§ 3.10 p.m.
§ LORD SANDFORDMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government what amount of revenue they expect to raise by the application of the selective employment tax to those employed in charities and what arrangements they have in mind for assisting the charities to maintain their services to the community.]
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, I must say that I am disappointed that the noble Lord is not sitting on the front Bench because I wanted to congratulate him and welcome him to what is sometimes regarded as the unholy alliance of the Whips. But having said that, may I say that I regret that I cannot add to what I said on this matter on Tuesday.
§ LORD SANDFORDMy Lords, while thanking the noble Lord for those gracious remarks, which almost, but not completely, disarmed me, may I go on to say that although what he said—
§ LORD SANDFORDMy Lords, while thanking the noble Lord for that reply which does not go beyond what he said on Tuesday, and while welcoming it as a step forward since the First Secretary of State's last remarks on this matter some ten days ago, and while hoping still that we may hear a complete repentence in due course, may I go on to ask him three further questions? First, how is it that when the Government were working out this selective employment tax and considering exemptions—for example, the central Government, the Armed Services, the schools, the National Health Service, the Post Office, local government and the water boards—they overlooked this large sector of the social services comprising the charities? Secondly, now that they have been made aware of the problems of the charities, when may we expect to have the benefit of the Government's conclusions in this matter? Thirdly, is the noble Lord aware that if the Labour Party are not careful, 1085 if they are not quick, they will brand themselves as a Party which, as soon as they received a mandate from the electorate, embarked on a fiscal policy that will have the direct effect of reducing Voluntary Service Overseas, cutting help for the refugees—meaning that fewer children are adopted—cutting back the efficiency of the lifeboat service, and so on? I cannot believe that is what they want to see.
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, I welcome the noble Lord, but, in view of the manner in which he put his supplementary question, I cannot suggest that he would set a very good example as a Whip to the noble Lords opposite. In the first place, we did not overlook the position of the charities. As to when we may expect a statement, may I correct the noble Lord? What I said on Tuesday, as he will see if he reads very carefully what I said, was not that it was a step forward. It was very much in line with what the Chief Secretary said some time ago. But any news, good or bad, will obviously be included in the Ministry of Labour Bill when it is introduced in another place. In regard to branding ourselves—well, I suppose that is a matter of opinion.
§ LORD LINDGRENMy Lords, when considering this matter will the Government consider the relationship between administrative expenses and the amount of money that actually goes to the various charities?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, I would suggest that that is rather a wider aspect of the subject that is before us.
LORD GRENFELLMy Lords, in view of the wonderful work charities do in this country, would the Minister indicate the type of charity at which this tax is aimed? That is a straightforward question, and I should like a straightforward answer.
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, the answer is, "No".
§ THE EARL OF DUNDEEMy Lords, is it the opinion of the Government that the charities are hoarding labour, and that it would be in the national interest that people employed in charities should be forced by this tax to go into industry and make "one-armed bandits"?
§ LORD WADEMy Lords, if, as I understand is the case, farmers are to be called on to pay this tax and will then have it reimbursed, may I ask the noble Lord whether he will suggest to his right honourable friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer that he should adopt a similar policy towards charities; or, better still, save the time of officials by exempting charities altogether?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, I am quite prepared to answer, but I think that I dealt with this subject pretty fully on Tuesday. I take all the points that have been made, and, as I said on Tuesday, I will see that they are submitted to my right honourable friend. But I think I should point out, quite fairly and frankly, that I am not, nor is any other Minister in this House, a Minister within the orbit of the Chancellor of the Exchequer or the finance houses. All we can do here is to take the notes. I think it would be wrong for us to be pressed as some noble Lords think that we should be pressed.