FINANCE BILL. (Hansard, 12 July 1939)

§ Mr. Pethick-Lawrence
On a point of Order, Mr. Speaker. I understand that you do not intend to call the first Amendment and the two consequential Amendments to Clause 20 (Charge of armament profits duty) which appear on the Order Paper in my name, for the reason that you take the view that they are out of order. May I respectfully submit to you certain grounds which, I suggest, show that the Amendment is in order? I understand that the Amendment is ruled out of order on the ground that it might increase the charge. I venture to suggest that it does not increase the charge and that it only cuts through the cumbersome procedure of the Bill. I draw your attention to certain words in the Clause. The Clause states, in Sub-section (1), that the tax is to be placed on so much of the excess as arises from armament contracts"; and Sub-section (2) states that this excess shall be ascertained by reference to the proportion which the turnover under armament contracts bears to the total turnover. It is clear from the wording of the Bill that it is anticipated that this proportion may not give correct results, and, therefore, there are two provisos, which lay down that if that proportion should prove to be unjust, either because it is too great or too small, a different procedure shall be adopted; and that procedure is designed to arrive at a more correct ascertainment of the proportion of the excess profits which is due to armament profits. All that I propose to do in my Amendment is to cut through that cumbersome procedure of first arriving at a proportion which has little connection with the object which it is intended to reach and then subjecting that to a further investigation, and to suggest that the same consideration which must form the basis of the further analysis secured by the provisos shall come into operation straight away. I do not propose that the amount of the excess profits due to armament contracts shall be fixed any more than is done by 2278 the Clause. All I propose is that it shall be ascertained by reference to the proportions which I propose in the Amendment.
Therefore, I suggest for your consideration. Sir, that all my Amendment does is to cut through the procedure of the Bill, which first of all fixes an entirely inadequate and inappropriate method of ascertainment, and then proceeds to say that if either party thinks that is inappropriate, it can discover the true relationship by another process. I propose that that process shall be taken from the beginning, while not leaving out the two provisos which, if any injustice still remained, could still set it right. For these reasons, I submit that my Amendment would not increase the charge, and consequently, that it is not out of order.

§ Mr. Speaker
In considering the Amendment I thought at first that it would not make any difference one way or the other, but, after fully considering it, I arrived at the conclusion that, at any rate, it would put those who would become liable to the duty in a more onerous position than they would have been under the Bill as it left the Committee, and that, if the Amendment had any effect at all, it might have the effect of increasing the charge upon those liable to the duty. In considering the matter of charge, it is my duty to consider not only whether an Amendment would increase the charge, but whether it might increase it. That is the reason I intimated that the Amendment was out of order.

§ Mr. Pethick-Lawrence
May I put one more point to you? I suggest that, far from putting these people to more trouble, it would put them to less trouble, because under the Bill as it is, first of all a decision is made in one way and subsequently it can be upset either by themselves or, alternatively, by the Commissioners, by reference to the very facts which are omitted in the first instance under the Bill and which, under the Amendment, would be taken into account.

§ Mr. Speaker
I still think that the Amendment would place those persons in a more onerous position than they would be under the Bill as it left the Committee, and that the effect might be to make a charge.