HC Deb 17 November 1927 vol 210 cc1121-2
71. Sir HENRY CAUTLEY

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Government intends to introduce and pass a Long Terms Credit Act for agriculturists; and, if so, will he explain why the existing Credit Facilities Act, which was passed to enable money to be lent on mortgage to farmers who had bought their holdings, is now a dead letter though the Act is still in full force and effect, and many of such farmers are still applying for loans?

Mr. CHURCHILL

With regard to the first part of the question, I would refer to the answer given yesterday to the hon. Member for the Buckrose Division (Major Braithwaite). With regard to the latter part of the question, the Agricultural Credits Act, 1923, empowered the Treasury to fix the aggregate amount to be lent under Section 1 of the Act, and this has been fixed at £5,000,000. These loans were made only to a limited class of farmers—those who agreed to purchase their land not earlier than 5th April, 1917, nor later than 27th June, 1921—and are therefore in a different category from the proposals now under consideration.

Sir H. CAUTLEY

Cannot the right hon. Gentleman use his influence with the Public Works Loans Commissioners to increase the amount of £5,000,000 which has been announced under the existing Credit Facilities Act which has been a dead letter up to the present?

Mr. CHURCHILL

If I started to use my influence endeavouring to add to the liabilities, capital and otherwise, of the State, I think we should get into an even more difficult position than that which we occupy at present.

Lieut.-Colonel ACLAND-TROYTE

Is my right hon. Friend aware that farm mortgages are now being called in, and could he not do something to alleviate the hardship caused to farmers through the Government's delay in bringing in their credits scheme?

Mr. CHURCHILL

We are going to bring in a credits scheme at the earliest possible Parliamentary opportunity.

Mr. HARMSWORTH

Does not the right hon. Gentleman consider that such a grant would merely have the result of throwing good money after bad and would not in the least solve the agricultural problem?