§ 68. Mr. C. WHITEasked the Financial Secretary to the Teasury whether he will make improved arrangements for dealing with goods over which a dispute arises, as in the case of a recent consignment of Japanese window blinds, where the Customs officer inaccurately asserted that certain glass beads forming part of the blinds were made by the lamp-blown process, which necessitated the detaining of the goods from the 6th to the 29th March, involving heavy charges upon the importer and the deposit of 33⅓ per cent. duty in cash; and whether he is aware that the deposit was not obtainable until after a delay of two months, during which time the importer was unable to sell the goods owing to the uncertainty as to whether the duty plus charges would be payable or not?
Mr. YOUNGI would refer the hon. Member to the reply given on the 22nd instant to a question by the hon. Member for Whitechapel, which, I assume, relates to the same consignment. As regards the period from the 6th to the 29th March, I would remind the hon. Member that, pending a decision as to liability, delivery of the goods could have been obtained at any time after importation on a deposit being made with the Customs to cover any duty which might prove to be chargeable. This deposit was not actually made until the 29th March. The delay in returning the deposit was due to the fact that a question of principle, requiring careful consideration, had first to be determined.
§ Captain W. BENNHas the Cabinet decided the principle involved in Part II of the Act?