§ 1. Mr. CECIL WILSONasked the President of the Board of Trade whether, under Part I of the Safeguarding of Industries Act, calcium molydate is treated as an analytical reagent or a crude commercial product?
§ The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of TRADE (Sir Philip Cunliffe-Lister)Calcium molybdate is included without qualification in the list of articles issued under Section 1 (5) of the Safeguarding of Industries Act, and all forms of this chemical are, therefore, treated alike under the Act.
§ Mr. WILSONMay I ask whether in the Order to which the right hon. Gentleman has referred the list does not include simply analytical and synthetic organic chemicals and analytical reagents and refined chemicals, and how a chemical compound of this kind, used for trade purposes, can be included under any one of those heads?
§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTERNo, Sir. I think if the hon. Member reads the answer I have given him, he will see that it is included, and rightly included, under Section 1 (5).
§ Mr. WILSONMay I ask how it is that a chemical compound which in the United States is being very largely used, and the use of which results in reducing the price of steel, should in this country be so treated that it increases the price of steel by £4 a ton?
§ 2. Mr. A. V. ALEXANDERasked the President of the Board of Trade what industry it was proposed to protect by listing calcium molybdate in the articles under The Safeguarding of Key Industries Act, 1921?
§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTERThe industry in question is the one manufacturing the commodities specified in the last heading of the Schedule to the Act.
§ Mr. ALEXANDERDoes that mean that it was done in order to protect the synthetic chemical industry?
§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTERYes, Sir; it was in order to protect the synthetic chemical industry that the House passed the Safeguarding of Industries Act.
§ Mr. ALEXANDERAre we to assume that a crude compound used for the manufacture of steel is being treated by the Government as a synthetic chemical?
§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTERThe hon. Gentleman must understand just exactly what I have said in my answer
§ 47. Mr. ALEXANDERalso asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the expenses incurred by firms applying for a safeguarding duty under the Safeguarding of Industries procedure are being allowed by the Inland Revenue authorities to be taken into account for the purposes of assessment of liability to Income Tax?
§ The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. Churchill)The Inland revenue authorities are advised that the expenditure to which the hon. Member refers is of the nature of capital outlay, and, therefore, inadmissible as a deduction for Income Tax purposes.
§ Mr. ALEXANDERWill the right hon. Gentleman inquire into the matter, because, obviously, it is a great expense to the people in the industry?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLI have stated the position with regard to the law and practice. I do not require any further inquiry to fortify the answer which I have given.