HC Deb 21 May 1985 vol 79 cc873-8 4.29 pm
Mr. Teddy Taylor (Southend, East)

I beg to move,

That leave be given to bring in a Bill to provide for the elimination of agricultural derating over a five year period.

My Bill would ensure that the agriculture industry pays rates on its buildings like any other industry in the United Kingdom. Because the sum involved is substantial, I propose that reform should be spread over five years.

The fact that agriculture makes no contribution to the costs of local government is an unjustified and grotesque anomaly, which is an insult to many other industries which, in some cases, are struggling to survive under a heavy rates burden that could be reduced if agriculture paid its fair share. If the Treasury adjusted rate support grant to take account of the extra valuations, about £300 million a year would be available for reductions in general taxation.

Agricultural derating was introduced in 1929 as a modest endeavour to alleviate agricultural distress during the great slump when no other means of support was available to the industry. Circumstances have changed dramatically, as I am sure my right hon. Friend the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food will confirm. Rates, which were then a modest burden, have become a major business cost. Farm buildings were modest and unsophisticated in 1929, but the agricultural revolution has resulted in an explosion of expenditure on costly buildings and facilities. Far from reducing or abolishing the concession, however, Parliament extended it in 1971 so that it now applies to what are loosely referred to as factory farming operations such as chicken battery systems and commercial buildings used by farm syndicates and co-operatives. Soon afterwards, case law extended the exemption to fish farming.

I find the continuation of agricultural derating puzzling because every committee set up by the Government to examine the rating system has declared that the exemption is intolerable and unjustified and should be ended. The Layfield commission, which was set up in 1976, expressed the unanimous view that there was no good reason for the concession to continue.

Why has nothing been done about this rating anomaly, which means that all other ratepayers and taxpayers have to bear an unfair burden? Has nothing been done because of administrative problems? That cannot be the answer because our efficient Inland Revenue would have no difficulty making the necessary valuations, because it constantly has to value all types of new buildings between general revaluations.

Has nothing been done because agriculture is especially depressed and vulnerable?

Mr. Robin Maxwell-Hyslop (Tiverton)

Yes.

Mr. Taylor

This does not add up.

Mr. Maxwell-Hyslop

It is both.

Mr. Taylor

My hon. Friend the Member for Tiverton (Mr. Maxwell-Hyslop) must be aware of the principle of rating which is that rates must be paid irrespective of whether businesses are profitable or depressed. I could give him the names of many firms that have great difficulty paying rates. Even if profitability were a factor, the evidence shows that agriculture receives more protection than any other industry.

Mr. Maxwell-Hyslop

No, it does not.

Sir Peter Mills (Torridge and Devon, West)

That is rubbish.

Mr. Taylor

Industry faces foreign competition with a tariff protection of 10 per cent., yet the protection of some commodities exceeds 200 per cent. through import levies. While industry struggles to secure customers, farming in general receives a guarantee that all of its produce will be purchased at a price well above that in the market—

Mr. Maxwell-Hyslop

That is not true.

Mr. Taylor

We spend more than £100 million every week in the Common Market destroying food, dumping it or storing surplus produce that cannot be sold. There is no special case, but even if there were the principle of business rating is that rates are paid irrespective of profitability, as many firms in my constituency and others, including agricultural ones, know to their cost.

Has nothing been done because rating reform is round the corner? Far from being a reason for inaction, the prospect of reform should make us even more determined to set down a marker that the concession should not be written into any new system.

Are we refusing to act because food prices would rise?

Mr. Maxwell-Hyslop

Yes.

Mr. Taylor

Even if that were true, there would be commensurate reductions in the price of other goods as the burden was taken off other industries. Even those who argue the case of agriculture know that farming prices do not reflect costs or the operation of the market because of the Socialist and interventionist price-fixing arrangements of the common agricultural policy.

I believe that there has been no action to remove an anomaly which we all know is a grotesque nonsense and an insult to ratepayers because it would involve putting an additional burden on an industry which has a great deal of friends and political clout and has much sympathy from all of us. That is especially true because the chemical industry is now integrated with agriculture and many City institutions and pension funds have sizeable holdings in the land.

