§ 10.6 p.m.
§ Lieut.-Colonel Sir WALTER SMILESI beg to move,
That this House views with grave concern the decline in the export of cotton piece goods from Lancashire and urges the Government to take all possible steps to assist this great industry.The principal industry of Lancashire is this great cotton industry. If you scratch a Russian, you find a Tartar, but if you scratch a Lancashire man you find some of the finest woven cotton cloth. The issue at the whole of the last Election in Lancashire was never such a thing as the means test. The only question we were asked was: "When are you going to get our cotton mills to work again?" It is very depressing to have to go back to Lancashire now and to feel that the employment figures in the cotton industry are still very bad. People are drifting out of the cotton industry; people whose fathers, grandfathers and perhaps greater and fathers have been employed as weavers are now having to look elsewhere for their livelihood. It is a very 309 moderate figure to say that there are at least 160,000 unemployed in Lancashire due to the depression in the Lancashire cotton industry. To the Lancashire Members about me it is unnecessary to draw any picture of the mills idle there, some of them emptied of machinery for ever, with their looms perhaps sold to Brazil at scrap prices, £l per loom, to compete now with us in the markets overseas. The Lancashire people are well aware of the fact that names illustrious in the cotton industry, like Hornsby, are now out of it for ever, and that people are beginning to look round for other means of employment.I have to admit that this is one of the most difficult industries which the Government have to assist. If it is a question of tomatoes or raspberries, it is almost a simple matter to assist the market gardeners of this country by means of quotas or tariffs, but when it comes to a question of markets overseas, it is a case of treaties or obligations, and a very difficult matter of negotiation it is. I see that there are two commercial treaties being discussed at the present moment, one, I understand, with the Scandinavia countries and the other with the Argentine. Of course, in Scandinavia I suppose one stands a better chance of selling things like Jaeger or Wolsey garments rather than the dainty fabrics manufactured by Tootal-Broadhurst. Nevertheless, summer-time comes, and girls will be girls, and there must be a chance of an opening there for Lancashire cotton goods. I trust that when that treaty is concluded we shall see Lancashire goods, cotton textiles, a prominent part of that agreement. In the Argentine there is a much warmer climate, and possibly there are better openings there. We all know the difficulties of supplying cheap meat for our working population here, but when an agreement is made with the Argentine, I sincerely hope that we are going to see the exports of cotton textile goods into South America increase.
After foreign countries come the Dominions, and I am glad to say that in the terms of the Ottawa Agreement our mills in Lancashire are to be given a fair chance of competition with those in our Dominions overseas. Australia has always been a good purchaser of Lancashire goods, and I hope that now she is through the crisis these quantities will 310 increase. When, however, we come to the Colonies, matters are rather disappointing. I was glad to see a letter in the "Times" which reported that the Secretary of State for the Colonies had taken up matters with the State Assembly in Ceylon with regard to the fact that no preference has been given to Lancashire textile goods. I am a tea-planter myself, and I have every possible sympathy with the tea-planters of Ceylon, but I am sure that they themselves would be the very first to admit, if it were put to them, that now that Great Britain has given a substantial preference to Ceylon tea, it would be only fair in return that a substantial preference should be given to Lancashire cotton goods.
In Africa, I understand that the question is extremely complicated, as about 1885, when there was a general scramble for land in Africa, various treaties and arrangements with other foreign countries were made, and these were reviewed again in 1919. Under these arrangements a great part of Africa was to be an ever-open door, and no preference was to be given in a great part of that continent to British cotton goods. There are, however, one or two colonies in Africa which, I believe, leave an opportunity for negotiation, and I hope that the Secretary of State for the Colonies will not forget them when the opportunity offers itself. Of course, the principal reason for the decline in the export of cotton piece goods is Japanese competition. The Japanese, our erstwhile pupils, who used to come over to our technical schools, universities and mills in Lancashire, have now built up a wonderful organisation for themselves, perhaps by means of subsidies, but principally by the depreciation of the Japanese yen. Only a year or two ago, when I was in India, for 100 rupees we used to get 133 Japanese yen. To-day I think that the rate of exchange is 82 yen for 100 rupees. It is that sort of competition that we are up against in Lancashire.
After the Crown Colonies, of course, we have to consider the question of India. I am the last person to wish to upset the Convention which was agreed upon in 1921. I have always been a supporter of further self-government for India. Indeed, I think that if the Government had acted more quickly upon 311 the lines of the Simon Commission Report, we might have had a very much better feeling in India to-day than there is. It is this delay that has encouraged opposition in political opinion. We have, however, to respect this Convention, by which India now has her own Tariff Board and the right has been acknowledged by three or four successive Governments to impose tariffs not only as revenue tariffs but also for the protection of her own industries.
