HC Deb 16 July 1909 vol 7 cc2468-77

(1) Where any minimum rate of wages has been fixed by a Trade Board, but is not for the time being obligatory under an order of the Board of Trade made in pursuance of this Act, the minimum rate shall have a limited operation as follows:—

  1. (a) In all cases to which the minimum rate is applicable an employer shall, in the absence of a written agreement to the contrary, pay to the person employed wages at not less than the minimum rate, and in the absence of any such agreement, the person employed may recover wages at such a rate from the employer;
  2. (b) Any employer may give written notice to the Trade Board by whom the minimum rate has been fixed, that he is willing that that rate should be obligatory on him, and in that case he shall be under the same obligation to pay wages to the person employed at not less than the minimum rate and be liable to the same fine for not doing so, as he would be if an Order of the Board of Trade were in force making the rate obligatory; and
  3. (c) No contract involving employment to which the minimum rate is applicable shall be given by a Government Department or local authority to any employer unless he has given notice to the Trade Board in accordance with the foregoing provision.

Provided that in case of any public emergency the Board of Trade may by Order, to the extent and during the period named in the Order, suspend the operation of this provision as respects contracts for any such work being done or to be done on behalf of the Crown as is specified in the Order.

(2) A Trade Board shall keep a register of any notices given under this section:

The register shall be open to public inspection without payment of any fee, and shall be evidence of the matters stated therein:

Any copy purporting to be certified by the secretary of the Trade Board or any officer of the Trade Board authorised for the purposes to be a true copy of any entry in the register shall be admissible in evidence without further proof.

Mr. CARLILE

I beg to move to omit Clause 8. Under Clause 5 it is provided that "Upon the expiration of six months from the date on which a Trade Board have given public notice of any minimum time-rate or general minimum piece-rate finally fixed by them, the Board of Trade shall make an Order (in this Act referred to as an Obligatory Order) making that minimum rate obligatory in cases in which it is applicable on all persons employing labour and on all persons employed, unless they are of opinion that the circumstances are such as to make it premature or otherwise undesirable to make an Obligatory Order, and in that case they shall make an Order suspending the obligatory operation of the rate (in this Act referred to as an Order of suspension)." I would point out Clause 8 provides for a limited operation in certain circumstances in "where any minimum rate of wages has been fixed by a Trade Board, but is not for the time being obligatory under an Order of the Board of Trade made in pursuance of this Act." Why should the minimum rate of wages be held to operate at all before the Board of Trade has made it obligatory? That seems to be a curious position in which to place the suggested rate of wages. If the rate is not made obligatory, it is put into a sort of uncertain position which cannot fail to act prejudicially to the industry concerned. It is most important that the workpeople in any trade should feel that the rate of wages which is being paid is that which is recognised under this measure, or, on the other hand, that the question of wages is one which is absolutely open to be arranged between themselves and the employers. On these grounds, I think there is no necessity to put in a clause dealing with a rate of wages which is not actually obligatory, but to which, at the same time, employers are, to some extent, amenable. Is an employer to have a written agreement between himself and every individual workman, or is he merely to put up a schedule of prices under which he proposes to remunerate the workpeople? On the other hand, if he accepts the proposed rate, he is to be liable to certain pains and penalties in connection with it. I think it would be much better that there should be no question of dealing with the rate of wages until the Board of Trade have approved of it, and once that has been done of course employers and employed alike would come under the operation of the Bill.

Mr. T. L. CORBETT

I beg to second the Amendment.

Mr. CHURCHILL

The omission of this clause would destroy the whole principle of the Bill. The principle is that there shall be an instrument by which we may endeavour to rally all employers who pay good wages to the side of the minimum wage. Then it is hoped by their pressure to induce others to accept that standard. When it finally comes to a case of the minimum rate being made obligatory by an Order, the Board of Trade will be able to proceed more effectively if they have the support of those employers who have paid not less than the minimum rate when it was in limited operation. We attach the greatest importance to the clause. The hon. Member for the St. Albans Division (Mr. Carlile) was a Member of the Grand Committee, and he did not give us the advantage of this suggestion when the Bill was before that Committee.

Mr. CARLILE

I am not aware that all the Amendments proposed to-day were considered by the Committee upstairs. I beg leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. H. H. MARKS

May I ask whether I can now move the Amendment of which I have given notice on Clause 8?

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER (Mr. Caldwell)

It is not in order in its present form on this clause, which deals with the limited operation of the minimum rate, which has not been made obligatory. It would have been in order on Clause 6, but the hon. Member did not move it.

Mr. H. H. MARKS

Before deciding as to the way in which it was to be moved, I consulted Mr. Speaker, and he subsequently suggested that it would be in order on Clause 8.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER

I cannot say anything about that. It was quite in order on Clause 6, and I called on the hon. Member to move it. He did not avail himself of the opportunity of moving it then, and as it stands on the Paper dealing with minimum rate, which has been made obligatory, it is not in order on Clause 8.

Mr. H. H. MARKS

May I point out that when you called this Amendment to Clause 6 I stated it was an error to have put it on the Paper under Clause 6, and that I intended to move it under Clause 8.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER

I did not deal with the matter in reference to Clause 8 at that point. I subsequently examined the Amendment in reference to Clause 8, and found that in the form in which it is on the Paper the Amendment is not in order under Clause 8.

Mr. GOULDING

When my hon. Friend rose the first time Clause 8 had not been put to the House.

Mr. CHURCHILL

On a point of order. May I draw your attention to the Amendment to Clause 11 in the name of the hon. Member for Tottenham (Mr. Alden), which you have called and which the hon. Member has withdrawn?

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER

The hon. Member for Tottenham stated he did not move. Therefore there has been nothing before the House since.

Mr. GOULDING

My hon. Friend has mentioned that he spoke to Mr. Speaker about the matter, and was informed that it would be in order under Clause 8, and, in addition, when he brought the matter to your notice he intimated that it was his intention to raise it later, and I think it would be in the interests of all parties in the House in those circumstances that my hon. Friend should not lose the opportunity of moving his Amendment simply because of a slight lapse of attention at the time.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER

I am quite satisfied that we can go back to Clause 8. With regard to the special circumstances which the hon. Member has explained in reference to what he stated was the ruling of Mr. Speaker on Clause 8, that was not so left to me. It was left to me as being competent under Clause 6; and when the proposal was brought under my notice to change the Amendment to Clause 8, I found that it was not competent under Clause 8. Looking, however, to what has passed, I am not unwilling that the hon. Member should address himself to Clause 8, seeing that no later question has been put from the Chair.

Mr. H. H. MARKS

Do I understand that I am entitled to move the Amendment?

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER

No, not in the form in which it is on the Paper; but you may address yourself to Clause 8.

Mr. BONAR LAW

All I understand the hon. Gentleman to desire is that he should be at liberty to discuss very shortly this Amendment, and I would like to know if it is not possible to alter it so as to make it suitable for discussion under Clause 8?

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER

I do not object to the hon. Member addressing himself to Clause 8.

Mr. H. H. MARKS

In what form should the Amendment be altered so as to bring it within Clause 8?

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER

The Amendment can be brought within Clause 8 by inserting "has been" after "wages," leaving out the words "has been made obligatory by order of the Board of Trade," inserting the Amendment as a new sub-section at the end of line 19. This would make it in order here.

Mr. H. H. MARKS

Then I beg to move the Amendment in the form suggested, namely, to add: "no contract involving employment to which the minimum rate is applicable shall be given by a Government Department or local authority to any employer except on the condition that any work to which the minimum scale is applicable done under the contract shall be done within the United Kingdom."

Those who are familiar with Clause 8 of the Bill will not require any lengthened or detailed explanation of the object which I had in view. Under the provisions of Clause 8, so long as the rate has not been made obligatory no Government contract is to be given to any employer who will not declare himself to be bound by the rate, but it is to be observed that if the rate is obligatory and the Government can then give its orders where it pleases, it would seem that foreign workers in a foreign country could not submit themselves to the obligations of sub-section (b), because there is no power in this country to inflict a fine upon a foreigner resident abroad. Therefore this particular condition arises, to which I invite the attention of the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Churchill), that so long as the rate was not obligatory, the Government could not give a contract at all, but when once the rate was obligatory it would be lawful for the Government to place its contract abroad. The Amendment which I propose would equalise conditions as between British contractors and foreign contractors, and it would have the effect of preventing this legislation from putting British contractors at a disadvantage with their foreign competitors. I think that there is legitimate reason for accepting this Amendment, if not in the form in which I have moved it, at least in a form which would produce an equivalent result.

Mr. GOULDING

I rise to second the Amendment. This House declines to take any steps to prevent sweated goods from abroad entering into competition with trade in this country, but they have decided that certain specified trades shall have obligations imposed upon them in reference to the wages which they pay. It is surely desirable, when those obligations have been put upon traders in this country, handicapping them in competition to that extent, that the Government should not put a further handicap upon them by giving away to traders in other countries the work in these trades which they have to give away. One of the difficulties of the moment is the want of employment for our people in this country, and it is very essential that we should seize every opportunity of trying to earmark this employment for our own people, and we should see that the Government, who depend on the taxes of the country for their mainstay, should give their work to British tradesmen.

Mr. CHURCHILL

This proposal raises a very wide and controversial question, far beyond the scope of the Bill, and I would urge that in the course of our discussions we should not involve in proposals for improving the condition of the people, about which there is a general concensus of opinion, other proposals raising the exciting political and party controversies of Tariff Reform. As far as possible we should endeavour not to engage in a dis- cussion on those lines. There is nothing in the proposal of the hon. Member which, if it is to be applied at all, ought not to be applied to the existing Fair Wages Clause. All this Bill does is to fix a fair minimum wage in certain trades. It does not alter the situation or the conditions in any respect. It is extremely unlikely that any of the Government contracts in regard to these trades will be dealt with under the Trade Boards Act.

Mr. BONAR LAW

Are there not different conditions in these trades from those which obtain under the Fair Wages Clause.

Mr. CHURCHILL

There may be a slight difference, but if the argument were to apply at all it would equally apply over the whole area of the Fair Wages Resolution. But that is raising a very large question, which should not be mixed up with the discussions on this Bill, and which is outside its general scope, purpose, and character. The proposal of the hon. Gentleman is quite irrespective of the rates of wages paid abroad in any of these trades. They may be much higher than the minimum rates fixed here, and yet there would be a definite preclusion on grounds of principle limiting all Government contracts to this country. I do not think this is the moment to take such a position as that. I think it would be a very great pity if we were to plunge into a discussion of that character. I trust the House will not accept the Amendment of the hon. Gentleman, who, after all, has moved it in a form which he himself, I think, admits is not the form in which he would wish to have it or the form which would achieve the purpose he has in view; not only that, but if he were to achieve his object it would render a large portion of the Bill unworkable.

Mr. BONAR LAW

I am not certainly going into the fiscal controversy, but I should like to point out to the right hon. Gentleman that it seems to me the conditions here are slightly different from those applicable to the Fair Wages Resolution. The object of the Fair Wages Resolution was intended to apply to foreign trades just as well as those at home in the case of Government contracts, while it is quite obvious under this Bill you cannot possibly apply the conditions proposed by the Bill to foreign trades. What this Amendment wants is this: that these trades in foreign countries shall be on precisely the same footing as they are in this country. We say you cannot get that by any of the methods which come under the Fair Wages Resolution. The only possible way in which you can do that in these particular trades is by saying that the contracts be done at home. That is the sole object of the Amendment. In the temporary space of time before a change is made in our policy I have not the slightest desire that a different rule should apply to Government contracts for those of general trade. We have got to go through a short period before the change that we all see coming, and in the meantime I do say it is very absurd to take particular trades like those which are in a miserable condition and included in this Bill. It was actually shown in the case of a particular trade in Ireland, in the city of Belfast, that the custom was to send goods to the West of Ireland, and get work done there. Those carrying on that trade found it possible to get the same work done cheaper in Madeira and Japan, and the work was lost in Ireland. In these cases the same danger is possible, and the least we can do in the

case of Government orders and orders given by local authorities is to see that the effect of this Bill will not be to drive away employment altogether and give it to other countries.

