§ 3. Mr. Hollandasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what would be the loss in revenue if all rates of Surtax were halved.
§ Sir E. BoyleOn the basis of last year's Budget estimate £95 million.
§ Mr. HollandWithout prejudice to anything which may or may not appear in the Budget statement of my right hon. and learned Friend, may I ask my hon. Friend whether he thinks that a reduction in this high level of Surtax might help to encourage the development of maximum efficiency in the sphere of technology and management?
§ Sir E. BoyleI had better not say what I think on that subject at present.
§ 26. Mr. Emrys Hughesasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make arrangements to ascertain how many underground workers in the mining industry pay Surtax.
§ Sir E. BoyleI do not think that a special inquiry for this purpose would be justified.
§ Mr. Emrys HughesWhy not? Should we not be armed with these figures in order to see how many of our constituents are likely to benefit if the rate of Surtax is reduced?
§ Sir E. BoyleNo, Sir. With respect, the hon. Gentleman is falling into the old Marxist fallacy that labour power is the sole source of value. We shall not earn our living in the world unless we not only extract things but manufacture and also sell them, and I think 596 that a special inquiry of this kind would not be worth while.
§ Mr. MilneWhen the right hon. and learned Gentleman is ascertaining these figures, will he bear in mind the contribution that the mining community makes to the nation, and see that there is an improvement in any position that he does discover?
§ 30. Mr. Shinwellasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what are his proposals for raising the starting point for the imposition of Surtax to £6,000.
§ Sir E. BoyleI cannot express a view on this proposal before the Budget.
§ Mr. ShinwellDoes that mean that the hon. Gentleman is reluctant to agree with the proposal that has been made in this connection? Does he realise that his reply will come as a shock in certain quarters of the House, but that I would regard the reluctance of the Treasury to proceed in this undesirable direction as a unique example of its intelligence and commonsense?
§ Sir E. BoyleThat is very flattering, indeed, but, while we all respect the hon. Member for Bosworth (Mr. Wyatt), he is not Chancellor of the Exchequer.