50. Mr. Vaneasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will state his objections to permission being given to the 718 British Pioneer Tobacco Growers' Association and similar bodies to shred leaf grown by their members.
§ The Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr. Gaitskell)Yes, Sir. As tobacco grown in the United Kingdom is liable to Excise Duty of £2 16s. 5½d. per pound, its growth and manufacture must be strictly controlled. In April, 1948, my predecessor decided to allow amateurs to grow small amounts of tobacco in gardens or allotments for personal consumption without payment of duty, and towards the end of 1948 he agreed to extend the concession to cover co-operative "curing." It was, however, made clear to the two growers' associations that this was the absolute limit of the concession.
One of the bodies concerned, the National Amateur Tobacco Growers' Association, is satisfied with the concession in its present form. But since 1949 considerable pressure has been exerted by the other body, the British Pioneer Tobacco Growers' Association, for a still further extension of the concession to include co-operative "shredding," which differs essentially from curing in that it is process of manufacture. If allowed, this might result in manufacturing operations on a substantial scale and go far beyond the limited and amateur character of the original concession. The extension proposed would mean that in effect the Association would be entering the commercial field and would have, there-for, to accept the same liabilities as other manufacturers with whom they would be competing.
Finally, I must point out that there is no particular reason to encourage tobacco growing as a desirable use of land, labour and fertilisers which, from a national point of view, could be more usefully employed in growing food. The loss of revenue which would follow any large extension resulting from a further concession to tobacco growers would, moreover, far outweigh any saving in foreign exchange.
Mr. VaneIn view of the very large amount of foreign exchange which is now spent on importing tobacco into this country, would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that such concessions as he may make to this body or similar bodies should at least be reasonable? Does not he really think that the present concession, 719 which allows growers to have up to 25 lb. per head per annum cured without payment of duty and at the same time prevents these bodies from shredding tobacco—which is a difficult thing to do at home—is really very unreasonable and is worthy of review?
§ Mr. SpeakerThis is an argument and not a question asking for information.
§ Mr. GaitskellI should have thought the hon. Member could have seen from the answer I gave to his original Question that I did not think that the practice of the Government was the least unreasonable in this matter. It is a question of drawing the line somewhere. We have given a large and substantial concession amounting in value to something like £70 per head, and I do not think we should go beyond that.