The section provides for several safeguards in regard to the search of the person.

Section 31 provides for the power to stop and question a person entering or leaving the State as regards their journey and their baggage and, if necessary, to search their baggage. Stopping and questioning persons entering or leaving the State, and examining their baggage where appropriate, are essential powers to prevent smuggling.

Section 32 provides for the power to arrest without warrant a person who a customs officer suspects is committing, or has committed, an offence under section 14 or section 15 of the Bill, or where the person has obstructed or assaulted a customs officer.

Section 33 provides for the power to detain goods and conveyances being imported or exported, pending the outcome of inquiries and investigations into whether the goods in question are in compliance with the Customs Acts.

Section 34 provides for the power to seize any goods and conveyances that are liable to forfeiture under the Customs Acts.

Section 35 provides for the power to deal with seizures, whether before or after the goods have been condemned by the courts.

Sections 36 to 39 of the Bill deal with general customs administrative matters. Most of the sections are standard provisions in legislation relating to the Revenue Commissioners. Section 36 provides that the duties of customs are under the care and management of the Revenue Commissioners. It also confirms that the Commissioners are the customs authority for the purpose of the Community Customs Code.

Section 37 provides that the Revenue Commissioners may authorise customs officers to carry out various functions deemed necessary by the Commissioners.

Section 38 provides for the delegation of certain powers, functions or duties by the Revenue Commissioners to an officer of the Commissioners.

Section 39 provides for the making of regulations by the Revenue Commissioners for the purposes of giving effect to the Customs Act and of giving full effect to the Community Customs Code. The section also provides that the Minister for Finance may make regulations specifying the customs controls to apply in regard to the import or export of any goods by land. The section makes it an offence to contravene any provision of any regulation made under the section and provides for the penalty that applies.

Sections 40 to 42 of the Bill deal with EU and international customs obligations. Section 40 provides for a system of penalties for contravention of certain customs rules and procedures. These penalties were first introduced in 2011 to ensure uniform application of the EU customs rules. The opportunity is now being taken to broaden the application of such penalties to all areas of customs legislation, as the existing regime of monetary penalties had become hopelessly outdated with the passing of time and had, as a result, fallen into disuse as an effective tool for ensuring compliance with customs requirements.

Section 41 provides for the continuation of the force of law in respect of the Naples II Convention, which governs mutual assistance between EU customs authorities in regard to criminal matters. The Naples II Convention was originally given the force of law by the Customs and Excise (Mutual Assistance) Act 2001.

The section also provides for the application by Ireland of the 2009 EU Council decision on the use of information technology for customs purposes. This decision establishes a joint computerised information system for customs to assist in preventing, investigating and prosecuting serious contraventions of national laws by making information available more rapidly, thereby increasing the effectiveness of the co-operation and control procedures of the customs administrations of the member states. This EU decision replaces an earlier EU convention, which was originally given the force of law in the Customs and Excise (Mutual Assistance) Act 2001. The 2001 Act is among those being repealed by the Customs Bill.

11 o’clock

Section 42 provides for the ratification by Ireland of the EU Council convention of 10 May 2009 on centralised customs clearance, concerning the allocation of national collection costs when customs duties are made available to the EU budget. The convention covers the situation where the customs duty is collected in one member state but the goods are physically imported into another member state. This arrangement has only been introduced relatively recently, as a trade facilitation measure. In such circumstances, both member states incur costs but only one member state has collected the customs duty. The convention provides for the sharing by the two member states, on a 50:50 basis, of the collection fee. As it happens, Ireland is currently a net beneficiary under these sharing arrangements and Deputies might like to note that the benefit of centralised clearance to Ireland will be in the region of €20 million for the full year 2014.

Sections 43 to 48 of the Bill provide for the appeal procedures in regard to customs decisions and assessments of customs duty. As I stated earlier, these sections are a restatement of the existing legislation. Section 49 of the Bill deals with prohibited or restricted goods. The section is, in effect, a restatement and modernisation of existing legislation concerning the application of the Customs Acts to prohibited or restricted goods being imported into, or exported from, the State. At this stage, a number of matters are under consideration in the Bill that I may bring forward on Committee Stage. I will, of course, also give consideration to any constructive suggestions put forward by Deputies during our debate.

Dara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On behalf of my colleague, Deputy Michael McGrath, I welcome the introduction of this Bill. It is primarily a technical Bill, but it gives us a chance to discuss the issues and pay tribute to the work of the Customs and Excise service.

