HC Deb 01 November 1966 vol 735 cc64-5W
Mr. Whitaker

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) why the unearned income of dividends is not statutorily treated in the same way as the earned income of wages in the measures taken to freeze incomes;

(2) why dividends were included in the White Paper on Prices and Incomes, but were excluded from the subsequent legislation.

Mr. MacDermot

I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given to my hon. Friend the Member for Derbyshire, South-East (Mr. Park) on 25th October, 1966.

Mr. Whitaker

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what are the names of the 12 companies whose dividends have so far violated the incomes standstill; what was the unjustified percentage increase in each case; and what action he proposes to take against them and against any further company which declines to co-operate voluntarily.

Mr. MacDermot

Details of the twelve companies are as follows:

Company Per cent. dividend
Last Year This Year
Bulex Ltd. 7.50 90.0
Distillers Co. Ltd. 10.42 11.00
Jetinga Valley Tea Co., Ltd. 5.00 10.00
Kinta Kellas Rubber Co., Ltd. 20.83 30.00
London Rubber Co., Ltd. 33.00 35.00
Cyril Lord Ltd. 19.00 22.50
Metal Traders Ltd. 100.00 200.00
David S. Smith Ltd. 12.00 1500
Stewart Plastics Ltd. 25.00 26.00
Stocklake Holdings Ltd. 10.50 12.00
West of England Trust Ltd. 15.00 18.00
Westward Television Ltd. 40.00 50.00

As was stated by my right hon. Friend in reply to my hon. Friend the Member for West Ham, North (Mr. Arthur Lewis) on 20th October, 1966, investigation has established that these increased dividends were paid under a misunderstanding of the precise effect of the standstill policy in their individual cases, and no further action is proposed.