We all know the strength of these conventions; only the other day we said that it was quite right and proper to be able to put five fielders on the leg side for a slow bowler, but that one was not allowed to put on more than two when he is a fast bowler. It is this sort of cricket that we want to play with India: we want fair play for India and fair play for Lancashire also. At the present moment the tariffs in India are 50 per cent, against Japanese goods, and 25 per cent, against goods from this country. I suggest that it is the depreciation of the Japanese yen, and not British competition which Indian mills fear at the present moment. It is Japanese competition. When we look at the figures of the difference in the imports of Japanese cotton goods into India and those of Lancashire cotton goods, we find that Japanese cotton goods have increased in the course of some 15 years by more than 100 times, whereas the import of Lancashire cotton goods has decreased. Another reason why I consider that 25 per cent, is too high is that I see from the papers that five new cotton mills are to be erected in Allahabad. It will do a good turn to our machine-makers in England because I understand that all the engines, machinery, shafting, etc., are to be ordered in this country. But while we are pleased that our machine-makers are getting some extra trade, we have to realise that in the future this modern machinery will be competing with our own. It must also be remembered that it is not every Province in India which either grows cotton or manufactures cotton. For instance, the Province in which I spent 26 years of my life did not grow any cotton and did not manufacture any. We grew only tea. In that connection I could use the same argument 312 as I used when I spoke about Ceylon. A definite preference has been given to Indian tea, and I hope, in return, that the Tariff Board, and later the Legislative Assembly in India, will see their way to reduce the excessive tariff on Lancashire cotton goods.
I want to see trade increased between the two countries. I want to see this country taking more Indian tea, and more manganese. In the latter connection there is no doubt that under the Ottawa Agreements the iron and steel manufacturers made a very good agreement. I understand that pig iron from India is to be imported into this country, manufactured in the Welsh rolling-mills into corrugated iron and re-exported in that form to India, where it will get a substantial preference. Seeing that the Indian iron and steel masters are now, I understand, members of the British Federation of Ironmasters, I hope that it is not too much to expect that in the future we shall see Indian mills and Lancashire mills in one federation. I do not bring this Motion forward in any spirit of antagonism to India. I want to see better feeling and closer economic co-operation between the countries. The mills in India and in Lancashire are sufficient to supply the whole of our Crown Colonies and our Indian Empire without having to turn to Japan for a yard. There are so many hon. Members behind me who have a very much closer acquaintance with the cotton industry than I have and who are experts on the subject, that I will cut my speech short. I bring forward the Motion, which, I hope, the Government will accept in those terms, hoping for closer economic co-operation between India, our Colonies, and the old country.
§ 10.20 p.m.
§ Mr. CHORLTONI beg to second the Motion.
It is disappointing to find the House so empty when a question of such importance to this country is before it. It is to me entirely inexplicable that so much time should be taken in the discussion of something in regard to Carlton House Terrace, which will not put any man into a job, and that the trade in the North of England should be as it is at the present time. It is one of the most disappointing things that I have had to meet since I came to this House. The Lan- 313 cashire cotton trade is one upon which Lancashire depends, and the population not only in the cotton trade, but associated with it round Manchester is nearly as great as the population around London. That trade, which has grown up in 200 years—it is 200 years since Richard Arkwright came forward with his invention— has enabled the workers in the cotton mills to earn millions of pounds, which have gone into the coffers of this country and helped, perhaps, to build Nash's monument, Carlton House Terrace. That trade is now faced with a prospect which is very serious. Short as is the time at our disposal to-night some of us will be afforded the opportunity of presenting the case of the cotton industry to the House, and asking for sympathy.
May I quote some of the figures which have been used of late in the meetings which have been held in Lancashire, where we have been discussing what should be done. In 1924 the British exports of cotton cloth to India, British Malaya, Ceylon, Kenya and Uganda amounted to 1,428,000,000 yards more than those of Japan, but in 1931 the Japanese cotton goods imported to those same countries were more than the British exports by 123,000,000 yards. It is most appalling to think that this trade, which was the largest export trade of the country, upon which so many workpeople depended, has now fallen from its high estate and we have been beaten by Japan. It may not be as important as Carlton House Terrace, but in the North of England it is causing very great despondency. The exports of cotton goods from Japan into British Malaya in 1932 amounted to over 16,000,000 yards and into European countries 4,000,000 yards. Into Ceylon in 1932, in August, September and October, Japan sent 15,000,000 yards, while Great Britain sent only 6,000,000 yards of cotton goods. Ceylon is a country of which the Mover of the Resolution has spoken and a country to which we have given a tea preference. We can expect in return something which will help the Lancashire trade. It is useless for anything short of a very heavy preference to be given to us if we are going to recover these markets, which have existed in the past. To Kenya and Uganda in 1931 Japan exported 26,900,000 yards, compared with only 5,000,000 yards from this country.