Any legislation dating back to 1876 is probably in need of review. However, what has been constant since then has been the dedication and courage of the members of the service around the country in doing their job, often in very difficult circumstances. These officers do not receive the attention other branches of the services do. We never see a drama series about customs or any fly on the wall documentaries. However, that is not to say the officers are not doing a fantastic job. We support this legislation.

Some of the challenges facing the service were never envisaged in 1876 or even in the most recent legislation, particularly in regard to what is covered by section 42 - customs duty collected in one state on goods imported into another. I expect we will see significant growth in this area in coming years. The Minister is aware there is a difficulty currently in regard to online purchases which are not subject to the sales tax or VAT a person buying goods in a shop must pay. This makes for an uneven playing pitch for retailers and we end with a situation where the traditional bricks and mortar retailers operate versus those online and those outside the jurisdiction. Is there some potential to level that playing pitch in section 42?

The issue of customs duties and fuel presents a particular challenge. I wish to pay tribute to Customs and Excise, the Garda, the relevant local authorities and the Minister's officials in regard to the progress made on the issue of diesel laundering in the past few months. However, the progress on diesel laundering puts into stark contrast the lack of progress, a kind of "do not know where to go" response, on the issue of petrol stretching. I wish to acknowledge the work the Minister of State, Deputy Simon Harris, has done on this. However, there is enormous frustration, particularly across my constituency where hundreds of people have been affected, that the response of the State on petrol stretching has not led anywhere and has not provided any answers.

I know this is a difficult issue to tackle, but the people affected are ordinary people who went about their business and filled their cars with petrol from legitimate retailers and as a result of that basic transaction, their engines were damaged. Sometimes two or three cars belonging to one family were affected. In most cases, insurance companies have paid out for repairs, but this has affected "no claims" bonuses and many bonuses were lost, leaving people hundreds of euro out of pocket. In the case of those with only third party insurance, the damage was not covered and people are thousands of euro out of pocket. When people report the issue to the Garda, gardaí say it is being investigated and Customs and Excise says the same. However, there is no sense that they are anywhere near getting to the bottom of the issue, which is a frustration for everybody.

I understand it is difficult to investigate this issue because the damage was done long before its effect was seen in cars. However, when consumers pay fuel duty - almost 60% on petrol - and pay a levy on their insurance policy towards Government protection, they expect that when something beyond their control happens, there will be some sort of compensation. While I acknowledge the significant work that has been done by the Minister of State, will the Minister ensure that the Department examines this issue? These people were innocent victims of something which I now believe was not criminal. Somebody messed up somewhere along the line and hundreds of families have been affected. Some families in rural areas have two cars off the road and public transport is not an option. I ask for particular attention to be given to this. In the context of diesel laundering, we have seen success can be achieved and in the past number of months have noticed an increase in the level of detection. In County Monaghan, a plant laundering 20 million litres a year was uncovered. This took years of work, surveillance activity, investigation work and other work we are not even aware of.

The Minister has stated previously that there are approximately 2,000 staff in Revenue involved in enforcement activities. We need to ensure they are up to date with all the technology available and that they have the capability and access to modern technology on a par with the people and organisations they are tracking. We must ensure Revenue and Customs and Excise are one step ahead of those involved in diesel or fuel laundering or in illegal cigarette sales for the purpose of illicit earnings.

When the issue of fines was discussed in the context of the Finance Bill, Deputy Michael McGrath suggested we needed to increase the fines for laundering and smuggling of fuel considerably. This would send an important signal that we will not tolerate this type of activity within our country and that those caught will pay a heavy price. I understand it is now considerably more difficult - I cannot say it is impossible - to remove the dye from fuel. We need to look again at the issue of marked diesel for agricultural and industrial use and at replacing it with a rebate system. This would further reduce any incentive to buy this cheap fuel.

There is much consideration given to the issue of cigarette smuggling. EU estimates suggest that the illegal tobacco trade costs the Union €10 billion a year, at a time when national budgets are stretched beyond breaking point. A report by Northern Ireland's organised crime task force showed that paramilitaries work with international smugglers to import both counterfeit cigarettes and so- called "illicit whites". These are cigarettes made in legitimate factories overseas but then smuggled into the European Union without paying the appropriate duty. A report by Irish customs shows 76% of seized cigarettes in 2012 were "illicit whites", up from 46% in 2011. This gives us some indication of the size of the problem.

