§ The relief granted under sub-section (1) of section nineteen of the Finance Act, 1920, shall extend to care of a widowed mother who resides with the claimant and is wholly dependent upon him for support.—[Sir N. Stewart Sandman.]
§ Brought up, and read the First time.
Sir NAIRNE STEWART SANDEMANI beg to move, "That the Clause be read a Second time."
I am certain that the whole Committee must feel that this case is a very just one for the making of some concession. If a man has a housekeeper, he gets a rebate of only £45 per annum, while if he has a widowed mother he gets, I understand, a rebate of only £25.
§ Mr. P. SNOWDENIn the ease of a housekeeper he now gets £60.
Sir N. STEWART SANDEMANHe gets £60 if he has a housekeeper, and only £25 for his widowed mother. Surely, the man with a widowed mother should be in no worse position than the man who has a housekeeper. I do not think that there is any argument on the other side. Such a man may have given up the chance of being married in order to take charge of his widowed mother, and I cannot see why the man who does not want to get married but employs a housekeeper should get a rebate of £60, while the man who is really doing his duty by his widowed mother only gets £25. I feel certain that this concession would not cost very much, and I hope that the Chancellor of the Exchequer will be able to see his way to grant this request from one who hardly ever bothers him at all.
§ Mr. P. SNOWDENThis is another of those Amendments which naturally excite sympathy. It is an Amendment which I have myself, I believe, supported in the Division Lobby when I sat on the other side of the House; but circumstances alter Cases, and I think that that charge of inconsistency could be levelled against every Member of the House who has sat under different party Governments. As the hon. Member has said, a very substantial allowance is now given to a widower whose widowed mother looks after his children in the capacity of a housekeeper, but that allowance cannot be given twice over. In the case which the hon. Member has in mind, 91 there would be an allowance of £25 a year as a dependant's allowance. I would point out that under the hon. Member's proposal the allowance would not be given to a father who was dependent upon a son, and the fact that the hon. Member has not extended his proposal to a father exposes the difficulty that exists in dealing with a matter like this, because quite as strong a case might be put forward for a relief of £60 a year for, say, an invalid's sister or an incapacitated brother, as for the support of a widowed mother. As the Committee will see, the whole question bristles with difficulties, and one concession inevitably leads to a demand for further concessions. In my present financial difficulties, there is one conclusive reason why, with all the sympathy in the world, I am unable to accept the hon. Member's proposal, and that is that it is estimated that it would cost more than £500,000 a year. For the present, therefore, I am afraid the hon. Member will have to be satisfied with my sympathy, and my hope that, as I said in connection with another Amendment, in future years we may be able to consider the proposal under happier financial conditions.
§ Question, "That the Clause be read a Second time," put, and negatived.