Mr. ROBERT DUNCAN

My hon. Friend who has moved this Amendment is distinctly taking a step forward in the direction of a principle which involves the question whether trades at home should not be protected against the competition of similar trades in foreign countries, especially where regulations are applied to any trades at home which do not apply to those abroad. I think we are right in taking up this attitude, and pointing out that the Government in this matter are occupying an altogether untenable position in fixing regulations here, which, in the case of Government contracts abroad, would not apply.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted."

The House divided: Ayes, 40; Noes,. 174.

Division No. 310.] AYES. [3.6 p.m.
Acland-Hood, Rt. Hon. Sir Alex. F. Fell, Arthur Philips, John (Longford, S.)
Anstruther-Gray, Major Gooch, Henry Cubitt (Peckham) Powell, Sir Francis Sharp
Banbury, Sir Frederick George Gretton, John Pretyman, E. G.
Barnes, G. N. Hamilton, Marquess of Renwick, George
Bignold, Sir Arthur Hay, Hon. Claude George Sheffield, Sir Berkeley George D.
Bridgeman, W. Clive Hills, J. W. Starkey, John R.
Bull, Sir William James Joynson-Hicks, William Talbot, Lord E. (Chichester)
Carlile, E. Hildred Kavanagh, Walter M. Valentia, Viscount
Cochrane, Hon. Thos. H. A. E. Law, Andrew Bonar (Dulwich) Wilson, W. T. (Westhoughton)
Corbett, T. L. (Down, North) Law, Hugh A. (Donegal, W.) Winterton, Earl
Craik, Sir Henry Lonsdale, John Brownlee
Dickson, Rt. Hon. C. Scott- Macdonald, J. R. (Leicester)
Doughty, Sir George MacVeigh, Charles (Donegal, E.) TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—Mr. H. H. Marks and Mr. Goulding.
Douglas, Rt. Hon. A. Akers- Oddy, John James
Duncan, Robert (Lanark, Govan) Pease, Herbert Pike (Darlington)
NOES.
Abraham, W. (Cork, N.E.) Carr-Gomm, H. W. Dewar, Arthur (Edinburgh, S.)
Agnew, George William Charming, Sir Francis Allston Dewar, Sir J. A. (Invernesss-sh.)
Alden, Percy Cherry, Rt. Hon. R. R. Dilke, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles
Ashton, Thomas Gair Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston S. Donelan, Captain A.
Asquith, Rt. Hon. Herbert Henry Cleland, J. W. Dunne, Major E. Martin (Walsall)
Astbury, John Meir Clough, William Edwards, Sir Francis (Radnor)
Barker, Sir John Clynes, J. R. Elibank, Master of
Barlow, Percy (Bedford) Collins, Stephen (Lambeth) Esslemont, George Birnie
Barran, Rowland Hirst Condon, Thomas Joseph Evans, Sir S. T.
Beale, W. P. Cooper, G. J. Everett, R. Lacey
Bell, Richard Corbett, C. H. (Sussex, E. Grinstead) Flynn, James Christopher
Bennett, E. N. Cornwall, Sir Edwin A. Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter
Berridge, T. H. D. Cotton, Sir H. J. S. Fuller, John Michael F.
Bertram, Julius Craig, Herbert J. (Tynemouth) Furness, Sir Christopher
Birrell, Rt. Hon. Augustine Crean, Eugene Glen-Coats, Sir T. (Renfrew, W.)
Boland, John Crooks, William Glover, Thomas
Boulton, A. C. F. Crosfield, A. H. Goddard, Sir Daniel Ford
Brocklehurst, W. B. Crossley, William J. Gooch, George Peabody (Bath)
Brooke, Stopford Cullinan, J. Gwynn, Stephen Lucius
Burke, E. Maviland- Curran, Peter Francis Halpin, J.
Burns, Rt. Hon. John Davies, David (Montgomery Co.) Harcourt, Rt. Hon. L. (Rossendale)
Cameron, Robert Delany, William Harcourt, Robert V. (Montrose)
Hardie, J. Keir (Merthyr Tydvil) Masterman, C. F. G. Roche, John (Galway, East)
Hardy, George A. (Suffolk) Meehan, Francis E. (Leitrim, N.) Rogers, F. E. Newman
Hart-Davies, T. Menzies, Sir Walter Rose, Sir Charles Day
Harwood, George Montagu, Hon. E. S. Rutherford, V. H. (Brentford)
Haworth, Arthur A. Mooney, J. J. Samuel, Rt. Hon. H. L. (Cleveland)
Hayden, John Patrick Morse, L. L. Scott, A. H. (Ashton-under-Lyne)
Hazel, Dr. A. E. W. Murphy, John (Kerry, East) Seddon, J.
Hedges, A. Paget Murray, Capt. Hon. A. C. (Kincard.) Sheehy, David
Henry, Charles S. Myer, Horatio Smeaton, Donald Mackenzie
Hobhouse, Rt. Hon. Charles E. H. Nannetti, Joseph P. Snowden, P.
Hodge, John Napier, T. B. Stanger, H. Y.
Hogan, Michael Nicholson, Charles N. (Doncaster) Stanley, Albert (Staffs, N.W.)
Howard, Hon. Geoffrey Norman, Sir Henry Steadman, W. C.
Hudson, Walter Nugent, Sir Walter Richard Strachey, Sir Edward
Jones, Leif (Appleby) Nussey, Sir Willans Straus, B. S. (Mile End)
Jowett, F. W. O'Brien, Patrick (Kilkenny) Taylor, Theodore C. (Radcliffe)
Joyce, Michael O'Connor, James (Wicklow, W.) Tennant, H. J. (Berwickshire)
Kekewich, Sir George O'Connor, John (Kildare, N.) Tomkinson, James
Kennedy, Vincent Paul O'Connor, T. P. (Liverpool) Trevelyan, Charles Philips
Kilbride, Denis O'Dowd, John Verney, F. W.
Lamont, Norman O'Grady, J. Wardle, George J.
Lardner, James Carrige Rushe O'Kelly, Conor (Mayo, N.) Waring, Walter
Layland-Barrett, Sir Francis O'Malley, William Warner, Thomas Courtenay T.
Lever, A. Levy (Essex, Harwich) Parker, James (Halifax) Wason, Rt. Hon. E. (Clackmannan)
Levy, Sir Maurice Pirie, Duncan V. Wason, John Cathcart (Orkney)
Lloyd-George, Rt. Hon. David Pointer, J. Waterlow, D. S.
Lundon, T. Power, Patrick Joseph Watt, Henry A.
Macdonald, J. M. (Falkirk Burghs) Priestley, Sir W. E. B. (Bradford, E.) Wedgwood, Josiah C.
Mackarness, Frederic C. Radford, G. H. White, Sir Luke (York, E.R.)
Macnamara, Dr. Thomas J. Reddy, M. White, Patrick (Meath, North)
MacVeagh, Jeremiah (Down, S.) Rees, J. D. Whitley, John Henry (Halifax)
M'Laren, Sir C. B. (Leicester) Richards, T. F. (Wolverhampton, W.) Wilson, Henry J. (York, W.R.)
Maddison, Frederick Richardson, A. Wilson, P. W. (St. Pancras, S.)
Mallet, Charles E. Ridsdale, E. A. Wood, T. M'Kinnon
Marnham, F. J. Roberts, G. H. (Norwich)
Mason, James F. (Windsor) Robson, Sir William Snowdon TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—Mr. Joseph Pease and Captain Norton.
Massie, J. Roch, Walter F. (Pembroke)

Question put, and agreed to.

Forward to