§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill?"
§ Mr. HARRISThis Clause is in an entirely different category from the previous Clauses. The others have some pretence of being imposed for revenue purposes, but this Clause cannot be assumed to be for that purpose, even by the wildest stretch of imagination. The idea was invented under the Safeguarding of Industries Act and the duty is not imposed for revenue purposes. On the contrary, it was deliberately intended by the Treasury—
§ The CHAIRMANCan the hon. Member say of his own knowledge that the Tynwald, when discussing this duty, did not regard it as a revenue duty?
§ Mr. HARRISI assume a high intelligence on the part of the Isle of Man authorities. We have a Manxman in this House, and if he is a sample of the intelligence of the Tynwald, then we must assume that they knew these duties could not be imposed for revenue purposes. These duties are not imposed for revenue but in order to safeguard particular industries that do not exist on the island and to prevent importation. I, therefore, say that the island is rather travelling outside the scope of an ordinary Finance Bill. We should be careful in passing in Clause of this kind and in encouraging this island on the downward path of Protection. The Clause ought not to pass without protest.
§ Mr. McNEILLI felt greatly afraid that the success of the hon. Member last night would impose upon him a temptation that he would be unable to resist tonight, but, honestly, I do not think that the matter under discussion is quite a suitable one for the debate that the hon. Member tries to introduce. I want to enter a protest against these Debates on these Clauses. I feel very strongly that these Debates, however much they may amuse the House for a. few moments, are very much out of place. Certainly it is a very extraordinary circumstance that hon. Members opposite, who belong to a party that for years past has been devoting itself to the task of imposing Home Rule on those of His Majesty's subjects who do not want it, are now engaged in trying to fetch away rights which have been traditionally enjoyed by the people of the Isle of Man. An hon. Member mentioned the Act of 1887, and said that that Act clearly showed that this House was entitled to control and to debate the whole of the proposals of this Bill. I take exactly the opposite view of that Act. That Act appears to me to lay down perfectly plainly that the function of the House of Commons is to confirm the Resolutions, if it thinks fit to do so. Of course, that carries with it the implication that this House may refuse to confirm them.
§ The CHAIRMANWe are now getting into a very wide discussion, remote from the specific proposals of this Clause.
§ Mr. McNEILLWith great respect I contend that, in answer to the hon. Member for South-West Bethnal Green (Mr. Harris), who has made an attack on this particular duty, I am entitled to say that a constitutional question is involved in this matter, and that I do not intend, for deliberate reasons, to defend, one way or the other, the proposals of this Clause. That is the only answer to the hon. Member's argument in so far as it was an argument. I can assure the Committee that very considerable misunderstanding may arise in the Isle of Man when they find that we are adopting the unprecedented course of discussing and weighing the pros and cons of proposals which have been carried by the local Legislature. So far as I can ascertain there is no precedent for taking excep- 2267 tion to what has been done by the local Legislature. I respectfully request the Committee to understand that there is something more at stake here than the mere question of spending a little time in an amusing discussion of these matters, and I think if the Committee understand that this is a rather serious matter they will not introduce a procedure which may give rise to a great deal of resentment.
§ Mr. KELLYI can hardly be charged with treating that part of the world with any want of courtesy and respect. Some six of my colleagues sit in that particular assembly, but to be told here that we have no right to discuss this Measure because somebody else has passed a resolution upon it is certainly asking too much from us. If we have no right to discuss it, then it should not be placed before us, and I am sure the people of the Isle of Man would look upon us with anything but respect, if we were simply to pass this Measure through because it happens to be printed and placed before us. I do not know whether this Clause has been carried in the Isle of Man in such a way as warrants us in saying that it meets with the acceptance of the people of the Isle of Man. Nothing has been said by the right hon. Gentleman as to when this matter was dealt with and how it was carried through the two Houses in the Isle of Man. I object to being asked to obey the Government blindly when they say "You must not discuss this, but yon must accept it."
§ Mr. D. HERBERTOn a point of procedure. Is it not the case that the Isle of Man has a certain amount of independence, and that the Government of the Isle of Man is friendly to the Government of this country? In these circumstances I submit it is within the competence of the independence of the Isle of Man that its own Government should take. steps provisionally to impose these taxes, and the only power which is properly left to this Parliament is to consider whether these taxes are in any way harmful to this country and not to oppose them unless it can be shown that there is some good reason in the interests of this country for interfering with the otherwise independent powers of the Isle of Man.
§ The CHAIRMANI cannot say that an argument against these taxes is necessarily out of order, but obviously it is incumbent to show sonic reason why this Committee should override the judgment of the properly constituted Legislature of the Isle of Man.
Captain BENNI do not resent the serious note which has been introduced by the Financial Secretary to the Treasury. I have seen many Isle of Man (Customs) Bills passed, and the point behind this one is, that this so-called spontaneity and similarity and simultaneity is not real. The fact is that a protectionist Government in this country decides that this country shall become protected and among its victims are the residents of the Isle of Man. That is the situation, and it is wrong to say that this is a spontaneous act. Why these people in the Isle of Man refused to have anything to do.
§ The CHAIRMANIf the hon. and gallant Member for Leith means to say that undue influence has been brought to bear on the Legislature of the Isle of Man, he would only he in order if he can bring some evidence of that in regard to the lace duty. A discussion on the general constitutional question cannot take place on this Clause.
Captain BENNI plead that something might be said in answer to the speech of the right hon. Gentleman, which ranged from Home Rule right away through the whole category of political topics. As regards this lace, this is an imposition on the Isle of Man by a Protectionist Government of a measure of Protection, and that is the serious answer to the serious speech of the right hon. Gentleman.
§ Captain GARRO-JONESThe right hon. Gentleman stated that it was an affront to the autonomy of the Isle of Man to discuss whether or not this Lace Ditty should be imposed. When we granted autonomy to the Isle of Man, it was subject to the confirmation or rejection of any tariff proposals of this kind that they should propose, and I do not see how we can confirm or reject a tariff proposal if we are not allowed to argue its merits and to know what the objec- 2269 tions are to it and what the Government have to say in support of it. If it is an affront to the autonomy of the Isle of Man to discuss it, it is a greater affront to the House of Commons to say we are not to discuss it. It is obvious that we have a. perfect right to discuss the merits of this and every Clause.