Counterfeit cigarettes are typically manufactured in China and other Asian countries and illegally shipped to Europe. Apart from the loss of revenue, there are other issues of concern, such as the content and the abnormally high levels of cancer-causing chemicals in them. I welcome the fact there has been increased co-operation between EU and Chinese customs to cut the scale of this trade. However, much more needs to be done in terms of building awareness of the content of the cigarettes and educating people on the fact that these cheap cigarettes are dangerous to their health.

More work needs to be done on educating consumers on their rights, particularly in regard to purchasing goods from overseas retailers and the excise duties they face. I said earlier we need to level the playing pitch. Many websites do not tell customers the full cost of the goods they are about to buy, particularly the cost when customs duty is added.

As I understand it if the value of the purchase plus shipping from a website outside the EU is €22 or more, then Irish VAT must be paid. Someone buying goods valued at €150 or more is liable to pay import charges. That needs to be more widely publicised so that people are aware of the full cost when making purchasing decisions rather than having to hand over more money to the import agent when the gift arrives.

I welcome the Bill which gives us a chance to discuss the customs service and the very brave work the men and women of that service do every day across this island. They have been faced with huge challenges over the decades, particularly during the Troubles. Members of that service have put themselves at risk to serve the State for which they deserve the respect and support of the House. I welcome the legislation.

Peadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Fuel smuggling is obviously a great cost to the State in terms of tax that is not paid into Revenue. It is obviously a great cost to the people who are trying to function along the Border, maintaining the law and ensuring they are selling proper product. Let us imagine there was a way to stop fuel smuggling. Let us imagine if fuel taxes on both side of the Border were equal. Let us imagine if the cost of diesel, petrol or any fuel were the same in south Armagh as it is in north Monaghan. That would obviously take away the incentive to smuggle and reduce the cost to police smuggling, which would be a further win for the State.

Let us imagine we had a government with the political will to seek to bring the taxation powers governing excise on fuel to the North of Ireland so that on the island of Ireland we could organise it for ourselves. That would be a sunny day. That opportunity is in the Government's gift. Our party has won getting corporation tax powers back to Ireland. There is no reason that other taxation powers and fiscal powers that are logical could not also be brought back to Ireland North and South.

This is a mainly technical Bill which consolidates much existing legislation related to our customs system. I say "our" customs system but in reality our system is just a cog in a bigger EU customs machine. While the content of the Bill is described as consolidating and technical I would like to deal with a number of issues that jump out on reading it.

Section 6 deals with customs ports and airports. I am curious as to whether military aircraft using Shannon Airport, for example, are subject to the provisions of this section. Sections 10 and 11 also deal with the procedures to do with aircraft landing and leaving, and refer to all aircraft having to comply "unless otherwise authorised or exempted". How does an aircraft receive such an exemption? The same applies to foreign naval vessels that occasionally visit us. Under what grounds are they exempt from customs?

The Bill refers to Type I and Type II airports. Type II airports are subject to extra requirements. Is there a list of which airports are Type I and which are Type II? How many aircraft or vessels are known to have landed without the knowledge of Customs and Excise in 2014 and previous years?

The accompanying memorandum points to two new subsections. The first in section 17 allows for goods under official control to be forfeited if customs duty is not paid. The new subsection in section 33 allows for the detaining of goods which the Garda or other relevant authority believe may be required as evidence. The goods can be held "for such period of time as may be required to determine if they are so required as evidence". I am not convinced the wording here is sufficient to prevent a possible abuse of this section to detain goods for long periods of time under the pretence that they might one day be used as evidence.

Last year the Revenue Commissioners sold €213,385 worth of seized goods. That is not an insignificant amount. Is that money kept by Revenue or channelled to charitable organisations or some other worthy cause?

Section 22 is worthy of some scrutiny. It seems to give immunity from any sort of legal recourse to anybody hurt or who has property damaged by officers carrying out a seizure or detention. I ask the Minister to clarify the meaning of that section.

Sections 44 to 46 suffer from what is a common flaw in some legislation. Appeals are effectively dealt with in house through the appeals commissioner appointed by the Minister. I note the legislative programme has a Bill which will presumably bring about some change to this system. In the meantime this legislation only allows an appeal to the courts and only to the less accessible High Court on a point of law. This is a common mechanism used in consumer protection, for example, and I believe its purpose is sometimes to discourage or simply prohibit by means of cost a legal challenge to how the State operates. I ask the Minister to outline his thoughts on this issue.

The main purpose of this Bill is to reiterate the State's assent to EU-wide rules on customs through the Naples II convention and the CIS system. The Customs Information System deals with a huge amount of personal data and clearly it is important that proper data protection systems are in place. Have any breaches of data occurred since the system came into place?

