CLAUSE 9.—(Recording and registration of values.) (Hansard, 11 June 1931)

§ Sir SAMUEL ROBERTS
In view of the many important Amendments on the Paper, and the short time at our disposal, I do not move this Amendment.

§ Sir KINGSLEY WOOD
I beg to move, in page 8, line 16, to leave out Sub-section (2).
We are now dealing with the Clause which provides in the first Sub-section that the Commissioners shall keep a record in relation to every land unit which is valued. I am moving to leave out Sub-section (2) in order that I may have the opportunity of addressing a number of questions to the Minister in charge as to the object of this provision. It provides that the Commissioners shall deposit at the offices of the various local authorities a land value register which is to be a copy of so much of the entries in the record as relates to the land wholly or partially comprised in the areas of the respective local authorities. This provision goes on to say that the registers shall be so deposited, in the case of those relating to the first valuation made under this Part of this Act, as soon as practicable after such date as His Majesty may by Order in Council declare to he the date at which the valuation of all land in Great Britain has been substantially completed. Of course, the date when all these matters will be substantially completed is a very hypothetical date indeed. In this connection I would like to refer to Clause 12, because I have a consequential Amendment to leave out Sub-section (3), which says: 1216 Every council at whose offices a land values register is deposited under this Part of this Act shall keep the register so deposited until notice is received by them from the Commissioners that it is no longer necessary to do so, and any such council shall, when required to do so by the Commissioners, make such additions thereto and amendments therein as the Commissioners direct, and shall at all reasonable times allow any person who is an owner of any land in respect of which entries are inserted in the register to inspect the register and take extracts therefrom free of charge. I cannot understand the necessity for this provision. Whatever we may think about the merits of this tax, it is a national tax, and I would like to know why provision is made for these records to be deposited locally. I do not understand that they will be of any particular value to a locality under the precise objects of this Bill. The Bill provides that the owner shall be served with copies of the entries, and he is the only person directly concerned. It may be interesting to hear whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer has at the back of his mind some idea about local authorities being authorised to levy a rate upon land values, but I should have thought, judging by the proceedings in this House, and the general attitude of the country towards this Bill, the Chancellor is undertaking quite sufficient at the present time—perhaps more than sufficient from the point of view of his colleagues in the Cabinet and the Members on the benches behind him. What we really want to know is why these registers are being deposited with the local authorities. Why should they be mixed up with unpopular proposals of this kind? Have the local authorities been consulted about this proposal? If so, I should apprehend that they have replied that they want nothing to do with it and would like the Government to retain the sole responsibility.

§ The SOLICITOR-GENERAL (Sir Stafford Cripps)
I am anxious to explain to the right hon. Gentleman what it is he wants to know. On the first valuation notification of the valuation will be given to each owner, and subsequently a list will be deposited in these various places. After that first quinquennial valuation no notification will be given to individual owners. A list will be prepared, as is done in the case of valuations for rating, and it is obviously desirable that that list should be deposited where it is accessible locally.

§ Sir K. WOOD
Why not at the police station?

§ The SOLICITOR-GENERAL
Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman thinks property owners would find it more convenient to go to the police station, but many property owners would prefer to go to the offices of the local authority, where they go already to inspect the books showing valuations for rating. The reason why registers are to be deposited locally is purely and solely for the convenience of the property owners in the district, and the obvious place for them is where the rate books are at present lodged and where owners are accustomed to go for information.

§ Sir K. WOOD
May I take it that there is no reason to apprehend that the Government are desirous, when they have got this valuation, of using it for rating purposes?

§ The SOLICITOR-GENERAL
It has already been stated by the Chancellor of the Exchequer that at some future time, may be, in accordance with the wishes of a great number of local authorities, the rating system of the country will be based upon land values, and not upon the improvement values, as at present. So far as this Bill is concerned it is dealing with a tax, and the object which I have stated is our real object in making this provision.

