§ Now, Sir, I come to indirect taxation—
§ SIR HOWARD VINCENT (Sheffield, Central)Hear, hear!
§ SIR M. HICKS BEACHI am afraid that our old favourites, beer, spirits and wine, are even less promising subjects for increased taxation than they were a year ago. I think I have said something already to show the Committee that any attempt to increase taxation on those articles would not, in present circumstances, be likely to add to the revenue. Tobacco is in a similar position; nay, it is even in a worse position, for, although it has always hitherto been considered as a most peaceful and soothing article, it is now the subject of an internecine warfare on the part of rival manufacturers which I hope may result in ultimate benefit to the consumer, but which at present has utterly disorganised the trade; and I know from past experience how very sensitive a subject tobacco is to any changes in taxation, and how dangerous it is to attempt changes with a hope of greater yield to the revenue. Then, Sir, I come to tea. Well, I have listened to the pitiful cry of our fellow-subjects the tea-producers in India and Ceylon, and bearing in mind that tea, which is almost a necessary of life, is already taxed to as much as 75 per cent. of its average value, I confess I should be sorry to increase that tax. I turn to sugar. Several very astute individuals, who have no doubt cleared sugar very largely in anticipation of an increased duty, have suggested to me that sugar would well bear an addition. I have no particular desire to enable them to charge to their customers duty which they have not paid, and put it into their pockets instead of paying it into the Exchequer. But I may say this. The manufacturing industries which use sugar as a raw material undoubtedly were affected by the imposition of the duty on sugar last year. I do not think it would be fair to disturb those industries again, having before them, as they must necessarily 179 have, the possibility of having to work under altered conditions when the bounties are abolished eighteen months hence. And therefore, Sir, I do not propose to increase the duty on sugar.
But I have a stronger reason than anything I have named for preferring, in my search for new indirect taxation, to add some article or articles to our tariff—
§ SIR HOWARD VINCENTHear, hear!
§ SIR M. HICKS BEACHRather than to increase the taxation of articles already on our tariff. Sir, I ventured last year to impress strongly upon the Committee that the financial difficulty with which we had to deal was not only the war difficulty, but the rapid increase of our ordinary expenditure. I pointed out to them that in six years our ordinary expenditure had increased by no less than £28,000,000, and I think I went so far as to say that, in my judgment, if that rate of increase continued, the country must come within reach of actual financial ruin. Well. Sir, I am happy to say that that rate of increase has not continued—I am speaking, the Committee will remember, of ordinary expenditure, not of the war expenditure. Last year the ordinary Estimates and the Consolidated Fund services showed together an increase of ordinary expenditure over the previous year of no less than £12,468,000. That is what I was mainly alluding to. This year, Sir, I am happy to say, there has been a salutary change. The increase over the original Estimates for last year is £1,787,000, and the increased interest on our war debt is £1,650,000, a total of £3,437,000, as against nearly 12½ millions the year before. But, Sir, that is still an increase, and I cannot conceal from myself that, looking to the continual augmentations of military and naval armaments in other countries, looking to the ever-increasing demands made upon the Exchequer, flowing from our modern civilisation, we must expect some increase in our expenditure in years to come. I am therefore endeavouring now, as I endeavoured last year, when I asked the Committee to raise additional 180 taxation in order to meet the charges of the war. so to frame that taxation that when peace returns and it is possible also to return to ordinary expenditure, we may have no difficulty in settling our financial system on a basis which will be equitable to all the taxpayers of the country. Sir, I have heard the cheers of my hon. friend the Member for Central Sheffield. I know that what he would tempt me to is a small tax upon a great many articles.
§ SIR HOWARD VINCENTForeign articles.
§ SIR M. HICKS BEACHNow, Sir, I do not agree with that. In my belief the great clearance of the tariff with which the names of Sir Robert Peel and Mr. Gladstone will always be associated, which cleared it of many—I might almost say of scores and hundreds—of articles, many of them producing very little revenue, was a greater relief to the springs of industry in this country, was a greater advantage in increasing trade and commerce and the chances of employment at good wages of our working men, and therefore in promoting their well-being, than the removal of any particular tax on any particular article, however necessary that article might be to their comfort. Therefore, in seeking for new indirect taxation, what I desire to find, as I desired to find last year, is an article practically of universal consumption, from which, therefore, a large revenue could be produced to the Exchequer without any injurious or oppressive burden on any individual or upon any class. I have had, of course I always have, many suggestions with regard to taxation; but in nearly all of them I have noticed this—that the interests of the Exchequer are not the first thing which my correspondents have at heart. There is a sort of thin veneer of regard for the Exchequer over the suggestions; but when I look underneath I discover generally that they desire to tax some odious object out of existence—such as, for example, betting advertisements in newspapers—and they would be perfectly satisfied if they were taxed out of existence; although, of course, that result would not yield one single penny to the Exchequer.