HC Deb 09 June 1932 vol 266 cc2129-39
Mr. T. WILLIAMS

I beg to move, in page 3, line 1G, at the end, to insert the words: Provided that this section shall not apply to sugar manufactured from homegrown beet unless the Commissioners of Customs and Excise are satisfied that the grower of such beet has been paid a price representing a rate not less than thirty-five shillings per ton, calculated in accordance with rules to be made by the Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries. I have no desire to detain the House if the right hon. Gentleman will indicate that he is going to accept this Amendment. We were led to believe, in the Committee stage, that the right hon. Gentleman would reconsider the whole question of a guaranteed price, and, without having given a definite promise that the proposal would be accepted,, he did undertake to consider the question. If he is willing to accept the Amendment, I do not see any point in wasting the time of the House. Will he say whether he is willing to accept the Amendment?

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. Chamberlain) indicated dissent.

Mr. WILLIAMS

I should have thought that the right hon. Gentleman would have seen his way to accept the Amendment. I shall, therefore, have to restate the position. In 1931, when the Government subsidy was declining, the then Minister of Agriculture prolonged the payments, which enabled the acreage of sugar beet to be kept on a fairly stable basis, but in so doing he insisted that all the money received from the Exchequer should be paid to the producers of sugar beet, and all the possible avenues whereby the money might have flown in other directions were closed. The Anglo-Dutch group at that time were unwilling to come to an agreement. The other factories, however, came to an agreement with the Minister of Agriculture. The Anglo-Dutch group, therefore, remained outside the scheme. Farmers who could secure no guaranteed price refused to grow the normal quantities, with the result 'that at least one factory closed down this year owing to failure on the part of the producer of the beet to get a guaranteed price for his produce. The right hon. Gentleman may have been wise in extending this excess payment, but we cannot agree that, having extended it, he is correct in refraining from securing for the farmer a guaranteed price. They may repeat the statement that has been made twice already, that I believe 11 factories have guaranteed a price of 42s. a cwt. while in five other cases they have guaranteed 35s. plus a proportion of any profits that may accrue.

That is scarcely sufficient. It ought to be a cardinal principle in national finance that, where revenue is sought to bolster up a young, a middle aged, or an ancient industry, there should be a guarantee given by the recipients that the money will be used for the purpose for which it is diverted. In Clause 3 no such guarantee is forthcoming. The factory owners will receive the money and will use it, apparently, just as they wish. While they may be as good, bad or indifferent as most people—we do not wish to reflect upon them any more than upon anyone else—we feel that the principle is wholly wrong that this money, ostensibly provided for the grower of sugar-beet, is handed over to the factory owner, who need give no guarantee at all to the producer of any price that he is likely to obtain.

There is another point that ought to be emphasised. The policy of the subsidy may or may not have been wise. That is not the dispute at the moment. But, if it is wise to maintain these factories in working order, it is certainly wise to see that the farmers have such a price guaranteed for their produce that they will enter into early contracts and cultivate the requisite quantity for the continuous working of all the factories. The farmers are no longer growing the amount of beet that they were growing one or two years since. If this policy is going to be continued, we shall have more factories closing down and the £30,000,000 or £35,000,000 which will have been expended on helping this juvenile industry will have been absolute waste and at the end of seven or eight years we shall be no further forward. For these reasons we are obliged to press the Amendment if the right hon. Gentleman is still unwilling to accept what we regard as a very reasonable proposition.

Captain HEILGERS

I beg to move, as an Amendment to the proposed Amendment, in line 3, after the word "paid," to insert the words "by factories engaged in sharing profits with growers."

I am entirely in agreement with the hon. Gentleman in his contention that the factories should pay just as reason able a price to the grower, as the result of the subsidy, as they receive from the Government, but I am afraid that the price that he recommends is too low and that difficulties will arise when the growers go to negotiate with the factories next year. May I give a brief history of the negotiations and the position of sugar beet in the last few years? From 1924 to 1930 the same prices were paid by every factory in the country to the grower. In 1931 we found all the fac- tories except five, the Anglo-Dutch group, paying the same price, but the Anglo-Dutch group started an entirely new form of treatment of sugar beet, namely, profit-sharing. This year the position was absolutely chaotic. Four factories are paying 42s., nine are paying 40s. and the remainder, the Anglo-Dutch group, are again profit-sharing.

