HC Deb 15 May 1962 vol 659 cc1263-4

Question proposed, That this be the Second Schedule to the Bill.

Mr. Mitchison

Has the Economic Secretary discovered this important piece of information in the very short time he allowed himself for the purpose?

Mr. Barber

I have been thinking about it, but it is difficult to be quite clear what the reason may be, although I shall continue to ponder the matter. I hope that I may be able to give the hon. and learned Member the answer. The drawback rate on home-produced beer exceeds the excise rate, as he pointed out, by 2d. per 36 gallons, and these rates remain unchanged. I think that he will agree that on an occasion when we are merely consolidating the regulator apart from making certain administrative improvements and also dealing with the position under the E.F.T.A. agreements, this is fairly satisfactory.

Mr. Mulley

I wonder whether I can help the Economic Secretary? Can he explain why the drawback from the Excise rate is more than the duty, but on the Customs duty it is less? It seems a rather curious thing although we are apparently following tradition. If these mistakes have been made over the years that might be a good reason for putting them right now.

Mr. Barber

I have just realised that the answer I gave to an earlier question deals with the question of drawback. This is one of those examples where Customs and Excise insist on certain stringent restrictions on the brewers and because of this there is a 2d. difference between the ordinary rate and the rate of drawback. This is a measure of the additional burden put upon them because of the stringent conditions under which they have to work. If the hon. and learned Member for Kettering (Mr. Mitchison) is challenging it, it might be a great embarrassment to E.F.T.A., because this is an advantage to British brewers.

Question put and agreed to.

Schedule agreed to.

Third and Fourth Schedules agreed to.