With respect, I was merely observing this fact. One has to be careful and not accept that finance companies should have all the benefits of a hiring company and all the benefits of a money-lending company.

As the hon. Gentleman very fairly observed, this new Clause raises a subject which we have not discussed before and which has not even seen the light of day on the Notice Paper hitherto. Nevertheless, I am always happy to consider any new matters.

As we see it, the new Clause is designed to deal with the situation which could arise under a scheme of hire purchase recently announced by some finance houses. As I understand it, the scheme is to offer transactions where the hire-purchase price exceeds £300, and it is thus not within the scope of the Hire Purchase Acts at present. This will, of course, change when the Bill comes into force and the monetary limit is raised to £2,000. As I understood it, the particular schemes which have given birth to the new Clause have been drawn up so that, in respect of certain payments made by the hirer, the hirer may be able to claim repayment of Income Tax on the amount of interest paid on the loan.

The House will realise that the question whether particular payments are eligible for such tax relief or not is one of general application and not to be dealt with in the Hire Purchase Acts. The purpose of the Hire Purchase Acts is to protect the consumer, and this involves many different provisions regulating the relations between owner and hirer, and covering the dealer or even the guarantor when they come into the picture. The aim in framing legislation of this kind must always be to keep it as simple and as direct as possible, although the complexities of the relationships and situations which must be provided for make this a little difficult. There can be no question of adjusting the law to take account of slightly unusual ways in which particular companies may wish to do business.

In the present case, as I understand it, the concern in question operates, again, in a slightly schizophrenic way. One of its companies makes a loan, another makes the hire-purchase agreement and acts as guarantor of the loan. I recognise that there may be commercial reasons why the companies want to see the Hire Purchase Acts adapted so as to protect themselves if they enter into rather unusual arrangements. But we really cannot change the consumer protection law to take account of situations in which finance houses wish to take advantage of the tax law. If we did, we should have to change the law to take account of other unusual arrangements which other finance houses want to operate.

6.15 p.m.

The law must concern itself with the normal transaction, and the normal transaction is that, whatever has been paid under the agreement on behalf of the hirer, that amount has been paid and it is no concern of the finance house whether the hirer has saved the money out of his salary or wages or has gone off to his uncle or his bank to borrow it. The money has been paid as part of the hire-purchase price, and this will be taken into account if the provisions of Section 4 of the 1938 Act about termination or Section 11 about repossession have to be applied. This is certainly not simething to be interfered with. Finance houses—this applies generally, not only with regard to the scheme I have just mentioned—must plan their arrangements so that they can operate them within the Acts. They cannot expect the Acts to be adjusted to suit them so that they can get the advantage of a tax exemption which, I understand, was designed for a different set of circumstances.

The issues involved here are basically matters of liability to tax arising from the Finance Acts and not from the Hire Purchase Acts. This is not the right Measure in which to deal with matters of tax exemption. If it were decided that the interest element in h.p. charges should be made eligible for tax relief—and the hon. Member, as usual, has put formidable arguments for it—then it should be done by amending the tax law in the next Finance Bill and not by amending the Hire Purchase Acts to fit schemes designed to get within the present eligibility for tax relief.

I understand that some variants of this arrangement could come within the present eligibility for tax relief, but that is a matter for fiscal law and not for us to determine in this Bill or for me to pronounce an opinion on. It would not be proper for me to go into the broader issue the hon. Member raised when he claimed that hire purchase was the poor man's method of getting bank loans and that, if we give tax relief on bank loans to people with the credit to obtain them, we should allow similar relief on h.p. agreements. I do not want to express an opinion one way or the other on that, but if I were a Treasury Minister I would only say, "I cannot anticipate the Chancellor's next Budget."