It seems to me utterly wrong that, when the Government hand over subsidies to the factories, the factories should pay different prices when they are receiving the same money from the Government, and in some cases it is the rich factories that are paying the smaller figure. If my Amendment is accepted, it will be a direct encouragement to growers to enter into negotiation with the factories for the promotion and extension of profit-sharing. I believe that the whole future of the sugar beet industry must lie in profit-sharing between growers and factories. If my Amendment is not inserted, it will go forth to the world that Parliament thinks that 35s. is a reasonable minimum price to be paid to the grower of sugar beet, and minimums, unfortunately, in agriculture especially, have a habit of becoming maximums. Judging from my experience of sugar beet negotiations in the past, it will mean some very great difficulties when we go as growers to meet the factories again next year. Therefore, I ask the House to confine itself to my Amendment, which is merely designed to ensure a reason able minimum to start with for these growers who are willing and anxious to enter into profit-sharing with the factories.

Mr. ROSS TAYLOR

I beg to second the Amendment to the proposed Amendment.

Sir STAFFORD CRIPPS

May I. say a word as to the reason why we inserted the figure of 35s.? When the matter was discussed in Committee, the First Com missioner of Works said: While it is desirable that there should be some minimum the question is whether in the variation of world prices it is not reasonable that the farmers and the factories should enter into profit-sharing arrangements, as it were. Later he said: I want to be quite clear about this. I said that while it might be desirable that there should be some minimum price, it was a question whether it was not desirable, over and above that minimum price, that there should be a profit-sharing arrangement, and that this was a matter which should be inquired into."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 23rd May, 1932; col. 114, Vol. 266.] It was as the result of that that we reduced the figure here to 35s., not because we felt that it was a proper price, but in order to incorporate into the Bill the acknowledgment, with which we under stood the Government were in agreement, that there should be some mention of a minimum price. In view of the fact that all the contracts have been settled for this year, it is obviously immaterial what the minimum price is which appears in this Bill, because it will regulate nothing, but we certainly thought the First Com missioner agreed with us that there should be an acknowledgement that, when the grant for this year was being made by the Government, it would only be made subject to compliance with certain conditions that would be laid down. It is too late this year to make the conditions effective, but this is a token figure that is put in order to show the determination of the Government and the House that, when they are disbursing money to the factories in this way, the suppliers to the factories should be safeguarded by this House and it should not be left entirely to the will of the factories to do as they like in the matter and, so long as that principle gets in, we do not really mind whether the words of the hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for Bury St. Edmunds (Captain Heilgers) are there or not. What we are anxious to do is to preserve this principle of safe guarding the producer of such a commodity as this when the money is paid, not to the producer, but to the manufacturer, who purchases from the producer. We wish the producer to know that this House has his welfare at heart and that, when this is designed to help not the manufacturer of sugar but the production of sugar beet, this House must see to it that he gets a fair sum for his commodity.

The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Major Elliot)

There are, of course, certain technical difficulties in the way of accepting this proposal, but I do not wish to found myself upon that. The First Commissioner of Works under took to look into the question with the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I am sure the hon. and learned Gentle- man does not suggest that there was any pledge to do more than merely look into it. On looking into it, one is met with the fundamental difficulty that it is no use controlling the price of beet unless you can also control the price of sugar. That is the fundamental difficulty. It is no use saying you will give such and such a price if you know that, unless you can give it all the way through, the fluctuations of the market will eventually govern the price that the producer gets, whatever the assistance given by the House in one form or another. The next thing is that the farmers have themselves complained that they do not wish a mini mum price in the Bill because it will come to appear a maximum price. It is true that the Amendment of my hon. and gallant Friend would have the undesirable effect that it would merely impose this minimum on factories which have entered into profit-sharing schemes and, therefore, would actually prejudice profit sharing.

Captain HEILGERS

The reason why I put the figure down was that the Anglo-Dutch group were making a guarantee of 35s. before they started profit sharing, and that is regarded at present as a reasonable sum with which to start.

Major ELLIOT

My point was that my hon. and gallant Friend is only imposing the minimum on factories which, on his contention, are doing a very laudable thing. He is limiting factories which are doing a laudable thing and not limiting factories which are not doing a laudable thing and are not entering into profit-sharing arrangements. That illustrates the difficulties into which we are led as soon as we begin to insert figures and prices into Acts of Parliament. The proposal brought forward by the hon. Member for Don Valley (Mr. Williams) would have had the advantage as he indicated that it would fix a price of 35s., whereas in fact all the factories except four are paying 40s. There is no suggestion in his Amendment that there should be any limitation as regards profit sharing but merely that there should be a limiting figure of 35s., whereas all the other factories are paying 40s. That would merely have the effect that, if commodity prices continued downwards and the rates were not so high next year, the farmers would say, "We were getting that figure already."