§ Sir K. WOOD
Has the right hon. Gentleman any date in mind?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN
I think we are quite prepared to accept the statement of the Solicitor-General that there is no present intention of changing the character of the proposal in the Bill to the extent of making it a rating instead of a taxing proposal; but, assuming that to be so, I have a word to say on his statement that the reason for inserting this Sub-section is that after the first valuation alterations in a register are not to be notified to owners, but it is to be left to an owner to discover whether any alteration has been made in the valuation of his property by consulting the registers from time to time. I do not want to enter into any argument on that point, because we have Amendments on the Paper which will deal with it presently, but, as we raise the very strongest objection to the procedure proposed in the 1218 latter part of this Clause, the answer given is not an answer to our objection to the deposit of the registers with the local authorities.
It is obvious that the local authorities will be put to some expense, and probably some inconvenience, by the obligation to take charge of these registers, which, I suppose, will be bulky and tiresome to look after, and there is no provision for relieving the local authorities of the expense to which they will be put in the matter. If it be a fact that there is nothing in the minds of hon. Members opposite in the way of any change—at any rate in the near future—by which this valuation will be made the basis of a new system of rating, it will be time enough to talk about the local authorities taking charge of the registers when such a proposal is introduced. In the meantime we are not prepared to accept the view that the owner should be put to the inconvenience, and probable loss to himself, of having to consult the registers instead of receiving a notification.

§ Captain Sir WILLIAM BRASS
Are owners of property not to be given an opportunity of appealing when there is a revaluation?

§ The SOLICITOR-GENERAL
What I said was that they would not be served with a notice of valuation after the first valuation, but of course they would have a right of appeal.

§ Sir W. BRASS
Will they have to fill up a form?

§ The SOLICITOR-GENERAL
No, not necessarily. I am not certain what sort of form the hon. and gallant Member has referred to, and I am not certain that they will have to fill up any form.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN
I am pretty certain that they will.

§ Captain CAZALET
We have been told that there are 12,000,000 hereditaments to be valued, and in many cases this must throw a very considerable amount of additional burden on the county councils, both in room, space and work. I wish to ask whether the Government contemplate in any way assisting the county councils, both in regard to lodging these various documents and providing something towards the cost of the additional clerks who will be required for this purpose?

§ Sir WILLIAM MITCHELL-THOMSON
It has been stated that there is a possibility that at some future date these records of valuation may be useful for other purposes. May I point out that, as a basis for rating, this valuation will be quite useless. If this was going to be a valuation of all the land in the country, then it might be useful, but, as it will be a partial and incomplete valuation, and as the Commissioners have the power to direct the local authorities in regard to keeping the old registers, the new valuation will not be of any use.

§ Captain BOURNE
I beg to move, in page 8, line 40, after the word "first," to insert the words "and every subsequent."
I was glad to hear the Solicitor-General say that the landowner would not be required to fill up a new form in the case of the subsequent valuation. It would be a great inconvenience, and a matter of considerable expense, if the owner had to look up every subsequent register in order to see whether or not any valuation had been made in regard to his property. A landowner might have property in different districts, and perhaps in different counties, and that would mean that his property would be included in two registers in different districts and in different towns perhaps miles apart. I think that the Clause should at least provide that where an alteration has been made in the valuation the landlord should be informed of it.
It would be very inconvenient, in case an owner had premises in two different districts, for him to have to inspect the register in both places, and he would not be quite certain which was the genuine one. It seems to me to be quite unnecessary to put this great inconvenience upon the owners. I think that in every case where there has been an alteration in the valuation, notice of that alteration should be served on the owner. I can understand that this would not be necessary in cases where no alteration in the value has been made, but it would only be an act of justice to give the owner notice where a change has been made. If an owner is satisfied with the original value put upon his land, he would then know whether he was going to be put to any unnecessary expense. I think the least the Government 1220 can provide for in this Bill is to notify the owner in cases where any change has taken place in the valuation.

