That will be satisfactory, Mr. Blackburn.

The purpose of the Amendment is to enable a mutual trading concern, if I may use that phrase, which has had the misfortune to trade at a loss over the years to carry forward its losses into the period when it will be taxed. I cannot see that there is any inherent vice or mischief which the Amendment would promote because any mutual trading concern which wanted to use its position for the avoidance of tax would hardly be likely retrospectively in the past to have run up losses. The only vice I can see—and I cannot think that it is a real one; although, in any case, it could be guarded against—is that if the losses were carried forward there would, theoretically, be the possibility of a mutual trading concern which happened by chance to have a record of losses converting them on transfer to something tangible.

However, that could be provided against and, as against that possible loophole, the circumstances I have in mind seem to be compellingly and overwhelmingly in favour of the Amendment which arises out of a particular case in Liverpool involving what I can only describe as a semi-charitable concern, founded for the promotion of travel among youths. The directors are all voluntary, with the exception of one full-time executive. It is open to receiving donations and subscriptions, but finds itself in the unhappy position of having run up substantial losses in the past six years. The concern is getting on its feet but apprehends that it is a mutual trading concern within the meaning of the Clause.

The concern intended, until the Clause was brought forward, to recoup its cumulative losses by a more realistic rate charge to its members, but it will take two or three times as long to do that if the Amendment is not accepted. It may be that it is not a mutual trading concern, but that is a matter yet to be decided. Any concern which finds itself in the circumstances I have described should, in equity, be allowed to bring forward its losses, which could not have been anything but genuinely incurred.

If this concern had been taxed over the past six years it would have been able to bring its losses in, and I cannot see why, because by chance it happens to be taxed in this year, it should be deprived of the benefits and advantages it would have had had it been subject to tax in the past. I hope that the Financial Secretary will look at this matter seriously because although the wording may contain unsuspected defects the intention of the Amendment is clear.

Amendment No. 43 is even more minor and I will not delay the Committee over it. It is intended to give to mutual trading concerns which are brought into the tax charge for the first time the benefit of the commencing provisions applicable to new concerns. It is clear that once a mutual trading concern is brought in it will, sooner or later, when it comes to a natural end, have to be met by the Revenue with the cessation provisions. Therefore, the option conferred by the commencing provisions is designed to be provided by Amendment No. 43.

If the concern preferred to go into liquidation and start again it would get the benefit of the commencing provisions. I do not think that any particular vice or mischief can be occasioned. This would be a marginal advantage to certain mutual trading concerns. It is equitable and I hope that my hon. Friend will either accept the Amendment or consider it in the spirit in which it is moved.