There is a basic theme to the Government's policies — the removal of all unjustified privileges and protections and the eradication of unfair subsidies. Whether it be the mining industry, the car industry or engineering, we must remove unfair privilege and subsidy. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has rightly said that, when considering the future of rates, we should try to ensure that a wider section of the community which benefits from local authority services should contribute to the costs of local government. Agricultural derating is an illogical and unjustified privilege. It runs contrary to natural justice and is terribly unfair to other ratepayers. I hope that the House will cast aside any special interests and ensure that this wholly unjustified privilege is removed.

Mr. Maxwell-Hyslop

Wholly justified.

Mr. Taylor

I am aware from the shouts that, when it comes to voting, I shall be on a rather sticky wicket, but surely justice will prevail in Parliament. I am comforted, amid the scandalous shouts and abuses of procedure, by the knowledge that my cause is just and that, in the last century, it took 15 years of determination in Parliament to repeal the Corn Laws. This is a similar injustice. We should stand up for every ratepayer in Great Britain and treat everyone the same way. We should tell them that Parliament believes in justice and equity.

4.37 pm
Mr. Geraint Howells (Ceredigion and Pembroke, North)

rose

Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Paul Dean)

Does the hon. Gentleman wish to oppose the motion?

Mr. Howells

Yes. I declare my interest as I am involved with the agriculture industry.

I oppose the motion on several grounds. First, rather than produce justice and fair play as the hon. Member for Southend, East (Mr. Taylor) claims, the Bill would merely add to the complexities inherent in the present rating system. We all know that there are many anomalies and unjustices in that system and that we must eventually find a just solution, but why should we add to the confusion by introducing yet another category of rateable property?

The hon. Member has already condemned the whole rating system. I was interested to read an article that he wrote only last March on this very subject.

Sir Peter Mills

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Is the hon. Member for Ceredigion and Pembroke, North (Mr. Howells) speaking on behalf of the Liberal party? If he is, it should be made clear that the Liberal party supports agricultural rating.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

The hon. Gentleman knows that that is not a point of order.

Mr. Howells

Having analysed and dismissed several choices for rating reform, the hon. Gentleman presented his own solution thus: we should sweep away all rates—for householders, industry and commerce—and provide funds for local councils from the Treasury. In this way, he says: we would get rid of all the injustices of rates entirely. Today, however, with this measure the hon. Gentleman is turning his own argument on its head.

The second reason for strong opposition to the measure is that its application would place an unjust burden on the sections of the farming industry that are least able to bear it. What the hon. Gentleman perhaps does not understand is that there is tremendous variety in the agriculture industry, and that some sectors of the industry need to use outbuildings more than other sectors. Therefore, it is not the cereal grower, reputedly at the top end of the financial scale, who is likely to be penalised by additional rates, but the livestock farmer and especially the dairy farmer, who have suffered enough in the last year or so, and who will have to pay heavy bills for essential buildings.

It should also be remembered that the value of the output of agricultural buildings is very low in relation to the capital value of the buildings. This fact would present even more anomalies when comparisons are made with other industries.

I am entirely sympathetic to the concern of the hon. Gentleman for small businesses in particular. Their burden in terms of rates should be given urgent consideration. There is a need to change the system. It is patently in need of reform. However, the answer does not lie in extending the burden to other categories of small business, which include the farmer.

I should like to stress also that the rating of agricultural holdings could well be seen as the thin edge of a dangerous wedge. Many people fear that agricultural land itself would be in danger. I put on record that the Liberal party is against the rating of agricultural land because we do not think that it is right to add to the already high cost of producing food, and our concern, therefore, is just as much for the consumer as it is for the producer. Food is necessary to life, and its production cannot be compared to the production of other commodities and taxed in the same way.

The measure in my view is a retrograde step which merely tinkers with solutions and adds nothing to the serious debate on rating that needs to be considered urgently. Another way must be found of producing a system that is fair and just for all sections of society.

Question put, pursuant to Standing Order,No. 15 (Motions for leave to bring in Bills and nomination of Select Committees at commencement of public business):

The House divided: Ayes 99, Noes 184.

