§ Sir J. POWERI beg to move, in page 42, line 19, to leave out "6s. 0d." and to insert instead thereof "4s. 6d."
Since 1919 the importation of matches has very nearly doubled and the production of British matches has steadily diminished until to-day they are only two-thirds of what they were then. These figures, I think, must give a certain amount of concern to anyone. Whether my Amendment will remedy this state of affairs remains to be seen. There may be different opinions about the matter, but whatever opinion may be as to the method proposed, there can be no difference of opinion as to the seriousness of the position of the match industry. The figures speak for themselves. The only question is whether we are content to leave the industry in the condition in which it is at present. Certain developments which have taken place in the last few days must have given concern to everyone, because they are an attempt on the part of the British match industry to cut down expenses in advertising and in other directions so as to enable themselves to live. This Amendment would, of course, give a measure of protection to the industry, thereby giving more employment to our people, perhaps at the expense of the foreigner.
§ Mr. McNEILLI noticed the satisfaction it gave to the Committee when the hon. Gentleman said the figures spoke for themselves.
1600 I will say as little as possible on the subject. I understood my hon. Friend to make a criticism of the figures in the Schedule on account of the effect on the match industry. All that I want to do is to read a letter which may be of some satisfaction to hon. Members opposite as well as to hon. Members on this side of the Committee, because I remember when we debated the Match Duty at a former stage questions were asked as to how far in the arrangements that had been made with the match industry the parties had been consulted and to what extent they were satisfied. I am able to give some later information on that subject, because my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has received a letter signed by the Vice-Chairman and the Hon. Secretary of the Joint Industrial Council of the Match Manufacturing Industry. I will read the substance of the letter:
At the meeting of the Joint Industrial Council of the Match Manufacturing Industry held on Thursday. 21st April, 1927, it was proposed by Mr. T. W. Hoare (National Union of General and Municipal Workers, London), seconded by Mr. T. Williamson (National Union of General and Municipal Workers. Liverpool), supported by Mr. A. E. Ellery (Workers' Union, Gloucester) and carried unanimously:—'That this Council has noted with gratification the proposals of the Chancellor of the Exchequer with regard to the method of computing the Match Duties, which should operate more fairly to the British manufacturer (and to the consuming public), and should check the serious decline in employment in the industry.'1601 I think that is satisfactory in showing that in the view of both parties to the Joint Industrial Council the changes are likely, at all events, to be of benefit to the public and the trade.
§ Mr. E. BROWNThe Committee know that I have taken some little part in the discussion on the Match Duty, and I would like to refer to the question I put to the right hon. Gentleman on a previous occasion. The question I put to him with regard to the bringing forward of this new suggestion for a change in duty operating under the Schedule was, as to what firms were in consultation with the Treasury, and what the effect would be? The answer was to the effect that the relations were confidential, and no firm could be mentioned, and that the effect would be in favour of the consumer. I would like to ask the right hon. Gentleman if he is aware that since the previous debates on this question there has been an announcement in the Press that one of the leading match firms—Messrs. Bryant & May—has made an arrangement with the Swedish Match Combine with the result that the figures have spoken for themselves very loudly on the tape in this House and on the markets? I should also like to ask whether he still thinks, after what has happened during the last few days, the arrangement regarding the Match Duty, was undertaken in order to protect the British manufacturer against the foreigner, and in order to give an advantage to the consumer, or whether the Treasury had not better go further into the details? Can he give us any information as to what the arrangement is between the Swedish Company and Messrs. Bryant & May, because we understood in previous debates the enemy was the Swedish Combine. [An HON. MEMBER: "No."] I beg the hon. Member's pardon. I raised this question, and we were distinctly told in the debates that the foreign companies, including the Swedish companies, were the enemies of the British manufacturer, and that this was being done in order to protect the consumer against manipulation by the foreign firms. I still feel very suspicious that this is a combination of the manufacturers with the Treasury to raise the duty against the public, and to extract more taxation from the consumers of matches, and I would like the right hon. 1602 Gentleman to give the Committee some explanation.
§ The CHAIRMANThis is an Amendment to reduce the Excise Duty.
§ Mr. BROWNI clearly understand that, but the Financial Secretary raised the general question by reading the letter from the Joint Industrial Council.
§ The CHAIRMANNo. The point the Financial Secretary made was that the match trade was doing very nicely, and therefore the Amendment was unnecessary.