Sir S. CRIPPS

Surely the right hon. and gallant Gentleman does not suggest that this provision as regards the subsidy is to last for ever? It is only an annual fixation.

Major ELLIOT

It is an annual fixation, but surely the hon. and learned Member will agree that a figure put in a Statute is apt to have an influence very far beyond the year in which it is inserted in the Statute?

Sir S. CRIPPS

Surely the 38s. a ton which is in the Statute did not enable the farmer to get 40s. this year?

4.30 p.m.

Major ELLIOT

That is precisely what I contend it did not do. The 38s. had nothing to do with the price of 40s. We are dealing with the question of the trend of prices. If the trend of prices is against the farmer, he will get a lower return, and if the trend is in favour of the farmer he will not get a lower return. In the difficulty in which we find ourselves, we cannot be limited by putting prices in an Act of Parliament. We can give greater or less assistance to the industry, and we can trust as far as possible the industry to give a reasonable proportion of the assistance to the producer, but, if the House proceeds to fix prices by Act of Parliament, it will not succeed in its primary object, which is to encourage the growing of sugar-beet.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS

Surely the right hon. and gallant Gentleman must be aware that it is one of our main contentions that the fact that no guaranteed

price was available last year caused the Kelham factory to go out of production this year? We want the farmer to know well in advance that a certain price is available, so that the output of sugar-beet will be large enough to maintain all factories in operation.

Major ELLIOT

I do not think that it is possible to contend that it would have that effect. The main fact is that we are now dealing with a situation in which we are trying to found a new industry which is meeting with severe difficulties. Assistance is being given by the House, and it is being passed on to the various partners in the industry by various schemes. One set of factories is assisted by the guarantee of 40s. a ton, and another set of factories by a guarantee of 35s. a ton, plus a profit-sharing scheme. It would be most inadvisable to attempt to stereotype the position at this stage, and it would not secure the object which the hon. Member who moved the original Amendment, and my hon. and gallant Friend who moved the Amendment to the proposed Amendment have in view. I, therefore, ask them not to press their respective Amendments.

Captain HEILGERS

I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment to the proposed Amendment.

Amendment to the proposed Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 41; Noes, 314.