314 These figures may not be remembered by some people, but they show how serious is the state of affairs. In 1931 Great Britain exported more yards of cotton goods than Japan but in 1932 by the third quarter we were exporting 556,000,000 yards and Japan 603,000,000 yards. That is the time when Japan took the place of this country as the largest exporter of cotton textile goods. Can anyone wonder that the people of Lancashire, seeing these returns and knowing that the future would be worse, searched around for some means of saving themselves? In front of them there is nothing but semi-starvation; and for their children something even worse. We think that the House should take the matter so seriously as to combine in an effort to devise means for overcoming the difficulties of the trade. Japan is the country we have to face, and any measure that can be devised should be brought in. Other countries use dumping. Every time we make a move we are told that a Treaty is in the way, and that we cannot do anything because of it. We in Lancashire say that the Treaty with Japan should be denounced. It is more important to keep our own working people in employment than, to have any concern for a country which is so jealous of its own people. If the Treaty cannot be denounced then let us have an anti-dumping duty. Why should not the depreciation in the Japanese yen be good enough evidence for us to take action? Perhaps the cotton industry is not important; we are a long way from London.
The Indian side of the question has been explored from every point of view and so far feeling has not partaken of anything of a violent nature. It is felt that the Government really have tried hard to do what they can, but it is still thought that they do not realise the seriousness of the state of affairs in Lancashire and that more should be done. There is no desire to do anything which will affect the poor people of India, and the contention put forward for a reduction of the Tariff is based upon the fact that it will benefit Lancashire and also the poorer population of India who will pay less for Lancashire goods. We have also considered the position of the African Colonies, and in regard to the Treaties there it is unfortunate that we could not take action when they were 315 considered some time ago. Treaties like the Congo-Basin Treaty must be dealt with if we are to get anything like the trade we used to have with Africa. The same thing holds good in regard to Malaya, where there is a Dutch Treaty.
We want to feel that the concern felt by the Government is as great as the position of the industry deserves, and it would be well if they could appoint a special committee of Members from all sides of the House to ensure that the subject shall receive the attention it deserves. In the meetings which have been held in Lancashire, non-party meetings, the one object has been to deal with the fall in the trade and devise means for recovering it, and I hope that hon. Members of the Labour party will do what they can to help us. We are perfectly prepared to accept any proposal which will provide a better way of arriving at some result. I do not want to take up time by going into further details, though there are many other aspects of this important question with which I would like to deal. I am hoping that some of my hon. Friends behind me will deal with all the other matters that should be brought forward in support of this Motion.
§ 10.31 p.m.
§ Sir STAFFORD CRIPPSI am sure we have great sympathy with this Vote of Censure on the Government, and we shall certainly support it as such, because it brings into the public view that inactivity which has been so characteristic of the National Government ever since it was formed—inactivity, that is to say, in anything that may be helpful, though considerable activity on the other side so far as restriction of trade goes. The Mover of the Motion spoke about the promises that were held out in Lancashire at the General Election, and the urgent question as to the re-employment of those who were unemployed in the cotton industry. I am sure we shall all agree with him that very extravagant promises were made on behalf of the National Government, that if they were returned to power there would be an amelioration of the unemployment in Lancashire. But like most of the other extravagant promises which were made by the National Government that promise has not been fulfilled.
316 The Seconder of the Motion spoke of the selfishness of Japan in trying to find markets for Japanese goods. I did not quite follow his argument, because I understand that he is anxious to find markets for Lancashire goods. No doubt the same patriotic motive that compels him to try to find markets for Lancashire goods is compelling the Japanese to try to find markets for Japanese goods. The only unfortunate thing is that the Japanese yen has depreciated more than the English pound. Perhaps some Members will remember that about the time of the last General Election a good deal was said about the depreciation of the English pound and the tragic consequences that might follow if we went off gold, and various things of that sort. Now we hear that the tragedy is not that we have gone off gold, but that we have not gone far enough off gold.
