HC Deb 06 March 1928 vol 161 cc251-4
Captain WEDGWOOD BENN

I beg to move, That leave he given to introduce a Bill to amend the Safeguarding of Industries Act, 1921, in respect of agricultural produce. My purpose is to call attention to the grave discontent which exists among the agricultural community. A Motion on the Paper, put down by an hon. Member who is an unimpeachable authority, draws attention to this. The heavy taxes, the heavy burden of railway rates, and the impossible conditions in which agriculture is supposed to carry on are well known to-day. As regards the safeguarding of industries, the position of the farmer, as I understand it, is best expressed in paragraph 7 of the pledge which the National Farmers' Union demanded from candidates for membership for this House: I will support the rescinding of the Safeguarding of Industries Act unless equality of treatment is at once given to agricultural produce. [HON. MEMBERS: "Protectionist!"] Hon. Members had better wait until I have explained the Bill. The farmer says, and there is a great deal of sense and logic in the argument, "You wish to give protection under this Act, against foreign competition, to a number of small persistent, energetic, clamant industries, but nothing is done for me. Under Part I of the Act you profess to protect and safeguard key industries, and supplies on which the life of the nation depends, and small manufacturers of things like face powder can get protection, because they plead that they are supplying things on which the life of the nation depends, while nothing is done for me who produce the food of the nation." Judging from the membership of this House, I believe that a great many farmers are Free Traders. [HON. MEMBERS: "No!"] There are many hon. Members who sit here as Free Traders by the support of farmers. Of course, I am a Free Trader. I am, and always have been, opposed to any taxes on food. The voice of the Free Trader, in this House and in the last, has been the voice of one crying in the wilderness, but now he has got reinforcements. It must always be understood that Protection is not a general idea, but is regarded strictly as a personal relative matter. That is to say, it is no good telling A, who is a Tariff Reformer, that you are going to protect B. What A wants is protection for A. If he cannot have protection for A he will vote against protection for B. That is a fair description of the Tariff Reformer's position. Every Tariff Reformer is a Free Trader for his own raw material and a Tariff Reformer for his own finished product.

The Prime Minister, and the President of the Board of Agriculture, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer have made it clear that in no circumstances did the Government intend to impose protective duties on foodstuff. The position of the farmer is this. "You say you will not help us, and therefore we do not think it is fair that you should help other people, and we will oppose the Safeguarding of Industries Act altogether." And so, instead of a few scattered consumers who could not concentrate their forces, and who suffer under the evils of the Safeguarding of Industries Act, we now have opposed to the Act one of the greatest, best organised, and most powerful interests of the country, the agricultural interest, which recognises that the Act is partial and unjust. With the help of the agricultural interest we propose to repeal this Act. Who is going to oppose this Bill? On this side of the House sit many Free Traders. [HON. MEMBERS: "No!"] It is to the Government side that it will look for most of its supporters. The Bill is in response to the pledge given to the Farmers' Union. [HON. MEMBERS: "By whom?"] By Members of this House. The pledge, for example, was given by the Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs (Mr. R. McNeill) and by the Financial Secretary to the War Office (Lieut.-Colonel Jackson) who is in his place.

Lieut.-Colonel JACKSON

indicated dissent.

Captain BENN

I am informed by the Farmers' Union, but if they are in-accurate—

Lieut.-Colonel JACKSON

They are.

Captain BENN

The hon. Member for Henley (Captain Terrell) was generally sympathetic.

Captain TERRELL

I will make it perfectly clear.

4.0 P.M.

Captain BENN

The Home Secretary (Mr. Bridgeman) has also given the pledge, and it has been given by three score and ten Members on that side. That being the case, who is going to oppose it? I suppose that nobody is going to oppose it. If I am wrong any hon. Member under the Standing Orders of the House is at liberty to follow me in debate and make a brief statement and then divide the House. If I am right, I shall welcome it Of course, if hon. Members say "no" in the Debate, and do not follow that up with a speech and a Division, we shall know what

weight to attach to their attitude. My own belief is that everybody, even the hon. Member for Moseley (Mr. Hannon) and the hon. Member for Hampstead (Mr. G. Balfour), who have been the great champions of this Act, feel that the time has passed when it can be anything more than a ridiculous excess on the Statute Book. [HON. MEMBERS: "No!"] So far as those hon. Members who are good enough to back this Bill and many other hon. Members are concerned, we regard this Act as a weak and deformed infant, and we believe the time has come to give it a timely and merciful release.

Bill ordered to be, brought in by Captain Wedgwood Benn, Mr. Lambert, Mr. Hope Simpson, Mr. Bonwick, and Mr. Foot.