Division No. 222.] AYES. [4.33 p.m.
Adams, D. M. (Poplar, South) Grundy, Thomas W. Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)
Attlee, Clement Richard Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton) Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale) Hall, George H. (Merthyr Tydvil) Milner, Major James
Cape, Thomas Healy, Cahir Parkinson, John Allen
Cocks, Frederick Seymour Hicks, Ernest George Price, Gabriel
Cove, William G. Hirst, George Henry Salter, Dr. Alfred
Cripps, Sir Stafford John, William Thorne, William James
Daggar, George Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown) Tinker, John Joseph
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton) Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly) Williams, David (Swansea East)
Duncan, Charles (Derby, Claycross) Kirkwood, David Williams, Dr. John H. (Lianelly)
Edwards, Charles Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George Williams, Thomas (York, Don Valley)
George, Megan A. Lloyd (Anglesea) Lawson, John James
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. Arthur Leonard, William TELLERS FOR THE AYES.-
Grenfell, David Rees (Glamorgan) Logan, David Gilbert Mr. Groves and Mr. Duncan Graham.
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool) Lunn, William
NOES.
Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S. Atkinson, Cyril
Adams, Samuel Vyvyan T. (Leeds, W.) Anstruther-Gray, W. J. Bailey, Eric Alfred George
Agnew, Lieut.-Com. P. G. Aske, Sir Robert William Baillie, sir Adrian W. M.
Albery, Irving James Astbury, Lieut. Com. Frederick Wolfe Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Allen, William (Stoke-on-Trent) Atholl, Duchess of Baldwin-Webb, Colonel J.
Balfour, Capt. Harold (I. of Thanet) Gledhill, Gilbert Macquisten, Frederick Alexander
Balniel, Lord Glossop, C. W. H. Magnay, Thomas
Barclay-Harvey, C. M. Gluckstein, Louis Halle Maitland, Adam
Barton, Capt. Basil Kelsey Gtyn, Major Ralph G. C. Makins, Brigadier-General Ernest
Beauchamp, Sir Brograve Campbell Goff, Sir Park Mallalieu, Edward Lancelot
Beaumont, Hon, R.E.B. (Portsm'th, C.) Goodman, Colonel Albert W. Manningham-Buller, Lt.-Col. Sir M.
Beit, Sir Alfred L. Gower, Sir Robert Margesson, Capt. Henry David R.
Betterton, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry B. Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.) Marsden, Commander Arthur
Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman Grattan-Doyle, Sir Nicholas Martin, Thomas B.
Bird, Sir Robert B.(Wolverh'pton W.) Graves, Marjorie Mason, David M. (Edinburgh, E.)
Boothby, Robert John Graham Grimston, R. V. May haw, Lieut.-Colonel John
Bossom, A. C. Gritten, W. G. Howard Merriman, Sir F. Boyd
Boulton, W. W. Guinness, Thomas L. E. B. Mills, Sir Frederick (Leyton, E.)
Bower, Lieut.-Com. Robert Tatton Gunston, Captain D. W. Mills, Major J. D. (New Forest)
Bowyer, Capt. Sir George E. W. Guy, J. C. Morrison Milne, Charles
Boyce, H. Leslie Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H. Mitchell, Harold P.(Br'tf'd & Chisw'k)
Braithwaite, J. G. (Hillsborough) Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford) Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Briant, Frank Hamilton, Sir R. W.(Orkney & Ztl'nd) Moreing, Adrian C.
Broadbent, Colonel John Hammersley, Samuel S. Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh)
Brockiebank, C. E. R. Hanbury, Cecil Morrison, William Shepherd
Browne, Captain A. C. Hanley, Dennis A. Moss, Captain H. J.
Buchan, John Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry Muirhead, Major A. J.
Buchan-Hepburn, P. G. T. Harbord, Arthur Munro, Patrick
Burnett, John George Harris, Sir Percy Nation, Brigadier-General J. J. H.
Cadogan, Hon. Edward Hartington, Marquess of Newton, Sir Douglas George C.
Caine, G. R. Hall. Hartland, George A. Nicholson, Godfrey (Morpeth)
Campbell, Edward Taswell (Bromley) Harvey, George (Lambeth, Kenningt'n) North, Captain Edward T.
Caporn, Arthur Cecll Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes) Nunn, William
Castlereapgh, Viscount Hailam, Henry (Lindsay, H'ncastle) O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Sir Hugh
Castle Stewart, Earl Haslam, Sir John (Bolton) Ormiston, Thomas
Cautley, Sir Henry S. Hellgers, Captain F. F. A. Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William G. A.
Cayzer, Sir Charles (Chester, City) Henderson, Sir Vivian L. (Cheimsf'd) Palmer, Francis Noel
Cayzer, Maj. Sir H. R. (Prtsmth., S.) Hepworth, Joseph Patrick, Colin M.
Cazalet, Thelma (Islington, E.) Holdsworth, Herbert Peake, Captain Osbert
Cazalet, Capt. V. A. (Chippenham) Hope, Sydney (Cheater, Stalybridge) Pearson, William G.
Chalmers, John Rutherford Hore-Belisha, Leslie Penny, Sir George
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. N. (Edgbaston) Hornby, Frank Perkins, Walter R. D.
Chapman, Sir Samuel (Edinburgh, S.) Horobin, Ian M. Petherick, M.
Chorlton, Alan Ernest Leofrie Horsbnigh, Florence Peto, Geoffrey K. (W'verh'pt'n, Blistn)
Chotzner, Alfred James Howitt, Dr. Alfred B. Pickering, Ernest H.
