§ 36. Mr. COUPERasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will consider the application of the McKenna Duties to all pneumatic tyres in addition to those specified in his Budget proposals, in view of the foreign competition with the home industry?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLNo, Sir. The repeal of the exemption in respect of motor tyres merely represents the logical completion of the McKenna Duty on motorcars, motor-cycles, their parts and accessories, and I am not prepared to propose to the House the extension of that duty to tyres which have no connection with motor-cars or motor-cycles.
§ Mr. SNOWDENDid we not understand before that the McKenna Duties had been re-imposed purely for revenue purposes? I gather from what the right hon. Gentleman said just now that he is now defending them as protective duties. Is that so?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLNo, Sir; on the contrary, as far as my answer is concerned, 1006 it says that we should not be prepared to go beyond the actual scope of the duties as planned by the original creator. We are only completing his work, which, as the right hon. Gentleman knows, was designed with a revenue object, although incidentally it may have some protective effect.
Lieut.-Colonel Sir FREDERICK HALLMay I ask whether the Government have yet absolutely decided that they will not make further extensions to other industries if they find that it means an improvement for trade in general in this country.
§ Mr. WOMERSLEYIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that large quantities of very inferior quality cycle tyres are being imported into this country from Continental countries at a very low price and undercutting the better quality British tyres?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLI think we must rely on the better quality British tyres to assert their inherent superiority.