While an EU-wide approach to customs has some practical advantages it can also have drawbacks. For example goods labelled as Israeli are given preferential treatment under EU-Israel agreements but they may, in fact, originate in the illegally occupied territories of Palestine. It seems the procedure in doubtful cases is to confirm the details with the country of origin. In other words, all Israel has to do is to confirm the goods are not from the illegally occupied territories and there is nothing that can to be done. The State could ban goods from the settlements on human rights grounds, but it has not tried to do so. Obviously in recent weeks on the back of a Sinn Féin Private Members' motion, the Oireachtas gave a promise to recognise the State of Palestine, which is also important in this regard.

More broadly a Customs Union means setting trade rules at an EU level. The most topical example of this is the proposed transatlantic trade and investment partnership, TTIP. The TTIP is probably one of the most challenging and dangerous agreements being negotiated and discussed at EU level, most of it behind closed doors and most of it without any information seeping out. It cedes massive sovereignty from the Irish people to the dispute mechanism, which is completely out of our hands. It means to a certain extent that private companies can sue the Government regarding policy changes if those policy changes negatively impact on the profitability of those businesses.

The promises for job creation are very dubious. Those figures do not stand up to scrutiny. The most damaging element of TTIP is the investor state dispute settlement mechanism, ISDS. From what we know of this mechanism it is designed to cause damage to states that want to use policy in future to the betterment of its citizens. For example, the Government's plan to introduce non-branded cigarette packaging has come under scrutiny recently. The European Commission, the American Chamber of Commerce and a number of organisations have started to focus on this. It is very dangerous if governments cannot decide policy for fear that private corporations could sue them through the ISDS.

Other issues such as fracking and farming may be threatened with regard to this. Environmentalists, trade unionists, farmers and many civil society groups have raised huge concerns about what TTIP will actually mean for Ireland and the rest of Europe.

It is important to understand in the context of the customs union. My party is happy to support the passage of the Bill to Committee Stage where we will examine it in detail and possibly propose some amendments based on the issues I spoke about today.

Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Acting Chairman for the opportunity to speak on the Customs Bill 2014. I welcome the debate and the legislation. It is important to examine reform and the legislation dealing with customs.

I thank the staff who work in customs and commend them on an excellent job, which is thankless at times. They are dedicated public servants who sometimes put their lives at risk to serve the public good. It is important to say that in the debate. Over 2,000 staff are engaged in activities dedicated to target and confront non-compliance. The front-line activities include anti-smuggling, anti-evasion, investigation, prosecution, audit, assurance checks, anti-avoidance, returns compliance and debt collection. At times this can be a thankless and a dangerous job but they should focus on these issues. It is important these people get out and deal with it on the front line. They should focus on the concerns and protection of the citizens of this State.

A number of colleagues referred to the issue of illegal cigarettes. It is a major industry in the country. As well as being illegal, we are missing out on a couple of hundred million euro in taxes and revenue. We must focus on this. We must stop beating up smokers, which happens a lot. In recent days, we have started beating up e-smokers. While 150,000 of them are trying to give up cigarettes, Senators are prancing around trying to make life more difficult for those on e-cigarettes. This is the kind of nanny-state activity and distraction politics that must always be challenged. The real issue is illegal cigarettes and trying to get in a few extra bob. Every day, the Minister for Finance is looking for an extra few bob. Customs is a strong part of it and we should strongly support its activities. This is important.

We also have a drugs crisis in the State. Drugs are being smuggled in and, every now and again, we hear about the shipment being caught. However, most of them are getting through to many gangs in the city that are causing havoc, wrecking communities and intimidating whole streets. That is why we should be strong on this issue and vigilant about our coasts. We are an island nation and our coasts need to be protected and patrolled. The average customs man or woman on the front line would say that we do not have enough resources. These people play a major role in trying to protect the citizens of the State. I raise these issues in the broader context of the legislation.

The legislation is positive. It seeks to consolidate and modernise the national legislation relating to the administration of customs into a single item of legislation. That is common sense and part of the modernising process. It is also important to consider the European dimension to customs and, in particular, the EU's customs code. The current code and its implementing provisions set out the rules for importing and exporting goods and impose legal requirements and obligations on importers and exporters. In Ireland, customs controls are enforced by the Office of the Revenue Commissioners, administering the customs regime for the control of imports and exports and collection of duties and levies on behalf of the EU. Import duties collected by customs remain an important source of income for the EU. In 2012, they represented nearly 13% of the EU budget, which amounts to €16.3 billion. That is a very important figure yet most people have never heard of it. According to the Revenue Commissioners annual report for 2013, Ireland is fourth in Europe for efficiency of customs administration and fifth in the world. That is a high ranking, although not as high as the Acting Chairman, Deputy Bernard Durkan, who had the highest speaking time in the Dáil in 2014. I congratulate him on getting the number one slot. Many people are not aware of that and I hope the Minister appreciates the importance that we are up there in the premiership.