§ Mr. BROWNThe point I was making is germane to the Amendment; perhaps I am not expressing myself quite as clearly as I should. My point is, that this arrangement was made for the purpose of protecting the manufacturers against foreign competition, and now we are informed that the largest firm in this country has made an arrangement with these very foreigners, and this Committee is entitled to know the terms of that arrangement. We are concerned with what the Treasury have to say about the arrangement with the British manufacturers. I want to protect the British consumer against trickery by the foreign manufacturer.
§ Mr. HAYDAYI am a little concerned about the letter which the Financial Secretary has read. I am one of the officials of one of the organisations represented on the Joint Industrial Council, and I should like the right hon. Gentleman to tell us the nature of the inquiry by the Chancellor of the Exchequer which led to that letter being written. It is not an endorsement of this duty, but only an appreciation of some new method, and I should like to know the nature of the inquiry which led to the writing of the letter and the circumstances which surrounded the occasion.
§ Mr. McNEILLThe only reason I read the letter was because an hon. Member opposite inquired on a former occasion whether the operatives in the trade were consulted or only the employers, and my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer was not able to give an answer. As far as I am aware, although I will not absolutely pledge myself, no inquiry was addressed by the Treasury or the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the 1603 Joint Industrial Council, but it is possible that the question to which I have referred may have been noticed, and as a consequence the letter was written. I will read the covering letter:—
Dear Sir,Please note attached copy of resolution unanimously approved by the Joint Industrial Council of the Match Manufacturing Industry at its meeting held on Thursday, 21st April, 1927. It was the desire of the Council that you should be furnished with a copy of same, and I have pleasure in enclosing one herewith.
§ Mr. McNEILLThe 27th April; and it is signed: "A. E. Seabury, Vice-Chairman."
§ Mr. HAYDAYSince this question was raised a few days ago communications have passed, and that resolution has only just come to hand. If hon. Members will read the OFFICIAL REPORT tomorrow they will see that the Financial Secretary says that at the time the question was put the Chancellor of the Exchequer could not answer it. Since then the information has come to hand. It would appear on the face of it as though that information had only come to hand since the previous discussion.
§ Mr. McNEILLWith regard to the point raised by the hon. Member for Leith (Mr. E. Brown), I am afraid that I cannot answer the question he has put to me, because I was not aware of the arrangement of which he has spoken.
§ The CHAIRMANI do not quite see what this has to do with the lowering of the Excise Duty.
§ Mr. H. WILLIAMSI am very sorry, like the rest of the Committee, that this important discussion should have come on so late when those who speak feel under an obligation to speak as briefly as possible. I recognise to the full, the advantage to the industry that has come
§ through the change in the system of taxation. Before the change, the tax was so much per 10,000 matches. Foreigners were in the habit of packing 30 to 45 matches in a box, while the British manufacturers packed 50 matches in a box. Let me give an example of the effect of the change, which will show that it has not been adequate. On a basis of 40 matches per box, in the case of foreign safety matches, the duty works out at 248 of one penny per box. In the case of the British matches, which are packed 50 to a box, the duty works out at 3 of a penny. So that the British matches are, in fact, being taxed more highly than the foreign matches. That is one of the reasons why you are offered foreign matches if you go into a shop and put a penny on the counter. The result of the change in the system of taxation is that, since the duty is to be so much per 144 boxes of matches, matches will be taxed at the same rate whether they are British or foreign. So I do not think the change goes far enough having regard to the fact that in Belgium, where girls are employed in packing, the wages paid are about 40 per cent. of those paid in this country. I regret very much that the hon. Member for Bow and Bromley (Mr. Lansbury) is not here, because he realises, I know, the seriousness of the situation. I will now put my last point. When I point out to the Committee that the importation and consumption of foreign matches in this country is twice as much as it was six years ago and the consumption of British made matches has dropped to less than two-thirds of what it was, we see an industry suffering a very severe blow, and I think we ought to do something to protect the wage rates of our own people.
§ Amendment negatived.
§ Motion made, and Question put, "That the Schedule be the Third Schedule to the Bill."
§ The Committee divided: Ayes 130; Noes 51.