Division No. 214] [4.45 pm
AYES
Archer, Rt Hon Peter Jones, Barry (Alyn & Deeside)
Atkinson, N. (Tottenham) Lamond, James
Beaumont-Dark, Anthony Lewis, Terence (Worsley)
Beckett, Mrs Margaret Litherland, Robert
Bell, Stuart Lloyd, Tony (Stretford)
Benn, Tony Lofthouse, Geoffrey
Bennett, A. (Dent'n & Red'sh) Loyden, Edward
Bermingham, Gerald McCartney, Hugh
Boothroyd, Miss Betty McDonald, Dr Oonagh
Boyes, Roland McKelvey, William
Brown, Gordon (D'f'mline E) McWilliam, John
Brown, Ron (E'burgh, Leith) Marek, Dr John
Caborn, Richard Marshall, David (Shettleston)
Callaghan, Jim (Heyw'd & M) Mason, Rt Hon Roy
Canavan, Dennis Maxton, John
Carter-Jones, Lewis Maynard, Miss Joan
Clark, Dr David (S Shields) Michie, William
Clay, Robert Mikardo, Ian
Clwyd, Mrs Ann Morris, Rt Hon A. (W'shawe)
Corbett, Robin Oakes, Rt Hon Gordon
Cowans, Harry O'Brien, William
Craigen, J. M. O'Neill, Martin
Crowther, Stan Orme, Rt Hon Stanley
Cunningham, Dr John Ottaway, Richard
Davis, Terry (B'ham, H'ge H'I) Park, George
Dixon, Donald Patchett, Terry
Dobson, Frank Pike, Peter
Dubs, Alfred Randall, Stuart
Duffy, A. E. P. Roberts, Ernest (Hackney N)
Eastham, Ken Robertson, George
Edwards, Bob (W'h'ampt'n SE) Robinson, G. (Coventry NW)
Evans, John (St. Helens N) Sedgemore, Brian
Faulds, Andrew Sheerman, Barry
Fields, T. (L'pool Broad Gn) Sheldon, Rt Hon R.
Fisher, Mark Short, Mrs R.(W'hampt'n NE)
Flannery, Martin Skinner, Dennis
Forrester, John Smith, C.(lsl'ton S & F'bury)
Fraser, J. (Norwood) Snape, Peter
Garrett, W. E. Soley, Clive
George, Bruce Spearing, Nigel
Gilbert, Rt Hon Dr John Straw, Jack
Godman, Dr Norman Taylor, Teddy (S'end E)
Griffiths, Peter (Portsm'th N) Thorne, Stan (Preston)
Hamilton, W. W. (Central Fife) Tinn, James
Harrison, Rt Hon Walter Wareing, Robert
Haynes, Frank Weetch, Ken
Heffer, Eric S. Winnick, David
Home Robertson, John
Hughes, Dr. Mark (Durham) Tellers for the Ayes:
Hughes, Robert (Aberdeen N) Mr. Richard Shepherd and
Hughes, Roy (Newport East) Mr. Jonathan Aitken.
Hughes, Sean (Knowsley S)
NOES
Alexander, Richard Fox, Marcus
Alison, Rt Hon Michael Franks, Cecil
Amess, David Freud, Clement
Ancram, Michael Gale, Roger
Arnold, Tom Gardner, Sir Edward (Fylde)
Ashdown, Paddy Garel-Jones, Tristan
Atkins, Robert (South Ribble) Glyn, Dr Alan
Beggs, Roy Goodhart, Sir Philip
Benyon, William Gorst, John
Biffen, Rt Hon John Gower, Sir Raymond
Biggs-Davison, Sir John Greenway, Harry
Blackburn, John Grist, Ian
Bonsor, Sir Nicholas Grylls, Michael
Boscawen, Hon Robert Gummer, John Selwyn
Bottomley, Mrs Virginia Hamilton, Hon A. (Epsom)
Boyson, Dr Rhodes Hancock, Mr. Michael
Braine, Rt Hon Sir Bernard Hargreaves, Kenneth
Brandon-Bravo, Martin Harris, David
Brinton, Tim Haselhurst, Alan
Bruce, Malcolm Hawksley, Warren
Bryan, Sir Paul Hayhoe, Barney
Buchanan-Smith, Rt Hon A. Hayward, Robert