According to the Revenue Commissioners annual report for 2013, there were 1,170,989 customs declarations in 2013, an increase in 4% over 2012. With regard to drug seizures, the 2013 figures show 724 seizures of cannabis, amounting to a value of €11.31 million. There were 116 seizures of cocaine and heroin, amounting to €4.54 million, while there were 5,690 seizures of ecstasy and other drugs, amounting to a value of €4.96 million. The total number of seizures in 2013 was 6,530 and the value was €20.81 million. That is a lot of money. I warned the Minister for Justice and Equality and the Minister for Finance that this is the tip of the iceberg. Many drug shipments are getting through. The sad reality is that they are destroying our cities and towns. While we are modernising and making the legislation and the customs service more efficient, we should never take our eye off the ball. While we are at the top in terms of efficiency, we should be interested in upping our game.

Customs are in a unique position today to be able to facilitate trade and protect the interests of the EU and its citizens. I focus on our own State, which is very important. The custom systems can regulate and collect customs and excise duties, check commercial goods, and carry out security and safety checks, which are an important dimension, as well as monitoring to prevent organised crime and terrorism. I mentioned the drugs issue but there are organised crime elements, particularly in Dublin city, that have moved away from drugs because of the hassle from the drugs squad and the Garda Síochána. They have moved into illegal cigarettes, where there is more money to be made than in cocaine, cannabis and heroin. Customs have an important part to play in this.

The powers of seizure and forfeiture of goods have been known to the law and have been used in varied areas of legislation including firearms, drugs, fishing, counterfeiting and the proceeds of crime. Under the Bill, in addition to fines and imprisonment, goods can be detained, seized and declared forfeit. Customs officers have powers under Part 4 of the Bill, sections 25 to 35, to assist them in detection, including powers of stop, search, examination and arrest. This is dealt with in legislation but the important aspect is the safety of the staff.

Customs, at its most basic definition, means taxes on imports and exports. The Revenue Commissioners are responsible for regulation of the customs system in Ireland. It is important to focus on the issue. I welcome the legislation and I will support it because it consolidates all national customs provisions.

It will also modernise the existing legislation. I am interested in hearing more about the amendments that will be proposed on Committee Stage but, overall, I welcome this Bill and I will be supporting it.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Finian McGrath is holder of the record for the second highest level of speaking time in the Dáil in 2014.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this Bill. When I studied the Bill and its digest this morning, I noted a number of references to EU legislation. Anything that consolidates legislation is to be welcomed. The Bill deals with issues under EU legislation, such as free trade and transferring goods with ease, but the reality is that we seem to pick and choose in respect of the EU. Some goods can be transferred from one country to another without bother but if, for example, one imports a car from the UK one must pay a serious amount of tax. In the context of Europe and free trade, we hold EU driving licences and speak about open markets across the EU but when we want to import a vehicle, there is a huge gap between the price in Ireland and that in other jurisdictions. Are we taking out the nice pieces of the dinner for ourselves while leaving behind the pieces we do not like?

I have been involved in efforts to deal with the issue of petrol stretching in recent months. Customs officials have a wide variety of duties, and I commend them on their efforts. However, there has been an awful silence in the last few months in regard to petrol stretching. Numerous families around this country have two cars lying at the side of the house because they cannot afford to fix them. We levied taxes on the petrol these families purchased from filling stations in various parts of Ireland but they were unlucky in not having comprehensive insurance. Even people who had comprehensive insurance found they were not covered by the small print of their policies. The insurance policy may have been cheap but it included clauses that ensured the customer did not get what he or she expected.

