§ Mr. Peter MillsI beg to move Amendment No. 16, in page 12, line 9, leave out subsection (6).
This again is an Amendment with which we were concerned in Committee. We 408 feel that the authority should not be burdened with the additional job or expense of determining which officers are employed under which category for levy purposes. The Government wish to split these costs, and we do not think that this is fair. We believe that it is a burden, and that staff and overheads 409 should be treated as general expenses for overheads. We find it difficult to understand why the Government cannot see this and appreciate the difficulties which the authority will experience if it has to split the staff up to determine into which category they come for levy purposes.
This subsection should be deleted. It is impossible for the authority to allocate employees' time and overhead costs either to advertising or to support buying, as suggested in the Clause. If employees are involved in support buying, or in advertising, that should be considered as part of the overall staffing costs of the authority, and therefore part of the administrative expenses.
We should like to hear from the Minister whether this is an unusual policy for this authority. What we are advocating is accepted for other authorities. We shall be interested to hear why the Minister cannot accept the Amendment.
§ Mr. HoyThe purpose of the provision that the hon. Members are seeking to delete is to lay down precisely how the authority is to apportion its administrative costs for the purposes of the levy estimates that they will be required to submit under this Clause. These estimates will need to distinguish between the amounts required for market support, for advertising and for the authority's other non-trading functions respectively. Some method of apportionment of salaries and overhead expenses is therefore necessary.
I can assure hon. Members opposite that the problem of dividing up the time of staff employed on a number of different activities has not, so far as I am aware, presented any special difficulties for other bodies with which my Department is concerned. The method of apportionment for the Eggs Authority laid down in subsection (6) is reasonable and practicable, and I must ask the House to reject the Amendment.
§ Mr. MillsI am not entirely satisfied with that reply. The Minister gave a very hurried explanation. We feel that this is an important point. The Minister did not answer my question whether other authorities have to bear this burden of apportionment. I do not want to press the Amendment, but I would have hoped 410 that the Minister would take this matter more seriously.
§ Mr. HoyThe hon. Member evidently did not understand what I said. I said that the question "has not so far as I am aware presented any special difficulties for other bodies with which my Department is concerned".
§ Amendment negatived.