PLOUGHING GRANTS SCHEME, 1953 (Hansard, 17 June 1953)

§ THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES (LORD CARRINGTON)
My Lords, this is the third scheme to be made under the Agriculture (Ploughing Grants) Act, 1952, for providing grants for ploughing up grassland. It relates to land ploughed up between 1st June, 1953, and 31st May, 1954. The first part of the scheme, which provides for a grant of £5 per acre for ploughing up grassland which is of at least three years standing, is identical with the corresponding part of the last scheme with the following two exceptions. The first exception is that summer fallowing will be allowed exceptionally. A certain amount of ploughed up grassland, particularly the older grass, can do with more cleaning during the summer, and where the agricultural executive committee considers that this treatment is necessary, permission will be given to postpone cropping; but payment will not be made until a crop is sown. The second exception is that we have thought it proper to tighten up a little the arrangement whereby a farmer is allowed to put the land back to grass, instead of taking a tillage crop. Farmers who wish to re-seed their land to grass have to get a certificate which is given only if re-seeding is the only right course in the interests of good husbandry. Re-seeding has been extended to include grass sown with another grazing crop. One of the main reasons for the scheme is to get more land under tillage; and grass with a grazing crop of rape, for example, can hardly be said to meet that bill.
Part II of the scheme provides for a specially high rate of ploughing grant of £10 per acre. The conditions in this part 1029 of the scheme are, for practical purposes, the same as under the previous £10 per acre scheme. The wording of Part II now makes it clear, however, that where the farmer has incurred considerable expense in cleaning and preparatory work the grant may be paid as soon as the farmer, having done his ploughing, has carried out part of the other operations needed to sow a crop. The committee will be able to arrange this where they are satisfied that the farmer will complete the whole of the work without avoidable delay. In all other respects, this scheme is the same as the last one. Having regard to the fact that these schemes have been successful, I beg to move that this Scheme be approved.

§ EARL JOWITT
My Lords, I wish only to ask the noble Lord one question—I think I have asked it before, and it is owing to my own ignorance that I have to ask it again. What I should like to know is: Do these grants bear income tax or do they not—because it obviously makes a very great difference to the value of the grant to a rich farmer. I just do not know the answer—I ought to know it. Perhaps the noble Lord will tell me.

§ LORD CARRINGTON
I think the grants are treated in exactly the same way as other parts of the farmer's income, but I will check that point and let the noble and learned Earl know.

§ EARL JOWITT
That is to say, they enter into the credit side of the account and, therefore, swell the amount of income tax to be paid. Therefore, if the farmer is earning a considerable profit (as I have heard people say that farmers are, although I have never heard a farmer say that) then, of course, the amount received by the farmer is not very much.

§ LORD CARRINGTON
No. But assuming that I am right, and that these grants are subject to income tax, what we are trying to do in these Schemes is to help the farmer who is not so well off, particularly the farmers on hill farms who cannot afford to do these things. So I think the noble and learned 1030 Earl's objection is not quite so important as may at first be thought.

§ EARL JOWITT
It was not an objection; it was merely that I was seeking information.