§ 27. Mr. WATTasked the President of the Board of Agriculture whether his attention has been called to a case at Hemel Hempsted where a farmer was ordered out of his farm by the Department of Agriculture, after twenty-four years' tenancy, under the Defence of the Realm Regulations, and where the landowner got a rent of £250 from the new tenant against £162 from the farmer ordered out; and, if so, will he say what measures he proposes to adopt to prevent the Department's action leading to much increased rents?
§ Mr. PROTHEROOn 17th May, 1917, the Board authorised the landlord at his discretion to determine the tenancy of the 703 farmer referred to on account of bad farming. The Board understand that the farm has been relet at an increased rent, as stated in the question, but this fact constitutes no reason why the powers of the Board should not be used in such cases. The presumption is that the previous rent was unduly low. In any case, the Board could not agree that land should be allowed to remain in the possession of a tenant who is not farming it properly merely because it might fetch a higher rent from another tenant who is prepared to farm better, In the case referred to the Board satisfied themselves, by obtaining a report from their own Commissioner, that the determination of the tenancy was essential in the interest of food production.
§ Colonel WEDGWOODIs it not a fact the landlord gets this increased rent because of the passage of the Corn Production Bill?
§ Mr. PROTHERONo, Sir; I am afraid that the Corn Production Act so far as prices are concerned is not now in operation, owing to the fact that the prices of corn are far in excess of the prices in the Act.
§ Colonel WEDGWOODIs it not perfectly well known that the Corn Production Act gave a promise of future high prices, so that the rents are kept up?
§ Mr. HOLTIs it not a fact that in consequence the Chancellor of the Exchequer gets large sums in better Income Tax?
§ Mr. PROTHEROOut of the landlords?
§ Mr. PROTHEROVery probably.
§ Mr. BILLINGCan the right hon. Gentleman say whether the increased rental is taxed as excess profits?