§ Mr. MARJORIBANKS
The logic of my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Oxford (Captain Bourne) is, I think, irrefutable, and I would like the learned Solicitor-General to explain the distinction between the first and every subsequent valuation, because I really think he should explain why there is to be an entirely different procedure in the second as opposed to the first valuation and thereafter all subsequent valuations. I see in this land taxation a great change in the whole fiscal system of this country and, as far as I can see, there is to be an entirely new principle of taxing people without notifying them personally of the assessment that is going to be made. Nobody, it seems, will be able to know at what he is going to be taxed, unless, in the old Jewish fashion, he goes to Jerusalem to be taxed. He has to go to the local authority, or wherever he is registered, or else he has to read the newspapers. We in this Committee may be very intelligent people who are in the habit of reading newspapers. I see a right hon. Gentleman who has expressed a certain dislike to some newspapers which he never reads, and a local newspaper might be a newspaper which somebody did not wish to read. Certainly there is a strong dislike growing in this country against some newspapers, and it might be that such a newspaper might not easily reach the eye of every owner of land.
I would again take this opportunity to remind the Solicitor-General of the fact, of which he is well aware already, that an enormous number of people will be interested in this taxation—not merely dukes and large landowners, to whom the Chancellor of the Exchequer has constantly referred, but smaller men and people interested in the ownership of land through innumerable organisations. I should have thought that the secretary of each organisation, and each owner of land, would be entitled to know personally what increased assessment had been made. There seems to be a sort of doctrine that the value of land does not change as substantially as other securities. Of course, the value of securities 1221 in this country during the last four or five years has enormously changed, and I think also the value of land will enormously change. It seems grossly unfair that a man who is innocently enjoying the amenities of his own home, who does not wish to sell his home to make profit or anything else, should be affected by a more or less secret valuation. You are forcing a person to pay a visit to a local authority, or to read a particular newspaper chosen by that authority, and when he goes to the authority to try to find out whether there has been an increased assessment on his property, he may or may not be treated politely by the enormous army of officials raised and controlled at the nod of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. It may be that if a large number of people visit these authorities, they may not get proper treatment. It may be that they will not understand the forms which they find deposited there.
We all know how confusing these forms are. I know that people are frequently puzzled by the simplest documents of this kind. It is quite a different matter seeing such a form in the privacy of your own home, where you are able to ask the advice of your friends who have had to deal with similar forms. It is not everyone who can afford legal advice in a matter of this kind. I do say that if a form, however difficult, is sent to a member of the public, he can worry it out and ask the advice of his friends, but if he go in a humble way to the local authority, where, perhaps, he is overcome by the dignity of the building, and asks what his land has been assessed at, he may not be able to understand. This is not a matter of principle, but one of pure machinery, and I do think that, on reflection, the Solicitor-General, who has behaved with such reasonableness throughout, and whose eloquence is appreciated by all sides of the Committee, might consider that this is a small point on which he might give way.

§ The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. Philip Snowden)
I think there is some reason for the case that has been put to the Committee, and I shall be prepared to consider an Amendment to the Bill that in cases where a change has been made in a subsequent valuation, notification shall be sent to the owner. My hon. and learned 1222 Friend cannot at the moment suggest precise words for an Amendment, but I will give an undertaking to bring one forward on the Report stage.

§ Sir W. MITCHELL-THOMSON
I am sure the Committee will be grateful both to the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer for what he has said and to my hon. and gallant Friend for raising the point in the Amendment, which is, obviously, one that ought to be met. I will only make this comment, that, of course, there may be changes not only in the site value but in the cultivation value, and, therefore, notification would have to be made in either case.

§ Sir W. BRASS
The right hon. Gentleman, I think, is merely following what is happening in the assessments under Schedule A. When the assessments are put up, a notification is made. In a case where the assessment is not altered, there is not any notification to the owner of the property. So that I think the right hon. Gentleman is merely following what happens at the present time as far as rating is concerned. I would like to ask him this question. In the second quinquennium, there may be, of course, new land brought in. Some land, which might have been quite ordinary agricultural land in the first five years, might have ripened by the time the second quinquennium had arrived, and in that event, of course, the owner of the land would be notified.

§ Mr. P. SNOWDEN
I understand that where new land is brought in for assessment subsequent to the first valuation, the procedure of the first valuation is to be followed, and that notice will be sent to the owner.

§ Sir ARTHUR STEEL-MAITLAND
I want only to put it quite beyond dispute. As far as England is concerned, everyone, of course, is grateful indeed to the Chancellor of the Exchequer for being ready to consider this matter. I assume this applies to Scotland, because a fortiori there is an infinitely stronger case there.

§ Captain BOURNE
I should like to thank the Chancellor of the Exchequer for the concession he has given, and, in view of that, I would ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.