The hon. Member who has just spoken has, in effect, said what I was going to say. The responsibility for this matter is not ours but that of the right hon. Gentleman opposite. Although in some respects it is a small matter in other respects it is a large matter. What is involved is no less than the implication that what we gave to India in the Government of India Act—that great charter, every line and word of which was so carefully considered between us and our Indian colleagues—was not a rock, not something which we offered to India as something by which we should stand, but something which we could amend whenever the shoe pinched, without consulting them and without any consideration of what their wishes might or might not be. It is that aspect of the matter which strikes me as very serious. If it is believed in India that this is the attitude we desire to adopt with regard to the Government of India Act and that we are going to exercise our legal right to amend it without full and adequate consultation with Indian opinion, it does seem to me that the chance of getting everything on a better understanding has been seriously prejudiced.

The excuse in this matter, namely, that income tax must be, and must remain, simply and solely the right and concern of the central body, seems altogether inadequate for this particular course. If that is what you have been doing all you need have said was that you could have passed this Act and made it plain that no tax on employment might impose, under that guise, a tax on income. However, we have made our protest about this; we have made plain the view we hold and we have no desire to put any further difficulties in the way. The responsibility is the Government's and the right hon. Gentleman's opposite and I sincerely hope that the steps which he has taken to-day will not, as I fear they may, prejudice to any degree the happy relations we all desire to see exist between this country and India.