Mr John Thomas: Back to1939.
Mr John Thomas: The hon. Member should not make a statement of that kind without producing the facts. I happen to know something about distributive costs. Before making that statement the hon. Member should provide us with the facts of both that industry and others.
Mr John Thomas: I am trying to follow my hon. Friend's argument and the case he is making out, and I find myself in a certain amount of sympathy with what he is saying. It is no use, however, quoting what is the percentage increase on the costs, unless the hon. Member also quotes the costs of distribution borne by the distributors. I can assure him that these costs in the large majority of cases will bear...
Mr John Thomas: Will the hon. Gentleman tell the House who has been responsible for the present state of affairs in the Lancashire cotton industry, and will he agree that those who own and control the industry at the present time resent, and have resented, any interference from outside?
Mr John Thomas: Before the hon. Gentleman leaves that point will he answer this question. He says that output can be increased by 30 per cent. by the introduction of time and motion study. I think that he should tell the House whether he means the Government or the Board of Trade to introduce these methods, or does he accept the fact that they are and should be the responsibility of the owners?
Mr John Thomas: I did not ask the hon. Gentleman what should be done. I asked him whether he thought that it was the responsibility of the owners to put into administration time and motion study, or whether he wanted a Government Department to put it in for them.
Mr John Thomas: A few minutes ago, I put two questions to the hon. Member, and his only reply was "I am coming to that." Would he not answer my question by saying "Yes" or "No"?
Mr John Thomas: Surely, the hon. Gentleman is not putting the argument that, in order to compare the advantages or disadvantages of nationalisation, he would make a comparison between two different industries? Surely, there can be no comparison?
Mr John Thomas: asked the Minister of Labour what is the number of men and women registered as unemployed with the employment exchanges in the Dover constituency; and what proportion of these men are disabled miners suffering from silicosis.
Mr John Thomas: Is my right hon. Friend aware that I must have some doubts about that figure, because there are hundreds of silicosis cases in my constituency, and these men could and should be absorbed into full employment.
Mr John Thomas: Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will give us some reference to where that directive is contained, as I am quite sure that many Members of the Committee are quite ignorant of it?
Mr John Thomas: I asked the hon. Member for the information which he has. In answering my question, he referred to Surtax. I am not concerned with Surtax. He states that there will be a Surtax equal to 25 per cent. on companies going into liquidation. I ask him to give us the regulation, and not the understanding. A Government official cannot impose a tax by an understanding. Will he give us that regulation?
Mr John Thomas: Mr. J. R. Thomas rose——
Mr John Thomas: On a point of Order. Is the hon. Gentleman in Order in discussing the retrospective effect of this tax, which, as I understand it, has already been dealt with on an Amendment on which a Division was taken?
Mr John Thomas: It has been discussed.
Mr John Thomas: I certainly did laugh, because the hon. Member must know full well that companies are not allowed to put any sort of expenditure in their revenue accounts. Revenue accounts are subject to inspection by tax inspectors. They will be watched.
Mr John Thomas: What about capital profits?
Mr John Thomas: What the hon. Member said was capital expenditure. I corrected him and asked what about capital profits, realised capital profits?
Mr John Thomas: Would my right hon. Friend say whether the professional fees of the advertising agents are included, or whether the professional fees of such agents will be allowed?
Mr John Thomas: I would like to deal with one or two points raised by the Chancellor, and first with arrears of taxation, referred to in the Report of the Public Accounts Commutes. I suggest that a good deal of responsibility for the arrears rests in delay on the part of the Revenue in reaching agreed assessments. Some of the arrears could be got in much more quickly if there were a speed-up in that respect....
