§ 31. Mr. W. Robertsasked the Minister of Transport whether his attention has been drawn to a recent case in the Scottish High Court by which road hauliers who make use of removable containers for the purpose of carrying livestock are now rated for taxation of their vehicles at a higher rate than has hitherto prevailed; and whether he will consider, in the interest of agriculture, taking any action to remove this additional burden upon such road hauliers?
§ Captain WallaceIn December last my predecessor drew the attention of local taxation officers to the decision of the Scottish High Court in the case of Paterson versus Burnet, where, on the facts before them, the court held that a certain structure on a vehicle had not the
real purpose of … something to sling on or off the vehicle with the load inside1857 and was, therefore, properly reckoned as part of the unladen weight of the vehicle. I see no reason for asking Parliament to amend the existing law on the subject.
§ Mr. RobertsAm I not right in thinking that the law operates very unfairly and that railway companies' lorries which might very occasionally have the superstructure taken off are now taxed at the lower rate; whereas the private hauliers' lorries with a similar superstructure on them are taxed at the higher rate?
§ Captain WallaceI think it is perfectly consistent, because the rate of tax payable on goods vehicles depends upon their unladen weight. It is clear that the intention of Parliament in 1930 was that the unladen weight should include everything that is an integral part of the vehicle in use.