This issue is causing havoc. Deputies from both sides of the House have attended meetings on this issue. It is like finding a needle in a haystack. It is a sad reality that we cannot tell whether the fuel contained in a lorry coming from the docks in Dublin is good or bad. It does not require magic tricks to analysis a sample from each such lorry to identify where the problem lies. Everybody and nobody in this business is getting the blame. People are being blamed in the wrong, while others are left with ruined car engines because of petrol stretching. Revenue has to step up to the mark. If it takes the money, it has to deliver. It has taken taxes from these people, who paid them in good faith. In their hour of need, however, there is silence when it comes to offering a solution. They are told to go to the filling stations, the suppliers in the docks in Dublin or the insurance companies. They have gone to everybody but the stark reality is that people are being left high and dry, especially where they have third party insurance. The Department of Finance should liaise with Customs and Excise to address the problem because it will not be resolved otherwise. I have had similar issues where kerosene was used in diesel machinery. The only thing we could do was add engine oil to ensure the pumps did not break for the similar reason that a blown engine would cost €5,000 or €6,000 to repair. People who are already struggling cannot afford such costs.

Last week I read a newspaper report that Ireland was seen as a friendly place to do business. I was contacted by an individual who had been in business for 30 years. He told me he was packing up because he got a letter from the bank which blamed an increase in the price it charged for writing cheques from 20 cent to 60 cent on the Government's new centralised system for getting rid of cheque books. I hope this Bill does not put further costs on business. Consolidating legislation should be aimed at making us more efficient.

Joe O'Reilly (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this Bill. This week, a cross-Border raid on properties connected to an organised tobacco smuggling outfit resulted in the seizure of millions of cigarettes and a large quantity of cash. Some 334,000 branded cigarettes were recovered, with a retail value of €167,000 and potential tax revenue of just over €100,000. This was a significant result for Customs and Excise, Revenue, the Garda and, ultimately, the Irish taxpayer. It would not have been possible without strong legislation to back these organisations up. This is why I welcome the Bill. Some of our existing legislative provisions date back to 1876 and this Bill will make some of the more outdated provisions redundant. It is important that we update and consolidate our legislation to reflect these changing times and I commend the Minister for bringing this reforming legislation to the House. It would be remiss not to commend him also for bringing us back from the point of economic Armageddon. If events had continued in the way they were looking at one stage, this would be a minor item on our agenda. We would be in the economic abyss but for the actions of the Minister and the Government.

While the Bill aims to streamline our existing customs legislation into a single entity, it also contains some additional provisions pertaining to forfeiture and the power to detain goods. These new additions are dealt with in sections 17 and 33, respectively. Section 17(3) deals with the issue of illegally imported goods and non-payment of duty. If an individual or business is found to have imported goods without paying the necessary duty, it is standard practice to impound the goods until duty is paid. There are instances where a liability for duty arises and, under this legislation, such goods will be liable to forfeiture. The Bill also reinforces the practice of the immediate forfeiture of goods which are deliberately concealed with a view to avoiding payment of duty or because they are prohibited. These are two welcome additions to existing legislation. They bring Ireland in line with our European counterparts and will harmonise the definition and the qualification of custom infringements and sanctions across all member states.

I understand that, in advance of the publication of the draft EU directive on the Union legal framework for customs infringements and sanctions, the European Union identified huge discrepancies between customs sanctioning systems amongst member states. One of the more startling differences was that the nature of sanctions for customs infringement varied widely from state to state. That is why it is so important to have this legislation in place to unify and consolidate our customs laws with our European neighbours. I was heartened to hear from Deputy Finian McGrath that we are fourth in Europe for quality and competence of our customs services. That can be overlooked when we cite dramatic cases but there is always room for improvement.

Sections 25 to 35 of Part 4 address the powers of customs officers and officials. My constituency of Cavan-Monaghan, which is a Border constituency, has seen a sharp increase in the practice of fuel laundering, petrol stretching and cigarette smuggling around the Border. Last year, Criminal Assets Bureau officers carried out a total of 25 fuel laundering and cigarette smuggling searches in the Border counties. They targeted 21 individuals and confiscated assets with a value of €1.7 million. In Monaghan, customs officials and the Garda located a large fuel laundering plant which had the capacity to launder dyes out of approximately 20 million litres of oil every year. The dyes found are commonly used to differentiate fuels sold at lower taxes for certain industries, as with green diesel for agriculture. The estimated cost to the Exchequer in terms of lost taxes was thought to be somewhere in the region of €10.5 million per year, which is a significant sum. Some of that money would be much better invested to strengthen services and employ the necessary personnel to prevent these offences.

