Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank Senators for the welcome given by all sides of the House to the Bill and for their considered contributions on Second Stage. As I have stated previously and as Senators on all sides have reiterated, most of the customs legislation has stood since before the State was founded, in the form of the Customs Consolidation Act 1876. That Act has been extensively adapted and amended in the past 140 years. While its provisions are still on the Statute Book, many are redundant or of doubtful validity. From a wider perspective, the complicated and overlapping structure of the resulting legislation can, at times, be difficult to understand. I enjoy Ronald Reagan quotes, but this Government is here to help. There is an onus on all Oireachtas Members to ensure that the laws that we pass are accessible, understandable and relevant to our constituents and citizens. The Bill will go some way in that regard.

The Bill's purpose is to repeal, consolidate, revise and modernise customs legislation into a single Act. The new legislation is more in keeping with developments in trade and technology and better reflects the social and political landscape in Ireland. This legislative approach is at the core of the wider better regulation initiative. It will provide greater clarity and transparency and, in doing so, make our legislation more accessible. I hope it will reduce the administrative burden and red tape that is often perceived and encountered by those involved in complying with customs legislation and regulation.

There are approximately 1.1 million customs declarations per annum, and €277 million in customs duty is collected. This is a sizable amount. The scale and context of the customs operation in modern Ireland necessitate the modernisation of the underlying legislation. I thank Senators for expressing their gratitude to our Revenue and customs officials and the front-line work they do on a daily basis. It is only right and proper that the Houses support them in their work by putting in place modern and relevant legislation.

On a point of clarification, the figure of 2,000 staff refers to all of the Revenue Commissioners' enforcement operations. I am sure that Customs and Excise would love to have 2,000 staff on its own. I thank the 2,000 staff for the job they do.

Senator Sheahan raised a point about how the Bill referred in some places to the need for a warrant but, in others, to there being no need for a warrant. To clarify, the measures where a warrant is not needed refer to those under which actions are taken in a customs-controlled environment, such as an airport or port. The measures where a warrant is needed refer to the standard procedure of accessing private property or businesses. Persons other than the Revenue Commissioners - this was an important question - means locksmiths, drivers or anyone who will be needed to accompany an official in carrying out his or her function. If the Senator has more concerns about these matters, we can tease them out further on Committee Stage.

Senators referred to section 20. It is important that the court provide protections to our citizens, but customs officers also need protection when carrying out their functions. This is what section 20 endeavours to do.

Senator Bradford asked for clarity on whether it would be possible for an enforcement officer or inspector to carry out inspections of diesel samples at a depot or anywhere else. The answer is "Yes". Under our excise law, there are extensive powers to carry out such inspections. This is a useful clarification, as the issue always arises in the Seanad in terms of fuel laundering and petrol stretching. It is worth putting on the record the fact that significant additional powers have been made available to tackle these problems. A comprehensive strategy to tackle illegal diesel laundering has been put in place. The licensing regime for auto fuel traders was strengthened with effect from September 2011 to limit the ability of criminals to get laundered fuel onto the market. A new licensing regime was introduced for marked fuel traders in October 2012, designed to limit the ability of criminals to source marked fuel for laundering. New requirements in respect of fuel traders' records of stock movements and fuel deliveries were introduced to ensure that data were available to assist in supply chain analysis. Following a significant investment in the required IT systems, a new supply chain reporting regime was introduced from January 2013. This requires all fuel traders to make monthly electronic returns to the Revenue Commissioners of their fuel transactions. The Revenue Commissioners are using these data to identify suspicious or anomalous transactions and patterns of distribution for further investigation. There is intensified targeting and co-operation with other law enforcement agencies on both sides of the Border in terms of enforcement action against suspected fuel laundering operations.

The strategy of the Revenue Commissioners has yielded considerable results. The number of oil laundries detected and closed down in the period 2010-14 was 35. None has been detected in 2015 to date. Since mid-2011, 134 filling stations have been closed for breaches of licensing conditions and more than 3 million litres of fuel have been seized. To the end of March this year, two filling stations have been closed down and, to the end of April, 22,205 litres of fuel have been seized.Industry sources indicate a much reduced incidence of laundered fuel on the market and increased road diesel consumption. Obviously, other economic factors have contributed to this growth, but reduced fraud is an important factor. Last year there were four summary convictions and one on indictment for offences related to fuel fraud. In addition, there were 283 summary convictions relating to the detection of marked fuel in the fuel tanks of motor vehicles. I thought it was useful to take that opportunity to update the Seanad.

Senator Bradford also raised a very important point, which goes well beyond the debate on this legislation but certainly has an impact in the area of customs, namely, the possibility of a UK exit from the European Union. It is well known by all Senators that the Government intends to take a proactive stance in respect of wishing to see Britain remain in the European Union. The Irish Government remained silent on the issue of a Scottish referendum because we were not part of that union. It did not mean that we did not care, but we stayed silent so as not to interfere. We are part of the European Union and, therefore, there is no intention to stay silent on that debate. The Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade has already articulated on a number of occasions the Government's position and its desire that Britain remain within the European Union and has delivered speeches in London on that issue as well.

It is very important that we see what the British Government wishes by way of reform of the European Union. I notice comments regarding a desire to make it easier to do business in Europe and reducing red tape, which are aspirations all European citizens can subscribe to, but it is important that Ireland and all member states see the details in that regard.

It is important to acknowledge in the context of a customs Bill that many of the repercussions for Irish customs if the UK were to exit from the EU remain unknown or are speculative at best. The full implications would only be known once the details of any new agreement or arrangement negotiated between the UK and the European Union are finalised and published. There is much speculation, but that is all it is, that if the UK exited the European Union, and we hope it does not, it would enter a European free trade agreement with the EU, similar to that currently in place for Switzerland and Norway, or enter a customs union with the EU, similar to that currently in place for Turkey. Regardless of the final agreed position, the exit of the UK from the EU would have significant fiscal and logistical implications for Irish customs and, therefore, it is appropriate that it is raised in the context of this debate. Following the results of the recent UK general election, it now seems certain that there will be a referendum in the UK on EU membership within the next two years. If the UK public voted to exit the EU, this would have a significant effect on trade between the UK and Ireland. The volume of trade country imports into Ireland would double in value. The increase in imports of third country goods and the increase in the volume of exports to third countries would put significant extra pressure on Irish custom resources and infrastructure. This is something we are monitoring very closely. Ireland is willing to play a very constructive role in respect of the debate and the reforms Britain seeks and will approach that debate in a constructive manner, as a neighbour and a friend, but it is important we see the detail. I am sure this is something that this House and, indeed, the other one will consider and debate further over the coming months and years.

I thank Senators for their views and their considered response to this legislation. I look forward to Committee Stage, on which we can further tease out this Bill, and to getting this legislation enacted quickly as possible, so that we can give our customs officers the powers they need and deserve to effectively deliver the customs and excise system our citizens expect.