§ Mr. HAZLETONasked what the estimate of the Treasury now was of the additional taxation imposed upon Ireland for the current financial year, under the various heads, by the 1909–10 Budget?
§ Mr. RAMSAY MACDONALDasked a similar question, and further inquired what was the estimated amount of the advantages likely to accrue to Ireland from the purposes to which the yield of these taxes will be devoted?
§ Sir WALTER MENZIESalso had a similar question on the Paper.
§ The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. Lloyd-George)The amount which will be received from Irish sources in respect of the new and additional taxes included in the Finance Bill before 31st March will be approximately £265,000. If the Bill ultimately becomes law in its present form there will have to be added to this about £173,000, which ought to have been collected this year, but will not be received until next year, owing to the delay in passing the Bill. This will make the total Irish contribution to the Revenue proper to 1909–10 £438,000. Of the increased expenditure for which the Budget proposals are intended to provide, Ireland receives the advantage of £2,460,000 under the head of Old Age Pensions alone. There are also considerable additional charges upon the Exchequer in respect of the legislation of the last two Sessions affecting Land Purchase and University Education, as well as increased grants for elementary education and other Irish services. The total advantage to Ireland on the expenditure side of the account is thus not less than £2,800,000.
§ Mr. WILLIAM O'BRIENMay I ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer is it not a fact that Treasury estimates about Ireland have differed no less than £80,000,000 between the Purchase Act of 1903 and the Land Act of last year, and, under those circumstances, does he expect Ireland to be very much impressed by Treasury figures about Irish affairs?
§ Mr. LLOYD-GEORGEI do not know what the hon. Member thinks, but I know that what he stated, both about land purchase and the Budget, was rather wild. But if he will be good enough to point out to me in what respect these figures are wrong I shall be very glad to receive any representations from him on that point.
§ Mr. WILLIAM O'BRIENAs the right hon. Gentleman has stated that I am rather wild, may I ask him if he denies that the Treasury estimate of the cost of land purchase in Ireland at the time of the Act of 1903 was £100,000,000, and that the Treasury estimate last year was £180,000,000?
§ Mr. LLOYD-GEORGEAs a matter of fact—I am only speaking from the information I got from the Treasury—last year it 1468 was not a Treasury estimate at all. The Treasury was not in the slightest degree responsible for the land purchase finance of 1903, and I am very glad to be able to say that in their defence.
§ Mr. WILLIAM O'BRIENWho was?
§ Lord HUGH CECILMay I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he denies it is a fact that the taxpayers of Ireland, including the poorest part of the population, do in fact regard the Budget proposals as very oppressive?
§ Mr. MAURICE HEALYAm I correct in saying that the figures stated by the right hon. Gentleman do not include the increase in the Stamp Duty?
§ Mr. LLOYD-GEORGENo, they include the Stamp Duties for this year. The second figure—£173,000–includes the Stamp Duty as from the date it was imposed.
§ Mr. MAURICE HEALYI understand the second figure was the figure giving the increased amount which will now have to be paid in case the Budget is passed. The Stamp Duties, therefore, are not included.
§ Mr. HAZLETONAm I to understand from the figures given by the right hon. Gentleman that under no circumstances will the Budget, even if passed into law, impose for the financial year a burden on Ireland of half a million pounds?
§ Mr. GILHOOLYNo, because it will not be passed.
§ Mr. LLOYD-GEORGEThe extra taxes will amount to £438,000.
§ Mr. W. O'BRIENMay I ask whether if the Budget is introduced the right hon. Gentleman will have any objection to adding a proviso to the Budget that under no circumstances will the burden on Ireland exceed the figures now given by the Treasury?
§ Mr. LLOYD-GEORGEI do not know whether the hon. Member is authorised to make a proposal on behalf of the Irish Members. If he is, I should be very glad—I think I am authorised to speak on behalf of the British taxpayers—to cry quits on the whole transaction. In that event British taxpayers would be about £1,600,000 to the good.
§ Mr. J. G. BUTCHERasked the Prime Minister whether the Government still adhere to their pledge that the first act of 1469 the present House of Commons must be to deal with all the exigencies of the financial situation which have been created by the rejection of the Budget and by what has followed since; and whether the collection of the Income Tax will be treated as one of the financial exigencies of the situation?
§ The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Asquith)I stated in the speech to which the hon. Member refers that the House would not be asked to part with control of the Budget until after the Resolutions relating to the House of Lords have been submitted to it. For reasons which have been frequently explained, we cannot treat the Income Tax as a separable thing, and as standing in a different category from the rest of the Budget. It is the intention of the Government, as I have said more than once, to ask the assent of the House to the taxations imposed by the Budget, including the Income Tax, before the House rises for the Spring Recess.
§ Lord HUGH CECILAm I to understand that the Budget will so far as this House is concerned be finally disposed of before the Spring Recess?
§ The PRIME MINISTERNo, I did not say that.
§ Lord HUGH CECILWill the right hon. Gentleman say one way or the other? Is it intended to get the Budget through all its stages in this House before the Spring Recess, or not?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI am not going to give any undertaking on that point. I am going to repeat what I said several times, that we are going to ask the House to assent to the various taxes proposed by the Budget before the House rises for the Spring Recess.
§ Lord HUGH CECILMay I remind the right hon. Gentleman—[HON. MEMBERS: "No," and "Order, order."]
§ Mr. NORMAN CRAIGasked whether correspondence has passed between the Treasury and the Commissioners of Inland Revenue as to the course to be adopted by the latter in reference to the collection of Income Tax; whether such correspondence may be laid upon the Table; whether the Commissioners of Inland Revenue received assurance that the first act of the Government on return to power after the recent General Election would be to reimpose as from the date of the dissolution of the last Parliament all 1470 taxes and duties embodied in the Finance Bill, 1909–10, and to validate all past collections and deductions; and whether, in referring to collections and deductions in his announcement of 2nd December, 1909, he included the collection and deduction of Income Tax?
§ The PRIME MINISTERThe answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative; to the second and third in the negative; and to the fourth in the affirmative.