The impact of this activity on legitimate traders - the ordinary decent retailers who provide local jobs - cannot be overstated. I met a number of them in more recessionary times and it was heartbreaking to hear their stories. They were beset with all the difficulties, including lack of demand, that went with the recession and the collapse of construction and were experiencing a double whammy in having to compete with illegal fuel. It is a very serious matter. I am pleased with the initiative between the Revenue Commissioners and Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs service on the new marker for rebated fuels in both countries. This is a new dye that will be used in diesel which cannot be laundered. The Minister for Finance, Deputy Michael Noonan, has welcomed this on a number of occasions and was very proactive on it. I remember being one of the facilitators of a meeting a couple of years ago with the Minister and the hauliers from this region. He heralded at that meeting the prospect of this dye and his commitment to working with the authorities to ensure it was introduced. I gather that its implementation is imminent and the Minister might comment further on that in responding to this debate. Its effect will be enormous and its introduction will represent great progress when supplemented by patrols. To get it done from a chemical and scientific point of view would be great.

The significant achievements of our customs officials and Garda must be commended. While they are all good, as is the initiative on the dye, there are still a number of plants working North of the Border which continue to have a negative impact on our economy and citizens. While there are people who think that purchasing illegal or laundered fuel will save them money, some are unaware of the potential damage they are doing to their vehicle engines. Some people are very foolhardy. The same cautions apply to illegal cigarettes, which are often made using inferior tobacco and can have even greater health implications for smokers than genuine brands. The issue also arises in respect of other illegal drugs crossing the Border.

Sections 25 and 26 are also very important elements of this legislation. They provide customs officers with the power to enter, inspect and patrol certain locations and to stop vehicles, aircraft and vessels which they suspect are involved in smuggling activity. The new provisions outlined in section 33 will mean that customs officials who have reasonable grounds to suspect that goods are being illegally exported or imported have the power to detain said goods pending the outcome of an official enquiry under the terms and conditions of the Customs Act. The 30-day detention limit, as outlined in section 18, is important and represents a modernisation of the existing notice of claim provisions. If a customs officer is of the belief that such goods may also be used as evidence in criminal proceedings but fall outside the remit of the Customs Act, he or she will also have the power to detain these goods and hand them over to the Garda. These aspects can have operational importance in certain instances.

I welcome the inclusion of this provision in the Bill. Our customs officers do sterling work in the Border region and it is important to ensure they have the necessary legislative backing and are equipped to deal with issues. Section 41 in effect repeals the Customs and Excise Act 2001 and ensures that the Naples II Convention, which was designed to improve co-operation between customs officials in various members states, has effect in Ireland. As such, a central data bank, accessible by each member state, will now be accessible by Irish customs officials.

Fighting fuel laundering and illegal trading across the Border is one facet of normalising life between North and South. It is a huge, critical issue to normalise life for law abiding citizens, proper retailers and good employers in the area and to fight off the criminal elements who, as we recently discovered, are also polluting our natural environment with laundered fuel. These criminals are displacing jobs, revenue and services for our needy people. That is one crucial dimension to normalising the North-South situation and harmonising life on the two sides of the Border. The legislation is welcome in that context. While it is not germane to the legislation, it is important to note that as we deal with this issue we need to get an infrastructural balance between North and South, including proper connectivity of roads and byroads. Roads should be restored so that people can travel North or South with ease.

In referring to legitimate traders and the decent people who go about their business trying to earn an honest day's pay with a local filling station employing local people, it merits mention that the fall in the value of the euro against sterling represents a huge economic opportunity for retailers south of the Border to trade into Northern Ireland and the UK. There is great potential also for Internet trading and legitimate traders. It is seldom that this happens but it does occasionally. Now is one of those times, which is all the more reason the legislation is important. It is important for proper and legitimate trading to eliminate criminality, petrol stretching, diesel laundering, cigarette smuggling and other forms of illicit drug trading. If we eliminate those and build the infrastructure, we can establish a normal trading relationship North and South.

People talk in a misty or romantic way at late hours in taverns and inns about the possibility of a united Ireland. Perhaps they sing songs. However, one will only create the proper united Ireland to which we all aspire by getting the bricks in the wall in the initial stages. That means removing the criminality, establishing normal trade along the Border through legitimate businesses with proper employment and revenue accruing to the State, and building the right infrastructure and trading practices. It is by building those core bricks and putting economic foundations and the rule of law in place that one creates the potential to implement the more grandiose plans. The superstructures will come later but one must get the small things right first.

The legislation is important in getting the small things right. It gives our Revenue services and customs personnel the legislative framework to do their job in a modern and coherent way with other EU states. It is reforming in that respect and I commend the Minister on it. With the new and critical initiative on dye in diesel, it provides confidence and hope to the legitimate traders I met a few years ago who were heartbroken at having to lay people off and whose businesses were greatly at risk.

