47. Mr. F. HALL (Dulwich)asked the Prime Minister, if a memorial has been received from a number of Members of Parliament calling attention to the proposal to raise additional revenue for purposes which have not been previously sanctioned by this House; and if he is in a position to allay the apprehension caused by such a contemplated departure from the usual practice?
§ The PRIME MINISTERThe whole matter has been thoroughly discussed in the House, and I can add nothing to what was then said.
§ 56. Mr. CHIOZZA MONEYasked the Prime Minister if, in view of the fact that many Clauses of the Revenue Bill as printed are designed to carry into effect definite promises made by the Government to remove injustices in existing taxation, he can see his way to give the House an opportunity to enact these Clauses quite apart from the separate question of a new valuation for rating purposes; and whether, in view of the fact that the suggested new valuation is obviously intended to form the machinery for a reform of our rating system, be will give the House an opportunity to pronounce upon its merits as a separate question?
§ The PRIME MINISTERAs regards the first part of the question, if the House will agree to allow those adjustments, which were, I understand, discussed last year, to pass without opposition, we might proceed with them before the prorogation. It is intended that the proposals as to valuation shall be included in the same Bill as the new Grants which are to be conditional on the adoption of the valuation proposals.
§ Mr. JAMES HOPEHas the right hon. Gentleman any kind of guarantee that the 1914 doctrinaires of the Glasgow school will allow this?
§ The PRIME MINISTERNo, Sir, none whatever.
§ Mr. CHIOZZA MONEYMay I ask if the right hon. Gentleman will ascertain through the usual channels whether these Clauses can be regarded as non-contentious, which would enable him to proceed in the manner indicated?