Peace Tax (Hansard, 26 March 1986)

I beg to move,

That leave he given to bring in a Bill to allow people to withhold that portion of their tax which is at present spent on arms and related purposes, and to facilitate the payment by them of sums so withheld to peaceful non-governmental purposes. Early this morning I went to Gloucester prison for the release of Arthur Windsor, an old age pensioner who is not a criminal but could more aptly be described as a prisoner of conscience. He was sent to prison for refusing to pay a tax demand for about £100 to the Inland Revenue on the ground that he had strongly held conscientious objections to the financing of warfare.

Mr. Windsor is not a tax dodger. He tried to make the payment to the National Health Service or the Overseas Development Administration, but the cheques were returned. As a result, he became the first conscientious objector to be gaoled in this country since conscription ended more than a quarter of a century ago.

Way back in 1916, during the first world war, Parliament gave statutory recognition to the rights of conscientious objectors who wished to opt out of military service. Today, in the nuclear age, we have a different type and scale of warfare. Because of the possibility—indeed, the probability—of indiscriminate annihilation if nuclear warfare ever comes to pass, there are strong grounds for arguing that recognition of the right of conscientious objection should be extended to those who have strongly held conscientious objections to financing warfare through taxation.

The annual budget of the Ministry of Defence is about £18 billion, much of which is spent on weapons of war and mass destruction. Many people strongly object to the fact that when millions of people in the Third world face starvation, this country alone proposes to spend £10,000 million of taxpayers' money on the Trident nuclear weapon.

§ Mr. Canavan

My Bill proposes the establishment of a peace fund. Individuals would have the right to assign part of their tax to peace-building projects financed through the peace fund. I do not propose any new tax or any net increase or decrease in taxation. If a person chose to register his or her conscientious objection to the financing of warfare through taxation, the Treasury would make an appropriate payment for that person into a peace fund.

Under my proposals, the normal payment would be the average individual contribution to the defence budget. As I said earlier, the total defence budget is about £18 billion per year; the electorate is about 40 million. If we divide the first figure by the second, we get an amount of £450 per annum. That is how much the average person contributes to the budget of the Ministry of Defence. Under my proposals, therefore, an individual would have the right to demand that the Treasury paid up to £450 per annum into the peace fund rather than to the MOD budget.

The peace fund would be administered by trustees whose appointment would be subject to parliamentary approval and who would be accountable to Parliament. The trustees would have to present an annual report to Parliament. The peace fund would be disbursed for peace-building programmes—for example, by payments to 950 voluntary agencies working in the Third world such as OXFAM, Christian Aid, the Catholic Fund for Overseas Development, the Scottish Catholic International Aid Fund, and War on Want.

Some Conservative Members may say, "Wait a minute; this might create a dangerous precedent. It would open the doors for all sorts of people who object to various items of Government expenditure and would encourage them to withhold their taxes." It would be ironic if a party which supposedly believes in the freedom of the individual were to deny the freedom of an individual in this case.

I argue more strongly that my Bill creates no precedent; it simply follows the precedent which was enacted in the 1916 legislation, when Parliament gave statutory recognition to those who have conscientious objections to military service. If it is morally wrong to kill people, it is also morally wrong to pay other people to do the killing or to pay for the weapons which kill. The horrific, indiscriminate nature of modern warfare, particularly nuclear warfare, reinforces the conscientious objections of those who feel that the taxation system conscripts them into paying for the most destructive and evil war machine in which this country has ever been involved.

Many people have strong moral objections to participating in such a crime against humanity. My Bill would give them the right to transfer some resources from warmongering to peace-building. My Bill is a humane and sensible extension of the rights of conscience. Therefore, I ask all hon. Members to support it. Perhaps not everyone will agree with the pacifist ideals of people such as Arthur Windsor, but nobody can doubt the strength of his conviction and the sincerity of his beliefs. British history books contain many examples of extra-parliamentary campaigns by people who had the courage of their convictions to stand up and be counted; at times they resorted even to civil disobedience and as a result were gaoled for their beliefs before this House eventually responded to their legitimate demands for a change in the law. Arthur Windsor has joined that list of brave people. I ask the House to salute his courageous example by supporting my Bill.