HC Deb 10 July 1925 vol 186 cc819-28

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."— [Major Cope.]

Major CRAWFURD

There are one or two questions which I should like to address to the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade with regard to the various inquiries which are proceeding and that have been proceeding under the Safeguarding of Industries proposals of the Government, and I should like to thank the hon. Gentleman for coming down at my request. I should be glad, indeed, if we could have a few words from him to say, for instance, how the inquiries with regard to super-phosphates, gas mantles and gloves are proceeding, and, more particularly, with regard to the inquiry into the position of the steel industry. The White Paper, which was the governing table of the law with regard to these matters, seems to me to have been entirely passed over. The wording of the White Paper, which I have in my hand, is that if a prima facie case is made out for any particular industry then the Board of Trade will refer the claim for inquiry to a Committee. It is not "may refer" but "will refer," and the position as it appears to me is this. The conditions of the White Paper, which we were given to understand would be the only procedure which the Government would allow, have either not been carried out or else no prima facie case has been made out in the case of the iron and steel industry. I cannot help remembering the fate of the inquiry into lace, where the Committee appointed to inquire into the matter found that the conditions of the White Paper had not been fulfilled and where, in spite of that fact, the protective measure was proceeded with. In other words, I think the White Paper has become waste paper.

We are now told that the steel inquiry has been referred to the Civil Research Committee. We have never had any particulars regarding that Committee, or as to why this kind of matter should be referred to them. All we know is that, first of all, we were promised an Act of Parliament to deal with the matter. Then we were given a White Paper where the conditions are perfectly specific, and those conditions in the White Paper have been violated in three or four instances. We are now in a state of complete uncertainty, not only as to the result, but as to the actual procedure which the Government in future propose to adopt in dealing with these claims for protection. Our object in raising this matter is because we, particularly my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Leith (Captain W. Benn) and myself, have during the whole course of this Session been watching what we regard as an attempt to introduce tariffs and protection, and we have found that gradually the pledge given to us by the Government has been whittled away, and we are now in a state of complete uncertainty as to how we stand in these matters. I should be very grateful if the hon. Gentleman could give a short answer as to how these inquiries stand, and, particularly, as to what is to be the procedure in regard to the inquiry now going on by the Civil Research Committee into the case of iron and steel.

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of TRADE (Sir Burton Chadwick)

Of course, it is usual, when hon. Members are going to bring up such an important matter as this dealing with an industry like the steel industry, that some kind of notice should be given.

Major CRAWFURD

Of course, it was not within our knowledge: that there would be this opportunity for raising this point, but the moment we saw that there would be a little time I gave what notice I could to the hon. Gentleman.

Sir B. CHADWICK

I am much obliged to the hon. and gallant Member. He certainly told me, when I came into the House about five minutes ago, that he was going to raise this question, and I tell him, perfectly frankly, that I am not going to say much about it now. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh!"] I think hon. Members will appreciate my position and not expect me to launch out into a long speech on this subject at such short notice. I should have thought that all that could be said had been said about the iron and steel trade in the last few days. Again and again, both my right hon. Friend and I have explained that this matter of the iron and steel trade is being considered by the Civil Research Committee. The inquiry is suspended while the Civil Research Committee are going into it. I cannot say more.

Mr. ALEXANDER

The hon. Gentle-says, "While the Civil Research Committee are going into it." Into what? Are they going into the application of the iron and steel industry? What have they to decide? Have the Civil Research Committee to decide whether there was a prima facie ease for an inquiry under the White Paper procedure, or what?

Sir B. CHADWICK

That, of course, I cannot tell the hon. Gentleman. I am not in the Cabinet. This is a Cabinet Committee, appointed by the Prime Minister, presided over by the Prime Minister. I do not even know what Members are on that Committee, and I do not know what particular aspect of this great question they are considering. He asked me if the application is being considered as if it were before the Committee which would be set up under the White Paper. The inquiry which, in the ordinary course, would be made by a Committee set up under the White Paper is suspended while the matter is under consideration by the Civil Research Committee, and beyond that I cannot give the hon. Gentleman any information. As to the other subjects which the hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for West Walthamstow (Major Crawfurd) mentioned, gas mantles, super-phosphates and gloves, they are before Committees.