1605| Division No. 254.] | AYES. | [12. 36 p.m. |
| Agg-Gardner, Ht. Hon. Sir James T. | Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H. | Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham) |
| Albery, Irving Jamas | Bennett, A. J. | Butler, Sir Geoffrey |
| Alexander, E. E. (Leyton) | Bourne, Captain Robert Croft | Campbell, E. T. |
| Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby) | Briscoe, Richard George | Carver, Major W. H. |
| Applin, Colonel B. V. K. | Brittain, Sir Harry | Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. A. (Prtsmith. S.) |
| Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W. | Brocklebank, C. E. R. | Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton |
| Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover) | Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I. | Charteris, Brigadier-General J. |
| Balniel Lord | Broun-Lindsay, Major H. | Christie, J. A. |
| Clayton, G, C. | King, Commodore Henry Douglas | Remer, J. R. |
| Cooper, A. Duff | Lamb, J. Q. | Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint) |
| Cope, Major William | Little, Dr. E. Graham | Salmon, Major I. |
| Couper, J. B. | Looker, Herbert William | Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney) |
| Courtauid, Major J. S. | Lumley, L. R. | Sandeman, N. Stewart |
| Craig, Sir Ernest (Chester, Crewe) | MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen | Sandon, Lord |
| Curzon, Captain Viscount | Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (l. of W.) | Savery, S. S. |
| England, Colonel A. | McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John | Scott, Rt. Hon. Sir Leslie |
| Fairfax, Captain J. G. | Makins, Brigadier-General E. | Shaw, R. G. (Yorkt, WR., Sowerby) |
| Fielden, E. B. | Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn | Shepperson, E. W. |
| Forrest, W. | Margesson, Captain D. | Slaney, Major P. Kenyon |
| Fraser, Captain Ian | Mason, Lieut.-Col. Glyn K. | Smithers, Waldron |
| Gadle, Lieut.-Col. Anthony | Merriman, F. B. | Steel, Major Samuel Strang |
| Ganzoni, Sir John | Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark) | Storry-Deans, R. |
| Gault Lieut-Col Andrew Hamilton | Mond, Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred | Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H. |
| Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham | Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M. | Thompson, Luke (Sunderland) |
| Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John | Moore, Lieut-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr) | Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South) |
| Goff, Sir Park | Moore, Sir Newton J. | Tinne, J. A. |
| Grant, Sir J. A. | Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. I. T. C. | Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement |
| Greene, W. P. Crawford | Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury) | Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull) |
| Grotrlan, H. Brent | Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive | Warner, Brigadier-General W. W. |
| Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich) | Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph | Watson. Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle) |
| Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry | Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter) | Watts, Dr. T. |
| Harland, A. | Nicholson, O. (Westminster) | Wells, S. R. |
| Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent) | O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton) | Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern) |
| Harrison, G. J. C. | Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William | Williams, Herbert G. (Reading) |
| Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P. | Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings) | Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield) |
| Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J. | Perkins, Colonel E. K. | Windsor-Clive. Lieut. -Colonel George |
| Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford) | Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple) | Wise, Sir Fredric |
| Hills, Major John Waller | Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome) | Wolmer, Viscount |
| Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone) | Pilcher, G. | Womersley, W. J. |
| Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel J. N. | Power, Sir John Cecil | Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.). |
| Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H. | Radford, E. A. | Yerburgh, Major Robert D. T. |
| Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l) | Ramsden, E. | Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (Norwich) |
| Kennedy, A. R. (Preston) | Rawson, Sir Cooper | |
| Kindersley, Major Guy M. | Rees, Sir Beddoe | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.— |
| Captain Bowyer and Mr. Penny. | ||
| NOES. | ||
| Attlee, Clement Richard | Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetiand) | Oliver, George Harold |
| Barnes, A. | Harris, Percy A. | Paling, W. |
| Batey, Joseph | Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon | Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan) |
| Brown, Ernest (Leith) | Hayday, Arthur | Potts, John S. |
| Compton, Joseph | Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley) | Shepherd, Arthur Lewis |
| Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities) | Henderson, T. (Glasgow) | Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John |
| Crawfurd, H. E. | Hirst, G. H. | Sutton, J. E. |
| Dalton, Hugh | Hirst, W. (Bradford, South) | Taylor, R. A. |
| Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton) | Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfleid) | Tinker, John Joseph |
| Day, Colonel Harry | Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath) | Varley, Frank B. |
| Edge, Sir William | Johnston, Thomas (Dundee) | Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline) |
| Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty) | Kelly, W. T. | Welsh, J. C. |
| Garro-Jones, Captain G. M. | Kennedy, T. | Whiteley, W. |
| Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton) | Kirkwood, D. | Williams, T. [York, Don Valley) |
| Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne) | Lindley, F. W. | Windsor, Walter |
| Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan) | Lunn, William | |
| Grundy, T. W. | Murnin, H. | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.— |
| Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil) | Naylor, T. E. | Mr. Hayes and Mr. B. Smith. |