Christie, James Archibald Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.) Pickford, Hon. Mary Ada
Clydesdale, Marquess of Hunter, Dr. Joseph (Dumfries) Pike, Cecil F.
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D. Hunter, Capt. M. J. (Brigg) Potter, John
Colfox, Major William Philip Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer Powell, Lieut.-Col. Evelyn G. H.
Conant, R. J. E. Hurd, Sir Percy Pownall, Sir Assheton
Cook, Thomas A. Hutchison, W. D. (Essex, Romt'd) Procter, Major Henry Adam
Courtauld, Major John Sewell Jackson, Sir Henry (Wandsworth, C.) Pybus, Percy John
Cranborne, viscount Jackson, J. C. (Heywood & Radcliffe) Ralkes, Henry V. A. M.
Craven-Ellis, William Jamieson, Douglas Ramsay, Alexander (W. Bromwich)
Crooke, J. Smedley Janner, Barnett Ramsay, Capt, A. H. M. (Midlothian)
Crookshank, Capt. H. C. (Gainsb'ro) Jesson, Major Thomas E. Ramsay, T. B. W. (Western Isles)
Crossley, A. C. Joel, Dudley J. Barnato Ramsdan, E.
Cruddas, Lieut.-Colonel Bernard Jones, Lewis (Swansea, West) Ray, Sir William
Culverwell, Cyril Tom Ker, J. Campbell Rea, Walter Russell
Dalkeith, Earl of Kerr, Hamilton W. Reed, Arthur C. (Exeter)
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil) Kimball, Lawrence Reid, James S. C. (Stirling)
Davison, Sir William Henry Kirkpatrick, William M. Rentoul, Sir Gervals S.
Denman, Hon. R D. Knatchbull, Captain Hon. M. H. R. Renwick, Major Gustav A.
Danville, Alfred Knox, Sir Alfred Reynolds, Col. Sir James Philip
Despencer-Robertson, Major J. A. F. Latham, Sir Herbert Paul Rhys, Hon. Charles Arthur U.
Dickie, John P. Law, Sir Alfred Rosbotham, S. T.
Dixon, Rt. Hon. Herbert Law, Richard K. (Hull, S.W.) Ross, Ronald D.
Drewe, Cedric Leech, Dr. J. W. Ross Taylor, Walter (Woodbridge)
Duncan, lames A. L. (Kensington, N.) Lees-Jonas, John Ruggles-Brise, Colonel E. A.
Dunglass, Lord Leighton, Major B. E. P. Runge, Norah Cecil
Eden, Robert Anthony Lennox-Boyd, A. T. Russell, Albert (Kirkcaldy)
Edmondson, Major A. J. Liddall, Walter S. Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Elliot, Major Rt. Hon. Walter E. Lindsay, Noel Ker Russell, Hamer Field (Sheffield, B'tslde)
Ellis, Sir R. Geoffrey Llewellin, Major John J. Salmon, Major Isidore
Elliston, Captain George Sampson Llewellyn-Jones, Frederick Salt. Edward W.
Elmley, Viscount Lloyd, Geoffrey Samuel, Sir Arthur Michael (F'nham)
Emmott, Charles E. G. C. Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hn. G. (Wd. Gr'n) Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwan)
Emrys-Evans, P. V. Lockwood, John C. (Hackney, C.) Sandeman, Sir A, N. Stewart
Essenhigh, Reginald Clare Loder, Captain J. de Vere Sanderson, Sir Frank Barnard
Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univ.) Lovat-Fraser, James Alexander Scone, Lord
Everard, W. Lindsay Lumley, Captain Lawrence R. Selley, Harry R.
Falle, Sir Bertram G. Lyons, Abraham Montagu Shaw, Helen B. (Lanark, Bothwelll
Fermoy, Lord Mabane, William Shaw, Captain William T. (Forfar)
Fielden, Edward Brocklehurst McCorquodale, M. S. Simmonds, Oliver Edwin
Flint, Abraham John Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.) Skelton, Archibald Noel
Foot, Isaac (Cornwall, Bodmin) McEwen, Captain J. H. F. Smiles, Lieut.-Col. Sir Walter D.
Fraser, Captain Ian McKie, John Hamilton Smith, Bracewell (Dulwich)
Fuller, Captain A. G. Maclay, Hon. Joseph Paton Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dlne, C.)
Ganzoni, Sir John McLean, Major Alan Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John McLean, Dr. W. H. (Tradeston) Somervell, Donald Bradley
Soper, Richard Thomson, Sir Frederick Charles Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)
Southby, Commander Archibald R. J. Titchfield, Major the Marquess of Williams. Herbert G. (Croydon, S.)
Spears, Brigadier-General Edward L. Todd, Capt. A. J. K. (B'wick-on-T.) Wills, Wilfrid D.
Spencer, Captain Richard A. Todd, A. L. S. (Kingswinford) Wilson, Clyde T. (West Toxteth)
Spender-Clay, Rt. Hon. Herbert H. Touche, Gordon Cosmo Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westmorland) Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement Winter-ton, Rt. Hon. Earl
Stones, James Turton, Robert Hugh Womersley, Walter James
Stourton, Hon. John J. Vaughan-Morgan, Sir Kenyon Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir H. Kingsley
Strauss, Edward A. Wallace, John (Dunfermline) Wood, sir Murdoch McKenzie (Banff)
Strickland, Captain W. F. Ward, Lt.-Col. Sir A. L. (Hull) Worthington, Dr. John V.
Stuart, Lord C. Crichton- Ward, Irene Mary Bewick (Wallsend) Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton(S'v'noaks)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray F. Warrender, Sir Victor A. G. Young, Ernest J. (Middlesbrough, E.)
Tate, Mavis Constance Wedderburn, Henry James Serymgeour-
Taylor, Vice-Admiral E. A. (P'dd'gt'n, S.) Weymouth, Viscount TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Templeton, William P. White, Henry Graham Lord Erskine and Mr. Harcourt
Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton) Whiteside, Borras Noel H. Johnston