Major CRAWFURD

Could the hon. Gentleman tell me, as far as his knowledge goes, which does not seem to be very far, if the Civil Research Committee are following the same lines as the Government laid down in the White Paper as the lines to be followed by a Committee appointed by the Board of Trade. This was the method which we were told quite definitely by the Government was to be the method to be followed in any application for protection made during the existence of this Parliament, and if it is not the case then, as I said, I think all our safeguards are gone.

Sir B. CHADWICK

I can only ask hon. and gallant Gentlemen to wait until it is possible for them to know what has been done by the Civil Research Committee. It is perfectly idle to try to cross-question me as to what the Civil Research Committee are doing when I tell hon. Gentlemen, very frankly, that I do not know what they are doing.

Mr. ALEXANDER

The hon. Gentleman says he is unable to answer this question to-day because of the insufficient notice given him by my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for West Walthamstow (Major Crawford), but there are two or three other questions of which he has had rather considerable notice, and which are very important. They were put to him in debate on Monday, and he did not reply to them. We had no reply to the question whether the Balfour Committee on trade and industry, examining the whole problem, and able, perhaps, to produce a report of vital interest on unemployment, were going to produce an interim report. Can the hon. Gentleman tell us, also, what steps are being taken as a result of the report of the committee on the working of the bankruptcy laws? Will he also tell us what is the position of the inquiry with regard to the administration of the Companies Acts?

Sir B. CHADWICK

As to the bankruptcy laws, there is a Bill in draft now. That is as much as I could say, because I do not think that committee have made a report yet. As to the Balfour Committee, I understand that an interim report will be shortly available, but only on a portion of the enormous problem before the committee. I do not think I can satisfy hon. Members, because as I say, I have come into the House at two minutes' notice, and I must ask hon. Gentlemen to forgive me if I refuse to be drawn into making a statement without the necessary notice.

Captain BENN

We are indebted to the right hon. Gentleman for his presence here at all, and we do realise that it was short notice, but, as the hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for West Walthamstow (Major Crawfurd) explained, that was not our fault. The course of business was so framed by the Chief Whip that this opportunity occurred. But really there is no surprise in this question. I grant that the hon. Gentleman the Parliamentary Secretary is not able to tell us what is happening in the new Civil Research Committee, for he is not a member of the committee, but what he can tell us is what is happening in his own Department. This steel inquiry is an inquiry of the very gravest possible importance. The procedure the Government intended to follow was clearly stated by the Prime Minister, and it was laid before Parliament in the White Paper. Three conditions have to be fulfilled by an industry desiring an inquiry. These three conditions are not in question—substantial importance, severe competition, bad labour conditions abroad. The industry makes application for an inquiry to the Board of Trade, and not to the Civil Research Committee. For all I know, it may be the special sphere of the hon. Member to investigate such an application.

Sir B. CHADWICK

May I interrupt the hon. and gallant Gentleman and perhaps save his time and breath? How can I make it more clear? He says to me that I ought to know what is going on in my own Department, what is happening in this matter. I cannot make it more clear than such English as I possess has already made it. That inquiry has been supended while it is being examined by the Civil Research Committee.

Captain BENN

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman, but I was going to proceed to point out that this is a breach of the undertaking given in this White Paper. There are three conditions. He is good enough to admit that the conditions are fulfilled. The industry comes forward and, relying upon this White Paper, which is the declared policy of the Government, the industry says, "Grant us an inquiry." The White Paper says that if the Board of Trade are satisfied that a prima facie case is established, and that the three conditions are fulfilled— and they are not in question, the hon. Gentleman admits it—

Sir B. CHADWICK

How do I know?