§ Mr. CHORLTONWhat it amounts to is that the hon. and learned Gentleman suggests that we should bring down the conditions of labour and living in Lancashire to a level with those in Japan.
§ Sir S. CRIPPSI am afraid that the hon. Member does not follow my argument. It is not a question of the standard of living in Lancashire; it is a question of the devaluation of the pound, which does not necessarily have any reaction, so far as the standard of living in Lancashire is concerned. But the effect of the cutting off of the Lancashire market, of course, is one of the inevitable results of trade restrictions all over the world. [HON. MEMBERS: "No!"] Hon. Members behind me think it is not, but both the Mover and the Seconder have been speaking almost entirely of trade restrictions.
§ Sir JOHN HASLAMThe exports for the last three months of the past year showed an increase, and that was the first increase for years.
§ Mr. LAWSONThey were less than those in 1931.
§ Sir S. CRIPPSOf course that is a perfectly accurate statement, but I rather gathered that the hon. Member's complaint was that the Lancashire cotton industry was being hampered by import duties in other countries. He instanced India, Ceylon and other countries. The difficulties which are now widely—almost 317 universally—acknowledged, of tariff walls as interferences with international trade are met by the cotton industry, just as by every other industry in the world. If one is going to erect tariff barriers, they must necessarily have their reactions. I am not familiar with the recent figures as regards the Javanese trade which used to be a big trade in cotton with Lancashire and I cannot say how far that trade may be affected in the future by the taxation of Javanese tea but presumably the time will come, if it has not already arrived—
§ Mr. CHORLTONThe Javanese trade is a Dutch trade.
§ Sir S. CRIPPSBut a great deal of Lancashire cotton used to go to Java. [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] It depends on what one means by a "great deal," but there was a very considerable amount. I have not the figures but I have known many instances of Manchester firms who exported under their own marks cotton goods to Java and did a considerable trade. Naturally if one puts restrictions on imports from Java one is apt to find that there is a less easy flow of cotton goods into Java. If hon. Members think that the policy which the Government have so far pursued is likely to lead to an expanding market for cotton goods from Lancashire we think they will be disappointed. We think that the other way of approaching the problem, that is, from the Lancashire end, by trying to bring about a state of affairs under a nationalised cotton board by which production can be organised and put on more competitive lines in relation to foreign manufacturers is the more hopeful way. I am sure that the hon. and gallant Gentleman who is going to answer for the Government will tell us that the right cure is to nationalise this industry and bring it under centralised control, in order to effect those economies which are so essential. If this Vote of Censure leads to a realisation by the Government, tardy though it may be, that the real cure for the troubles which are presented to them and with which they are unable to cope is the cure of Socialism, then some good will have been done by this discussion.
§ 10.39 p.m.
§ Mr. J. P. MORRISI am sure that the House and in particular Members from 318 Lancashire feel grateful to the hon. and gallant Member for Blackburn (Sir W. Smiles) for bringing before the House the position of the cotton trade in Lancashire. My hon. and learned Friend who has just spoken described the Motion as a Vote of Censure on the Government and welcomed the opportunity of bringing to the public view the inactivity of the Government in regard to the Lancashire cotton trade. May I remind him that the Government have not been inactive so far as the cotton trade is concerned. May I remind him in case it has not been brought to his notice, that the Government concerned themselves very much in the preparation of the case for the cotton trade at Ottawa and that, arising out of the deliberations at Ottawa, the cotton trade has received substantial benefit. May I remind my hon. and learned Friend again that, as a result of the Government's activity, for the first time we have had a recognition by India of Imperial Preference, which was ratified in the Indian Legislative Assembly?
It is not my intention to follow the hon. and learned Gentleman. I wish particularly to deal with what I consider is the main reason for the continued depression in the cotton trade. The Mover and Seconder of the Motion have rightly said that it is due to Japanese competition, and stress was laid on the extensive competition in India of Japanese piece goods. May I ask my hon. and gallant Friend the Minister for the Department of Overseas Trade if he will bear in mind a suggestion which I very humbly make to him I As a means of increasing the export of Lancashire cotton piece goods to India, I recommend His Majesty's Government to take notice of, and if necessary form a Trade Committee to explore, the possibilities of a more extended use of Indian cotton in Lancashire cotton mills. I am certain that if it were possible to give an assurance to India that we were prepared to use more Indian cotton, the Indian cotton industry in turn would give us a guarantee to take more of our cotton piece goods in preference to those from Japan. Japan in 1931 bought 21,000,000 crores of rupees worth of Indian cotton, find India in turn took only 8,000,000 crores of Japanese cotton piece goods. Therefore, India had a favourable trade balance, so far as the 319 cotton trade was concerned, of 13,000,000 crores of rupees.
