§ 68. Mr. BRACKENasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Board of Inland Revenue have received any information modifying the conclusions of the Hitchcock Committee with regard to the profits made by the Yorkshire woollen industry?
§ The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. Philip Snowden)I must refer the hon. Member to my replies to previous questions by him on this subject, when I informed him that the statistics collected by the Inland Revenue Department do not distinguish the profits to which he refers.
§ Mr. BRACKENHow does the Chancellor of the Exchequer calculate the basis of his statement that some industries in Yorkshire made a 1,000 per cent. on their turnover; had he any statistics?
§ Mr. SNOWDENThat is precisely the question that the hon. Gentleman put on a former occasion. The hon. Member seems to be quite unable to frame a question which will elicit that information. When he can, I will give the information.
§ Mr. BRACKENIs not the Chancellor quite incapable of providing statistics to prove his statement?
§ Sir LAMING WORTHINGTON-EVANSDoes not the right hon. Gentleman welcome the opportunity of correcting the wholly incorrect and untrue statement that he made with regard to the Yorkshire woollen industry profits; can he give any single instance of a 1,000 per cent. profit on the turnover; is not that a mathematical impossibility?
§ Mr. SNOWDENThat information is not asked for in the hon. Member's question. The statement which the right hon. Gentleman has made, to use his own phrase, is wholly incorrect and untrue. I told the hon. Member last week that if he would put down a question asking for information in support of the statement which I made, I would supply it, and I am prepared to supply it now.
§ Sir L. WORTHINGTON-EVANSDo I understand that the Chancellor of the Exchequer is admitting that his statement 2379 is inaccurate; if not, will he give an instance of 1,000 per cent profit on the turnover?
§ Mr. SNOWDENI made no such admission. I said that the right hon. Gentleman's description of my statement as being wholly inaccurate and untrue applied to the remarks which he has just made. My authority is this, if I may be permitted to give it. The Sub-committee on the Top-making Trade under the Standard Committee on the investigation of prices, appointed under the Profiteering Acts, reported in 1921 that in the case of five firms of woolcombers—the right hon. Gentleman asked for one—whose accounts had been investigated, the average profit in pence per pound was multiplied between 1912 and 1919 about 15 times after deduction of Excess Profits Duty. The Committee reported that their figures
represented an increase in the average profit per pound over the five firms of approximately 22 times before deduction of Excess Profits Duty, and 15 times after deduction of Excess Profits Duty, the highest increase being 55 times the pre-War profit before deduction of Excess Profits Duty and 37 times after the deduction of Excess Profits Duty, while the lowest increases were eight times before deduction, and five times after deduction.
§ Sir L. WORTHINGTON-EVANSHow does the right hon. Gentleman attempt to justify his statement that it was 1,000 per cent. on the turnover?
§ Mr. SNOWDENIf the right hon. Gentleman will make a calculation, he will see that an increase of 22 times, an increase on their turnover—
§ Sir L. WORTHINGTON-EVANSIt does not say so.
§ Mr. SNOWDENThe right hon. Gentleman seems to be assuming that I said upon the turnover of their capital.
§ Sir L. WORTHINGTON-EVANSOn their turnover.
§ Mr. SNOWDENYes, turnover on their production, and that is the very basis of this statement. It represented an increase, they say, in average profit per pound—that is per pound turnover—[HON. MEMBERS: "No!"]—but I am certainly not going to quibble with hon. Members.
§ Mr. SPEAKERMr. Brockway.
§ Mr. CHURCHILLrose—
§ Mr. BROCKWAYOn a point of Order. May I ask whether you called me?
§ Mr. SPEAKERYes.
§ Mr. BROCKWAYMay I ask, in view of the profits which have been made in the woollen industry, whether the Government cannot do something to prevent wages being driven down to starvation level?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThat has nothing to do with this question.
§ Mr. CHURCHILLMay I ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer—
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYOn a point of Order.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: This is a point of Order. May I draw your attention, very respectfully, to the fact that you have endeavoured to limit supplementary questions on other occasions, and may I ask whether there is a difference between the rights of hon. Members and right hon. Members?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. and gallant Member must allow me to be the judge of this matter.
§ Mr. CHURCHILLMay I be allowed to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether it would not have simplified matters very much if he had said, quite frankly, that he used the word "turnover" when he meant the word "profit"?
§ Mr. SNOWDENWhat I said was perfectly true. As a matter of fact, I was using the identical words of this report:
It represented an increase in the average profit per poundof 22 times—and the other figures I have given. Those were the very words.