Captain BENN

The hon. Gentleman will not say that the steel industry is not an industry of substantial importance, will he? Will the hon. Gentleman say that the steel industry is not suffering from severe foreign competition? Will the hon. Gentleman say that the terms of paragraph 3, relating to labour conditions abroad, are not satisfied? That being so, we come to the final sentence, which says that if the conditions are satisfied the Board of Trade will grant an inquiry. That is the Government's policy. Then the Board of Trade say, "We will not grant an inquiry; we will remit it to be investigated by an august body, newly formed, called the Civil Research Committee." What we ask the hon. Gentleman is, "Why have they departed from the terms of the White Paper?" That is perfectly simple. Does it indicate that this policy of the White Paper has been scrapped? My hon. and gallant Friend pointed out that in one case, that of lace, it was scrapped, and it is very important indeed for us to know whether the Government relies upon this declaration of policy or not. That really is vital, because it may mean that the Government are taking one road instead of the other, and it really would be helpful if the hon. Gentleman could see his way to explain, when the steel industry came to the Board of Trade and established the conditions, what it was that was in his mind, as head of the Department of the Board of Trade, which led him to say, "I will not grant you an inquiry under the White Paper, I must refer it to the Cabinet, and have the matter referred to some other Committee." What was it made him do that? That is a simple question, and if the hon. Gentleman could enlighten us on that point we should he grateful.

Sir B. CHADWICK

As I have already stated, I am not in a position to answer that question, but I can promise the hon. and gallant Member that I will give him an answer as soon as I get the information.

Mr. MAXTON

I understand that the hon. Gentleman is under a seal of silence as far as the steel inquiry is concerned. I also gather that while he is unable to deal with steel, he can tell us everything about gas mantles. I am very much interested in the gas mantle industry, and some of my constituents are very much worried about the position of things just now. I think the Parliamentary Secretary will believe me when I say that I am not a malignant doctrinaire Free Trader, and I can look at this matter in a strictly scientific spirit, I am very interested in the safeguarding of industries experiment, and I want to see how it will work. The Government think it is a great panacea to cure all the ills of this nation, whereas there are others who think it is a desperate poison that will destroy Britain's trade.

Personally, I think the truth lies somewhere between those two extremes Nevertheless I am very interested to see the experiment put into operation. I think also that we are all agreed that when these inquiries are set going they should be put through with something like business dispatch. This inquiry about gas mantles has occupied much too long a time, and if every industry which asks to be safeguarded and asks for a separate inquiry is going to take so long as the gas mantle industry has taken, then the trade of this country is going to be very seriously hampered. With regard to the gas mantle industry I understand that the big orders for gas mantles are generally placed long before they are really required for sale, and this is the time when the industry makes its arrangements for the winter season. Now at the most important period of the year manufacturers and dealers in the gas mantle industry do not really know whether they are going to be dealt with until the Committee report.

I want the hon. Gentleman to tell us what are the reasons for this delay, and if this is the great machinery that the Government is devising to aid the trade and industry of this country, and if it is going to work so slowly in regard to a very minor industry, like the gas mantle trade, what a terrible mess we shall be in when there are 200 or 300 industries all in a similar condition demanding a protective tariff or the adjustment of some protective tariff. Under these circumstances you can imagine the state of chaos which will arise when nobody in any industry knows where they are for more than a week ahead. The Parliamentary Secretary has told us that he knows all about the position of the gas mantle industry, and now when we have time; at our disposal, and we are in a very amiable and non-contentious frame of mind, I hope we shall hear all that the hon. Gentleman knows about the present position of incandescent gas mantles.

Lieut.-Commander BURNEY

I should like to discuss a little more this question of the iron and steel industry. I understand the main reason why the Board of Trade has referred this question to the Committee of Civil Research is because iron and steel necessarily being a raw material for other manufactured goods, there is some doubt as to whether more harm would be done and things made worse than they are by putting a tariff on iron and steel. If it is true that this country is at one of the turning points of its great career, we should consider very seriously what actions this House should take to cure the unemployment problem, and it is essential that all three parties in this House should work together and consider seriously what is the best thing to be done in connection with our great basic industries.