I would like to make a slight reference to the Cotton Trade League, which has been formed in Lancashire and to which reference has been made by my hon. Friend the Member for the Platting Division (Mr. Chorlton). With the object of that League I fully sympathise, but I would ask the Government not to take too seriously the suggestion brought up by that body to attempt to dictate to India any interference in the fiscal freedom granted to that country. My hon. Friend the Member for Platting admitted that such a state of affairs existed, and I would suggest to the Government that the opinion expressed at those meetings on that point is not the whole opinion of the people interested in the cotton trade of Lancashire. It is highly desirable that, at a time when we are about to set up a new constitution for India, and when the report of the Indian Tariff Commission is now due, instead of creating a spirit of hostility in India, at any rate in Lancashire we should do nothing that might upset what we all hope will be a happy solution of the great question of the future Government of India.
The position in the Crown Colonies is very different, and I would like the Government to make a declaration as to whether or not, as a result of the commercial treaties that we have signed with various countries which give the most favoured nation treatment to Japan in our Crown Colonies, the advantages that we get in return outweigh the disadvantages which the cotton trade of Lancashire suffers by Japanese competition in those parts. I am certain that if the Government could inform the people of Lancashire that it would be disadvantageous to terminate those treaties, then the voice of Lancashire in that respect would be quiet, but if it were found that the disadvantages that the cotton trade of Lancashire suffered from extensive competition from Japan were not offset by the advantage we received from other countries, the voice of Lancashire, which has now begun to be heard, would continue to be heard in a more violent strain. It is a pity that the time is so short for a discussion of such importance and magnitude. I have in mind that my hon. Friend the Minister for Overseas Trade 320 is to reply and I will finish by asking the Government to give earnest consideration to the deplorable condition of the Lancashire cotton trade, and, as far as possible, without cutting across the previous policy of successive Governments since 1919, to do everything in their power to give assistance to this great industry.
§ 10.47 p.m.
§ Lieut.-Colonel J. COLVILLE (Secretary, Overseas Trade Department)I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising this question. Speaking on behalf of the Government, I have pleasure in accepting the Motion. We do not regard it as a Vote of Censure for a reason I shall be pleased to make plain. We take the reference in the Motion to the decline in exports of cotton piece goods to relate to a fairly wide period. My hon. and learned Friend the Member for East Bristol (Sir S. Cripps) unfortunately had not the facts when he described this as a Vote of Censure on the present Government. In point of fact, the position is that in 1932 the export of cotton piece goods from this country increased from 1,716,000,000 square yards in 1931 to 2,198,000,000 square yards in 1932. In the case of India, the increase was from 390,000,000 square yards in 1931 to 599,000,000 square yards in 1932. I think that to dispose of my hon. and learned Friend's further suggestion, I have only to say that during the term of the Government of which he was a Member, the fall of exports to India were on an unprecedented scale.
From the hon. and learned Gentleman's observations, I will turn to more serious observations that have been made on this question. His Majesty's Government regard the Lancashire cotton trade as of the greatest national importance, not only on account of its employment value, but also because of the balance of trade on account of its great exporting activity. The Government are not content merely to assert this, but are willing to show that active efforts are being made to help this great industry in many fields and will continue to do it. Let me outline some points in relation to the industry and some advantages that have been secured.
First of all, let me make reference to the Dominion and other markets. In relation to the Ottawa Agreements, let me take one or two countries in order. In 321 Canada, as hon. Members know, apart from mercerised yarns and yarns for mercerising, on which the continuance of free entry with increased preference has been secured, the changes in Canada are small. We have, however, secured a new agreement and an undertaking by the Canadian Government to set up a tariff board to review any duties specified by the United Kingdom Government for the purpose of recommending the changes which may be necessary in order to bring the duties into accord with the principle that they shall not exceed such a level as will give the United Kingdom producer full opportunity of reasonable competition on the basis of relative cost of economical and efficient production. United Kingdom producers will be entitled to the right of audience before the board.