Buck, Sir Antony Henderson, Barry
Burt, Alistair Hind, Kenneth
Butcher, John Holland, Sir Philip (Gedling)
Carlisle, John (N Luton) Holt, Richard
Carlisle, Rt Hon M. (W'ton S) Hordern, Peter
Cartwright, John Howarth, Gerald (Cannock)
Cash, William Howell, Ralph (N Norfolk)
Chapman, Sydney Howells, Geraint
Churchill, W. S. Hughes, Simon (Southwark)
Clark, Hon A. (Plym'th S'n) Hunt, David (Wirral)
Clark, Sir W. (Croydon S) Irving, Charles
Clarke, Rt Hon K. (Rushcliffe) Jackson, Robert
Clegg, Sir Walter Johnson Smith, Sir Geoffrey
Coombs, Simon Jopling, Rt Hon Michael
Cope, John Kellett-Bowman, Mrs Elaine
Crouch, David Kennedy, Charles
Currie, Mrs Edwina Kershaw, Sir Anthony
Dicks, Terry Key, Robert
Dunn, Robert King, Rt Hon Tom
Durant, Tony Kirkwood, Archy
Dykes, Hugh Knight, Gregory (Derby N)
Edwards, Rt Hon N. (P'broke) Lang, Ian
Eyre, Sir Reginald Latham, Michael
Fenner, Mrs Peggy Lawler, Geoffrey
Fookes, Miss Janet Leigh, Edward (Gainsbor'gh)
Forsyth, Michael (Stirling) Lennox-Boyd, Hon Mark
Lester, Jim Renton, Tim
Lewis, Sir Kenneth (Stamf'd) Ridley, Rt Hon Nicholas
Lightbown, David Rowe, Andrew
Lloyd, Peter, (Fareham) Rumbold, Mrs Angela
Lord, Michael Sainsbury, Hon Timothy
Luce, Richard Shaw, Giles (Pudsey)
McCurley, Mrs Anna Shaw, Sir Michael (Scarb')
MacGregor, John Shepherd, Colin (Hereford)
MacKay, John (Argyll & Bute) Silvester, Fred
Maclean, David John Sims, Roger
Maclennan, Robert Skeet, T. H. H.
Major, John Smith, Cyril (Rochdale)
Malins, Humfrey Smith, Tim (Beaconsfield)
Malone, Gerald Soames, Hon Nicholas
Marland, Paul Spicer, Michael (S Worcs)
Mather, Carol Stern, Michael
Maude, Hon Francis Stewart, Andrew (Sherwood)
Mawhinney, Dr Brian Stewart, Ian (N Hertf'dshire)
Maxwell-Hyslop, Robin Stradling Thomas, J.
Meadowcroft, Michael Thatcher, Rt Hon Mrs M.
Mellor, David Thomas, Rt Hon Peter
Merchant, Piers Thompson, Donald (Calder V)
Meyer, Sir Anthony Thornton, Malcolm
Mills, Sir Peter (West Devon) Tracey, Richard
Mitchell, David (NW Hants) van Straubenzee, Sir W.
Monro, Sir Hector Vaughan, Sir Gerard
Moore, John Waddington, David
Morrison, Hon C. (Devizes) Wakeham, Rt Hon John
Morrison, Hon P. (Chester) Waldegrave, Hon William
Moynihan, Hon C. Walden, George
Neale, Gerrard Wall, Sir Patrick
Nelson, Anthony Wallace, James
Neubert, Michael Walters, Dennis
Onslow, Cranley Watson, John
Osborn, Sir John Watts, John
Owen, Rt Hon Dr David Wells, Bowen (Hertford)
Page, Richard (Herts SW) Wheeler, John
Patten, J. (Oxf W & Abdgn) Wiggin, Jerry
Pawsey, James Wigley, Dafydd
Pollock, Alexander Winterton, Mrs Ann
Porter, Barry Wrigglesworth, Ian
Prentice, Rt Hon Reg Young, Sir George (Acton)
Price, Sir David
Proctor, K. Harvey Tellers for the Noes:
Raff an, Keith Mr. A. J. Beith and
Rathbone, Tim Mr. David Penhaligon.

Question accordingly negatived.