HC Deb 09 April 1963 vol 675 cc1071-3
13. Commander Kerans

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer why Her Majesty's Customs and Excise impose a duty on identi-kits hired from American owners to assist in the detection of crime.

14. Mr. Shinwell

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer why the Durham County Police authority was asked to pay an import duty of £262 7s. 4d. for identi-kits hired from the United States of America; and whether he is aware that identi-kits are used solely for the purpose of detecting crime.

15. Mr. Ainsley

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that the Durham County Police authority had to pay import duty on three identi-kits hired from the United States of America to improve the efficiency of the county police service; and if he will arrange for some remission of this fee by Her Majesty's Customs and Excise Department.

18. Mr. Pentland

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the import duty of £262 7s. 4d. imposed on the Durham County Police authority for the hiring of identi-kits from the United States of America.

19. Mr. Slater

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that the sum of £262 7s. 4d. import duty was charged to the Durham Police authority for the hiring of identi-kits from the United States of America; and if he will seek to have such charges dropped.

Mr. Maudling

I have looked into the question of these identi-kits and decided to remit duty on the importations already made. My right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade is considering whether to recommend a temporary exemptions order to relieve future importations from duty.

Commander Kerans

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for that Answer. I am sure that it will be welcomed. It is in the public interest to grant this relief of duty.

Mr. Shinwell

I too am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for the proposed remission, but may I ask whether he does not think that he should have a word with the Inland Revenue about this foolish imposition, which is quite unnecessary, in view of the need for these devices in order to detect crime?

Mr. Maudling

I must first correct the right hon. Gentleman. This concerns the Customs and Excise, not the Inland Revenue. Secondly, this duty was properly levied, and the Customs had no alternative but to levy it under the law. I have been able to make an extra-statutory concession on this occasion, which it is right to do.

Mr. Ainsley

I had the honour of serving for many years on my county police authority's committee, and I watched it grow from consisting of an isolated village policeman to the efficient force that it is today in detecting national and international crime. We do not propose to accept this additional charge on the police on the advice of the Government, who should accept responsibility for their own inefficiency.

Mr. Maudling

The police authorities have been very efficient in pointing out the difficulties, which I have been able to put right today.

Mr. Pentland

I also welcome the right hon. Gentleman's reply, but, when looking further into this matter, may I ask him to bear in mind that, if heavy import duties are to be imposed on police authorities which wish to hire these articles for maintaining a high standard of crime detection, they will be reluctant—[Interruption.]

Mr. Ellis Smith

The hon. Gentleman is not the Speaker yet.

Mr. Speaker

Order. The exchange of whispered confidences across the Floor of the House makes it very difficult to hear.

Mr. Pentland

As I was saying, Mr. Speaker, if an import duty is imposed on these devices, police authorities will be reluctant to hire them even though it would mean improving the crime detection figures, which is, apparently, the Government's aim.

Mr. Maudling

I should make it clear that the purpose of the Customs duty in protecting British industry would be completely undermined if public authorities could buy what they wanted free of duty. In this case, as these things are not made in the United Kingdom in any case, it seems sensible to remit the duty.

Mr. Slater

Further to the right hon. Gentleman's reply to my right hon. Friend the Member for Easington (Mr. Shinwell), may I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman would agree that the whole question wants looking into? This matter concerns not only police authorities which wish to use these kits, but can be applied to private industry, which has made application to manufacturers in other parts of Europe and has tried to obtain the same facilities as police authorities are trying to obtain, but has had to pay Customs duty. Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the whole problem should be reconsidered?

Mr. Maudling

I do not see why anyone other than the police should want identi-kits.

Mr. Slater

The reason for my supplementary question to the right hon. Gentleman arising from what he had to say to my right hon. Friend the Member for Easington was that this was not only—[HON. MEMBERS: "Question."] Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this applies not only to identi-kits but to the loan facilities afforded to industries desiring to bring certain things into this country but which have been denied the opportunity to do so because of the Customs duties?

Mr. Maudling

That goes a good deal wider than the original Question about identi-kits.