As regards Australia, the application of the preference formula laid down in the trade agreement concluded at Ottawa resulted in a new preference of 10 per cent, ad valorem for sewing thread and increases in the margins of preference on other yarns and piece goods. The increase in the margin was generally 5 per cent, ad valorem in the case of piece goods, and from 7½ to 10 per cent, ad valorem in the case of yarns and threads. A few of the reductions in duty introduced since the Ottawa Conference apply to cotton goods. The Commonwealth Government also undertook that the existing duties should be reviewed by a tariff board to bring them into line with the principle which I have enunciated.
In regard to the Union of South Africa, prior to the Ottawa Conference the duties on cotton piece goods of a value of less than 1s. 3d. a yard f.o.b. were 5 per cent, ad valorem on United Kingdom goods and 10 per cent, ad valorem on foreign goods. Under the recent trade agreement the Union Government undertook to impose a minimum specific duty of l½d. per yard on these goods when imported from sources other than the United Kingdom. Southern Rhodesia imposed a similar specific duty. That is of distinct advantage to United Kingdom trade. As regards Newfoundland, the agreement is conditional on certain other points. If that agreement goes through cotton manufactures generally, including piece goods, will get a new preference of 10 per cent, ad valorem.
322 Then, as regards the Colonies, among those which have recently granted new Custom tariff preferences to United Kingdom cotton goods are Mauritius, Gambia and Sierra-Leone—before Ottawa —and the Federated and Non-Federated Malay States since Ottawa. The position in regard to the Colonies is that in almost all of them, except Ceylon, a preference in already accorded to British cotton goods. Reference has been made to the position of Ceylon. While this matter is under consideration I do not want to say anything in addition to what has already been said, beyond emphasising that the terms of a telegram which has been sent are quite clear and specific, and my hon. Friends are aware of the attitude of the Government in this regard.
§ Mr. CHORLTONThe great difficulty is that the preferences are so small from the Colonies.
§ Lieut.-Colonel COLVILLEMy hon. Friend would like a larger range of preferences. That is perfectly true, and we must work within what limits we can. The Government are fully aware that an improvement in the preference margin will naturally help British trade. Then reference has been made to the West African and East African territories. I cannot discuss the whole question within the time at my disposal, but hon. Members will be aware that owing to certain treaties it is not possible to secure preferential margins in those districts at the present time. The question is complicated by certain important conditions which are now being examined closely. The Government are anxious to take the views of those trading interests which trade in these territories and intend to bring them into full consultation on the matter as soon as the legal question can be made clear. His Majesty's Government are aware of the difficult questions arising there, and also of the feelings aroused. I would add that the trading interests have not up to now been quite unanimous in their desires in this regard, and it is important that His Majesty's Government should take them with them in proposals concerning East and West Africa.
I would turn now to what is, perhaps, the most important point raised by my hon. Friend, Japanese competition. Its extent is fully recognised. These figures 323 will show how important is the question. The total exports of cotton goods from Japan in the first eleven months of 1931 amounted to 1,317,000,000 square yards, and rose in 1932 to 1,821,000,000 —a very big rise in a difficult year. Here are the figures in the case of India. For those 11 months in 1931 the exports from Japan amounted to 360,000,000 square yards, and rose in 1932 to 592,000,000. There was a similar rise in United Kingdom exports to India, though it was not quite so great. For 11 months in 1931 our exports to India amounted to 363,000,000 square yards, and rose to 544,000,000 square yards in 11 months in 1932. India herself has recognised this intensified competition from Japan. In August last the Indian Government increased the duty on foreign cotton piece goods from 31¼ per cent, to 50 per cent., leaving the duty on United Kingdom imports at 25 per cent., thereby increasing a preference of 6¼ per cent, to 25 per cent.
What of the future? Hon. Members have said that they have apprehensions with regard to the future. At this late hour I have only time to say that the President of the Board of Trade received a very important and influential deputation a few days ago, and I was with him at the time. The position was very fully and clearly outlined, and the Government are fully aware of the facts of the case, and will give it every consideration. In the terms of the Motion the Government will do all that is possible to safeguard the interests of this important trade. More than that I cannot say at this stage. There is one word more I have to say. There are negotiations at the present time with a number of countries. My hon. Friend mentioned one country, but in point of fact 19 countries have asked us for tariff negotiations, and I can say that in all cases where there is a market or a potential market for cotton goods this most important industry will be kept in the forefront of our minds. We have much pleasure in accepting the Motion. We do not regard it as a Vote of Censure, but as an earnest attempt on the part of this House to help an industry which plays an important part in our national welfare.
§
Resolved,
That this House views with grave concern the decline in the export of cotton piece goods from Lancashire and urges the Government to take all possible steps to assist this great industry.