§ Mr. PRETYMANasked whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that the Commissioners of Inland Revenue contend that, in calculating the amount to be deducted from gross value to arrive at the total value of any land subject to tithe, the deductions should only be an amount equal to twenty-five years' purchase of the present value of the tithe, whereas owners contend that it should be twenty-five years' purchase of the commuted value of the tithe plus the costs of redemption; also that the Commissioners refuse to allow any deduction for Land Tax; that they refuse to make deductions for land appropriated to roads on the ground that the owner still retains the soil; that they contend that total value and assessable site value are the same in the case of agricultural land where there are no buildings or timber; that their method of acertaining the site value of agricultural land is the opposite of that they adopt in ascertaining the site value of urban land; that on all these points owners have offered to refer cases but cannot induce the Commissioners to move in the matter; that meantime the Commissioners are settling valuations and making claims on the basis of their own interpretation of the law, which they are imposing on private owners who cannot afford to employ professional advice; and whether, in view of the fact that it is of the greatest importance that in a national valuation of this sort all property should be valued on the same basis, he will at once issue instructions to bring these matters before the referees and, where necessary, before the courts; and whether he will undertake that no valuation upon which these or other debateable points arise shall be treated as final until the correct interpretation of the law has been decided by the referees or by the courts?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEThe Commissioners of Inland Revenue have neither the wish nor the power to interfere with the action of any owner who may desire to submit any point of law, arising in connection with the valuation of his land, to the decision of a referee or other legal tribunal appointed under the provisions of the Finance (1909–10) Act, 1910. My right hon. 192 Friend is not prepared to give any such undertaking as that indicated in the concluding paragraph of the question.
§ Mr. PRETYMANIs the right hon. Gentleman not aware that the Department has every power of delaying these matters being brought before the referees by deferring their claims?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSECertainly, I suppose it is in the power of any Department to defer a claim which may be brought to the notice of the Department. From the observation I have been able to make of the working of the Revenue Department for nearly four years I do not think there has been any unnecessary delay.
§ Mr. PRETYMANHas this Act been in operation four years?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSENo, Sir; it has only been in operation two years, thanks to the action of another Chamber.
§ Mr. PRETYMANArising out of his former answer and not the last, will the right hon. Gentleman have inquiry made, and if he finds the suggestion, which is made here in all earnestness, is borne out—namely, that there is great delay on the part of the Revenue Department in bringing these cases forward—will he see that the earliest possible opportunity is given for bringing these matters before the referees?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSECertainly.