§ 73. Mr. D. GRENFELLasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Import Duties Advisory Committee were aware of the circumstances in the pepper 1583 market in October last when an addition to the duty on pepper was recommended by them?
§ Mr. COOPERThe hon. Member appears to be under a misapprehension since no addition to the duty on pepper was recommended in October last. The change in the duty was recommended by the Committee only in order that the ad valorem incidence of the duty might not be disturbed by the rise in the import value of peppercorns. In these circumstances the Committee were not concerned to inquire into the origin of the rise in values.
§ Mr. GRENFELLIs it not the case that in addition to the change of duty from ad valorem to a fixed rate per cwt. the rate was altered from 5s. 6d. to 7s. 3d.?
§ Mr. WILMOTIs it not a fact that this rise in price was the direct result of gambling in commodities, and should not the Government and the Import Duties Advisory Committee have had regard to the causes for this rise before agreeing to an increase in the duty?
§ Mr. COOPERThe committee were not aware of the causes of the rise. They noted the rise, and, therefore, altered the basis of the duty in order to retain the duty at the same rate as before. It was not their business to inquire into the causes of the rise in price.
§ Mr. WILMOTIs it not a fact that it is the function of this advisory committee to make these kind of inquiries into all the surrounding circumstances before making a recommendation to this House?
§ Mr. COOPERI cannot accept that. It is not the duty of the Import Duties Advisory Committee to inquire into everything which goes on in the rise and fall in the price of commodities. Having put a duty on, it is their duty to retain it at the same level, and that is what they did in this case.