During the last year the imports of iron and steel have increased by 200,000 tons in the first quarter of this year. It is said that the production of iron and steel in this country is approaching the total of 1913 and in America the steel industry is working to 90 per cent. of its capacity. When we come to subsidise the great industries of this country then we have to come to basic facts. If we take public money for certain industries that must necessarily be a greater burden upon other trades, but supposing this policy could be adopted without injuring our general trade, then there would be a very good argument for giving to the iron and steel trade a subsidy of £l per ton on steel and £l per ton of shipping built. If we could by a subsidy cheapen the production of steel in this country, we should decrease the cost and increase the output. Under these circumstances it seems well to consider whether there is not some way of obtaining money for that purpose without in any way affecting the trade of the country.

When I look around. I find a rather extraordinary situation in this country. We have a million and a quarter unemployed, but we are to-day spending very nearly £400,000,000 a year on drink, which is rather unnecessary, and I am wondering whether this country can, in its present circumstances, continue to afford to spend that enormous sum of money on what is not a necessity. It seems to me, also, somewhat callous and selfish and shortsighted of the country as a whole to allow this for political advantage—because, obviously, it is a good fighting political point to reduce the tax on beer—and I wonder whether we are not, as Members of this House, neglecting our responsibilities and prostituting our position as guardians of the nation's security, as guardians of our public purse, when we allow ourselves to be led away for electoral and petty party advantage, and endeavour each to outbid the other in giving to the public what is neither good for them nor any great advantage to the country. Therefore, I would suggest for consideration among all parties, and also for the consideration of the Civil Research Committee, that they might consider putting back the taxes upon drink to what they were in 1923. [A laugh.] The hon. Member below me laughs, but he is looking at it entirely from the point of view of political advantage.

We have about 1,500 clubs in the Conservative party, all of which consume a great deal of beer, but I venture to think that their consumption of beer, at any rate, is not a great advantage to the country as a whole. It is, however, a great advantage to the country as a whole that our basic industries should be resuscitated; it is a great advantage to the country as a whole that we should not have this canker of a million and a quarter unemployed. Therefore, supposing that my suggestion as to increasing our taxes on drink to what they were in 1923 were carried through by agreement between the three political parties—I venture to suggest that it could not be done without agreement between the political parties—then the revenue would be increased by something like £16,000,000 a year. With that amount them would be ample to assist our three great basic industries of shipbuilding, iron and steel. I exclude the coal trade for one reason, namely, that coal is not a manufactured article, and it is not, in my opinion, in the interest of the country that low-grade mines should be kept in operation when the supplies from high-grade mines will meet the demand, because, if coal in those cases is mined at a cost which is not- economic, obviously the country is paying a certain amount on each ton—there is a certain loss on each ton—and the more coal that is produced from these low-grade mines the more must the country as a whole be the poorer Therefore, I do not believe it would be in the economic interest of the country that these low-grade mines should be helped by any form of subsidy. I do think, however, that the State as a whole might consider bearing part of the cost of the transfer of miners to places where they can mine coal which can be produced at an economic rate.

Therefore, I would draw the attention of the House to these three great basic industries of ours, namely, iron, steel, and shipbuilding. If that £16,000,000 a year were obtained for the purpose of a subsidy to those industries, it would not affect the trade of the country as a whole in any way; it would not affect in any way the other industries of the country; all it would do would be to reduce the amount of expenditure on something which is non-essential, and in that sense it would, I believe, be in the best interests of the country that we should endeavour to combine and make an effort to deal with this question on those lines. Of our unemployed to-day, half a million are persons in these trades, and for that reason I venture to suggest that the House might consider in some fashion the suggestion I have put forward. I put it forward purely as a contribution to the question of unemployment as a whole, and not from any point of view of party or any other point of view. I venture to suggest that the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade might consider these remarks, and, if he considers them worthy of putting before his colleague, perhaps he will do so.

Forward to