It gives hope to the legitimate hauliers, whom I met and for whom I facilitated a meeting with the Minister some years ago, who could not run a normal haulage business because they were competing with people who used illegal diesel. Their jobs and families were at risk. I have a very distinguished colleague and friend, an eminent person in local government and a leading member of the council of the Irish Road Haulage Association, Councillor Peter McVitty. I make no apology for naming him. He is a very good, fine community person. He often told me that his business was seriously challenged by those who did haulage runs at a much more competitive rate using illegal diesel, and who were not doing their patriotic duty.

I appeal to the Minister, as the economy frees up, to keep the maximum customs enforcement personnel on the Border. They will pay for themselves over and over again through the smuggling they stop. I look forward to his response on Second Stage. I also hope the dye initiative works and that, as the years progress, we can restore normal life on the Border and get back to a sane existence in which people go about their business in an ordinary way and fully take part in society.

John O'Mahony (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am glad to contribute to the debate. It is a good, common sense approach to consolidate the legislation, get rid of the overlapping and make it much clearer so we can all understand it. Given that the world of 2015 is very different from the world of the 1800s when some of the legislation was put on the Statute Book, it needs updating and clearing up and I welcome it. In addition, there was no EU in the 1800s, and it is a major consideration today. While it is valuable and helpful to have customs legislation consolidated so it can be clearly understood and implemented, there remain major challenges, which many Deputies have outlined. There is still major illegal criminal activity operating inside and outside the State that affects us and causes millions of euro of losses to the country.

I very much compliment the Customs and Excise and the Revenue on their detections and seizures in recent days. They seized 2 million cigarettes and 12 tonnes of tobacco and the North-South co-operation was very important. In early January, 7 million cigarettes were seized at Dublin Port. While these increased detections and seizures are welcome, the worry is that this might be the tip of the iceberg and that much more might be slipping through the net. The Minister has assured us that whatever resources are needed to take on the criminal gangs are put at the disposal of the Customs and Excise and the Revenue. People should receive realistic sentences. Fuel laundering gangs were making up to €15,000 on a tanker of laundered fuel. Although sentences and fines have increased in recent years, they should be constantly examined because criminals must be hit at every level. The Government has put new tools at the disposal of the Revenue regarding traceability, such as the monthly return of mineral oil, ROM1, system, which traces fuel back to its source. However, it does not apply to petrol. Given that people in the trade, distribution companies and service stations have reported that ROM1 had an impact on diesel laundering, why does it not apply to petrol?

During recent years, an increasing number of fuel laundering operations have been closed down and seizures made. Some 130 filling stations have been closed down. Deputies Fitzmaurice and Calleary, among others, raised the major issue of petrol stretching. The Customs and Excise have assured us that they have enough resources to address it. However, while it happened last June or July, it has not been nailed down yet. It is confined to certain areas, namely, my constituency, Mayo, as well as Galway, Roscommon, Meath and Westmeath. Recently, Insurance Ireland came before the Joint Committee on Transport and Communications and told us 600 cases had been settled with people who had comprehensive insurance. However, these people have lost their no-claims bonuses. There are people who have third party insurance and whose cars have been put out of service by this and who have no access to public transport. Some people have had to buy new cars and if they had already taxed their cars, without the knowledge that they would be taken off the road, they lost the motor tax.

The issue needs to be resolved quickly. These people went into filling stations and paid for fuel, 57% of which went on taxes and customs duties, and got nothing but devastation, and they are still left hanging on. While it is not a major national issue, it is a serious issue for those affected. The other victims of petrol stretching have been the legitimate services stations. The Irish Petrol Retailers Association has formed a group which guarantees to the public that the fuel they sell is legitimate, and it should be supported. This week, it will launch in Claremorris, where there are more than 30 filling stations. A customer who goes into one of these stations will know that the fuel will be legal. Fuel contamination has put a question mark over every filling station and they must be protected. I urge the Minister to do whatever can be done to help the people devastated by it.

Tony McLoughlin (Sligo-North Leitrim, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am grateful for the opportunity to speak on the Bill, which will have a positive impact on efforts by Customs and Excise and the Revenue to tackle, among other issues, the smuggling of tobacco related products, narcotics and counterfeit goods into the State. The goal of the Bill is the consolidation of our existing but outdated customs legislation into a single, dedicated Customs Bill which will stand up to the tests of modern times. It will also strengthen the powers available to customs officers by applying customs laws to prohibited and restricted goods while also providing for specific EU and international customs obligations.