§ 40. Mr. Gammansasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer for an estimate of the loss to the Exchequer for the current year and the next financial year if the registration tax on older motor cars was reduced to that allowed for new motor cars.
§ Sir S. CrippsIn a full year, £5¾ million. If a change were introduced, the effect in the financial year would depend on the date as from which the change applied and the arrangements made for refunds.
§ Mr. GammansWill the right hon. and learned Gentleman, when preparing his Budget, consider this claim of the motoring community, and has he not had representations from the motoring associations on this matter?
§ Sir S. CrippsI have had representations on every conceivable point that might come into the Budget, and I have borne them all in mind.
§ Mr. Oliver StanleyWould the right hon. and learned Gentleman bear in mind the invitation of his predecessor that, after a suitable period, we should exert pressure on him in this matter, and will he show himself as accommodating as his predecessor appeared to me?
§ Sir S. CrippsI cannot anticipate my Budget statement.
Mr. Wilson HarrisIs it not hard that the Ministry of Supply should prevent persons from getting new cars, and that the Chancellor of the Exchequer should penalise them for having old cars?
§ Sir S. CrippsIt seems to me to be an admirable combination.
§ 46. Sir W. Smithersasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will introduce legislation to put pre-January, 1947, and post-January, 1947, motor cars on the same tax basis.
§ 34. Mr. J. Langford-Holtasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will extend the flat rate of car road fund tax to cover all cars regardless of date of purchase or first taxation.
§ Sir S. CrippsI am afraid I cannot anticipate my Budget statement.
§ Sir W. SmithersIs the Chancellor aware that the whole arrangements are full of anomalies and are grossly unjust, which is so typical of the Socialist Government?