is. Tax Off a Month After Fuel Rationing Ends
Page 58
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Oil Duty Bill Passed by Commons: Hauliers Need 80 Per Cent. of Normal Fuel Supplies
AN undertaking that the extra Is. fuel tax wilt be rescinded a month after the end of rationing was given, after much pressure in the House of Commons, by the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, Mr. Harry Brooke, during the committee stage, last week, of the Hydrocarbon Oil Duties (Temporary Increase) Bill
The Bill had an uneasy passage, under fire from many Tories as well as from the Labour Party. One after another, Conservative Members who had demanded a time limit to the tax to be written into the Bill, had threatened to move such amendments themselves.
In fact, the initiative was finally taken by Mr. Gordon-Walker (Lab., Smethwick) by giving the Government an opportunity of making their position . clear. He moved an amendment to end operation of the Bill on April 5.
Pressure on Treasury It brought in Sir Robert Cary. (C., Withington) asking whether, if the Government succeeded in resolving the crisis by the beginning of March, they will want to give the Treasury power to continue to impose the tax until April 5—time of the Budget—or even later? He suggested that the Government should consider making it clear that the duty would be taken off as soon as practicable after the end a the fuel shortage.
Mr. Brooke would not accept the amendment because, he said, no one could say that the end of the financial year would in fact have any definite relation to the end of fuel rationing. It might end before or after. But he had been impressed by the arguments put forward on the second reading that there was nothing in the Bill itself to identify the word temporary" with any particular date.
Government Promise
He was willing to write into the Bill a provision which, although it did not alter the power of the Treasury to bring the additional duty to an end at any time, would ensure that, even if the Treasury took no action at all, the duty would terminate one month after the end of rationing.
Mr. Gordon-Walker's amendment was negatived_
An attempt was made by the Opposition to have dery exempted from the new tax. It was an amendment moved by Mr. Bottornley (Lab., Rochester). who urged that any additional cost for industry would cause problems. British Road Services and private hauliers had already applied a 71-per-cent. surcharge to their rates. More than 75 per cent. of public service vehicles now used derv. The tax had its effects on bus services and they in turn influenced costs in industry and other services.
824 FROM OUR PARLIAMENTAR1 CORRESPONDENT
Mr. Rees-Davies (C., Isle of Thanet), president of the National Conference of Road Transport Clearing Houses, said long-distance hauliers were deeply anxious about the effects of fuel rationing: All engaged in the industry were anxious that their position should be understood by the Government, so that there was a clear distinction between their position and that of the C-licence holders, who did not live by fuel alone. About 80 per cent, of all the Aand Blicence holders were users entirely of oil fuel.
One trading concern, who had 27 vehicles all using derv, had a monthly consumption of 11,935 gallons. They would have to carry a further burden of £600 a month with the increase in tax. But under rationing they now got 331 gallons weekly, so that the total basic allocation was 5,296 gallons, representing about 14 days' supply. Whether they could stand the burden of this additional tax or not depended on the attitude adopted by the other Ministries.
Saving Haulage Industry There was only one thing that could save the road haulage industry from ending in Carey Street in the next six months—at any rate, the private hauliers. Unless the hauliers could get approximately 80 per cent, of their ,normal fuel needs, they would be immediately facing a severe loss. Some of their losses, said Mr. Rees-Davies, could be cushioned by not having to pay the additional tax.
He urged the Government to give most careful consideration to any measure "that will ensure these men,
who in many eases have only recently invested capital in this business as a result of the active and right policy of the Government, shall have 'the Government's support and shall be given some hope that they will not have to carry this additional burden as well."
Mr. Brooke replied that the amendment would create a switch from petrol to derv. To give an artificial preference of this kind would run counter to a wise fuel policy for this country. They would find the pressure of demand on supply more and more keen in the case of dery than of petrol. It would be unwise to accelerate by artificial means a more rapid increase in the use of oil-engined vehicles.
The amendment was defeated by 239 votes to 192.
"Exempt Buses"
Mr. E. Davies (Lab., Enfield, E.) moved an amendment to give exemption from the tax to public-service vehicles. Many undertakings were, he said, already in financial troubles and had been proposing to raise their fares even before the tax went up. This, with increased charges by the oil companies, would further add to the difficulties. By exempting buses and coaches from the extra tax, a considerable inflationary process would he avoided.
Mr. Brooke replied—"Impracticable." It would set up repercussions that would cost the Treasury considerably more than the £4m. which Mr. Davies had estimated.
The amendment was defeated by 233 votes to 187.
The clause providing that the extra tax was to he ended a month after rationing finished was moved by Mr. Brooke and approved by the House. It allowed Mr. Gordon-Walker to remark, for the Opposition, that the new clause made it all the more urgent that rationing should be brought to an end at the first possible moment,
Dislocation
On the third reading, Mr. E. Davies said that in view of the dislocation and inconvenience that the increase in tax would bring about, and as the Budget surplus was expected to be considerable. was the Bill necessary?
As bus operators could fix their own fares to compensate for increased fuel tax, there was a danger that this new freedom given to private-enterprise operators would mean their imposing the incidence of the increased fares in precisely those places where in the past they had been prevented from doing so by the Traffic Commissioners. There was a danger that workmen's fares would be brought to an end.
The Bill, he said, was a "most unintelligent way" of attempting to deal with the serious economic consequences of Suez in a trivial way, .
Sir Robert Cary said he did not think the difficulties of the industry were being realized by the House.
The Bill was given a third reading • by 284 votes to 246.