§ VISCOUNT BRENTFORDMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether, in view of the fact that the United Kingdom is now the only country left in Western Europe which adheres to the outmoded system of requiring formal customs documents for the temporary importation of private motor vehicles by visitors from abroad, they will now remove this impediment to the free flow of the tourist traffic to this country.]
EARL JELLICOEMy Lords, the possibility of simplifying the current requirements is under review. I do not, however, accept that the fact that other countries in Western Europe have dispensed with formal documentation for tourists' vehicles necessarily means that this is no longer the best system in the different circumstances prevailing here.
§ VISCOUNT BRENTFORDMy Lords, can my noble friend accord us any statistics on this point? How much is the cost of maintaining this system to the taxpayers of this country, and what would be the estimated loss to the taxpayers if the system were abolished?
EARL JELLICOEMy Lords, I am afraid I have not the statistics for either 180 of those eventualities, but it is my understanding that the possible loss to the Revenue of completely waiving the present system might, in fact, be very considerable indeed.
§ VISCOUNT BRENTFORDMy Lords, is that really so, in the light of the fact that no other country which has abolished this system has sustained any appreciable loss at all? So why should we?
§ LORD DERWENTMy Lords, before my noble friend answers, I would point out that he referred to the "different circumstances" in this country. Could he be more explicit as to what are the different circumstances?
EARL JELLICOEMy Lords, if I may take my second noble friend's question first, I think there are two main different circumstances. The one with which my noble friend is doubtless familiar is the fact that this country is an island. Therefore, both the volume of tourists and of tourist traffic in cars coming to this island is necessarily less than for countries entirely with land frontiers, and that makes a more formal control possible without imposing unnecessary and tiresome delays. The second difference is that, by and large, the combination of import duties and purchase tax which we impose on the import of foreign cars is higher than with our West European neighbours. Therefore, the temptation to abuse is greater and the gains that flow from it would also be greater. Those are the two main differences, as I understand them.
I am afraid that I am not quite certain that I retain my first noble friend's question in mind, but I think that he was asking whether statistics were available on the effect in Western Europe where the triptyques or carnets system has been abolished. I do not have details of that, but I should like to point out again that the circumstances, as we see them, are completely different for Western European countries, with their entirely land frontiers. To cite merely one statistic, I understand that in the case of Western Germany, something like 12 million cars annually cross the frontiers, and in the case of Austria something like 6 million, while in the case of this country only 60,000 cars are brought in annually by 181 foreign tourists. The size of the problem is quite a different one for the Western European countries.
§ LORD LUCAS OF CHILWORTHMy Lords, do I understand the noble Earl to say that, because this country is an island and is therefore less attractive and has a lower volume of motor cars entering it, the practices of bureaucracy can have more leisure in which to be practiced? Do I understand him to put forward, as the real reason why we have this outmoded system, that fewer cars come into this country than cross the frontiers of Western European countries?
EARL JELLICOEMy Lords, I think that the noble Lord caught the first part of what I said right—that this is an island—but the deduction which he drew from that he did not get right. The fact is that our insular situation and the transport limitations which inevitably flow from that situation make a full customs control possible without causing significant delay to tourists. It is my understanding that the present system imposes something less than two minutes' delay in the average period to the average tourist.
§ VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, is the answer that the noble Earl is giving entirely from the Treasury point of view, or is there any question of security involved?
EARL JELLICOENo, my Lords, the answer I am giving is not a question of security but of possible loss to the Revenue by evasion and abuse if the present system is waived. However, as I said in my first reply, the possibility of simplifying the present arrangements is under consideration.
§ LORD DERWENTMy Lords, may I ask whether, if so few cars come to this country, the system pays for itself or whether there is a loss on it?
EARL JELLICOEMy Lords, I cannot answer that in detail. As I said there are no statistics available of the precise cost of the present system, but it is my understanding that the abuse to which its complete waiver might well give rise could lead to a substantial loss to the Revenue.