HC Deb 07 July 1965 vol 715 cc1715-6

Amendment made: In page 20, line 40, after "entire", insert "loss".—[Mr. MacDermot.]

Mr. MacDermot

I beg to move Amendment No. 29, in page 21, line 11, after "structure" to insert: (including in the site any land occupied for purposes ancillary to the use of the building or structure)". This is largely a drafting Amendment to make clear that, when a building is destroyed, the restriction on the loss which may be claimed due to increase in the site value is not limited to the area actually covered by the building but includes any land occupied for use with the building. It is a clarifying Amendment to express more clearly the original intention, and it is to the advantage of the taxpayer.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. MacDermot

I beg to move Amendment No. 30, in page 21, line 13, to leave out subsection (6).

Would it be convenient, Mr. Speaker—I am sorry I did not give you notice of this—to discuss at the same time Amendment No. 83, dealing with the same topic, in Schedule 6?

Mr. Speaker

I do not know. If the House pleases, so be it.

9.30 p.m.

Mr. MacDermot

I am obliged, Mr. Speaker. During the Committee stage hon. Members were concerned to ensure that the Bill made provision for compensation payments for damage to be excluded from the scope of the Capital Gains Tax to the extent that they were ploughed back into the replacement or restoration of the asset in question. This is a matter to which my hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Cheetham (Mr. Harold Lever) referred a moment ago. Of the two Amendments, the first does no more than delete the existing subsection (6) of Clause 22, which lays down a special rule for insurance cases where the insurance is not sufficient to cover the cost of the asset which has been destroyed or damaged.

Mr. Peter Walker

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. The Financial Secretary asked if two Amendments could be taken together. We had not had any notice of this or an opportunity to look at the Amendments. However, on looking at them we prefer that the second one should not be debated at the present moment.

Mr. Speaker

Then let them not be taken together. The House will now deal with Amendment No. 30 only.

Mr. MacDermot

In that case, Mr. Speaker, all I would say is that this is a paving Amendment for Amendment No. 83, the substantive one, which is to make provision for dealing with the situation where compensation moneys are used for the replacement or restoration of an asset.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. MacDermot

I beg to move Amendment No. 31, in page 21, line 36, to leave out "subsection (5) of".

This is also a paving Amendment. It is a drafting point. The Amendment is a paving Amendment for Amendments Nos. 35 and 36 which are for the benefit of the taxpayer.

Amendment agreed to.