§ 6. Mr. Hannamasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will seek to relieve 724 from value added tax adaptations on cars for the disabled.
§ Mr. LawsonI am well aware of my hon. Friend's long-standing interest in this subject, and indeed of his tireless work on behalf of the disabled in general. But I am afraid that, as my hon. and learned Friend the Minister of State has explained previously to my hon. Friend, such a relief could not be justified in the context of a broadly based tax.
§ Mr. HannamDoes my hon. Friend accept that the provision of vehicles for the disabled has been discontinued by the Government and that it is therefore vital that the Motability leasing scheme is successful? Does he accept that one of the main obstacles is not the level of the mobility allowance but the VAT charged on adaptation?
§ Mr. LawsonMy hon. Friend is aware of our concern for the success of the Motability scheme. That is why Motability and similar organisations supplying cars to the disabled are able to deduct input tax on cars bought for leasing. Such input tax is not normally deductible.
§ Mr. Denzil DaviesDoes the Minister agree that the main reason why people are suffering in this way is the increase in VAT from 8 per cent. to 15 per cent? Will the Government reduce the rate of VAT, not only to help the disabled but to reduce prices in general?
§ Mr. LawsonNo, Sir. A reduction in VAT would have to be paid for by an increase in income tax. The vast majority of the British people do not want that.
§ Mr. McQuarrieDoes my hon. Friend realise that the number of people involved in the adaptation of vehicles is minimal? Does he agree that the amount of money involved is such that there is the possibility of the Government doing something about it?
§ Mr. LawsonMy hon. Friend is right. The cost might be small but it is impossible to draw the line there. Similar relief would have to be made in a number of other cases where, in equity, the case is equally compelling.
§ Mr. Edwin WainwrightDoes the Minister realise that his answer will be met with displeasure by all decent people? Will he reconsider this, and look after 725 these poor unfortunate people who are disabled and deserve as much benefit as we can give, although a few might take advantage of it?
§ Mr. LawsonI appreciate the sincerity of the hon. Gentleman's question. Nevertheless, relief for the disabled is more sensibly given through the social security system than through complicated remissions which would damage the integrity of the VAT system and make it difficult to know where to draw the line.