§ " The Treasury state that they have also received from the Import Duties Advisory Committee recommendations relating to Customs duties on the following commodities:
- Yeast,
- Pottery and clay products,
- Baskets,
- Fabric Gloves,
§ It is necessary for my purpose to show that this question of duties upon fabric gloves is not a question of a new duty. There has been a history of duties in relation to that particular industry. They have had varying duties, sometimes on and sometimes off, for 15 years. In 1918 they came under the Safeguarding Duties Act, which operated against imports from enemy countries, mostly imports from 508 Germany, as these imports practically are all made in Saxony. There has been more general legislation since. There was a duty of 33½ per cent. for five years, but when the Labour Government came into office for the first time, that duty was allowed to lapse in 1923. It was reimposed two years later, in 1925, and continued for a further five years when it lapsed again under the Labour Government in 1930. Then we come to the present Government. They began with no duty at all. Just before Christmas 1931 we had the Abnormal Importation Duties Act, which imposed a duty of 50 per cent. In April that was changed to a duty of 20 per cent. There have been several applications since. We now learn that a recommendation has been made, and obviously it must be for an increase in the duty. I want to point out in the first place that this is no new duty. The industry has had a duty and has been without a duty, and under the present Government there has been a Duty of 50 per cent., and one of 20 per cent. Therefore I ask hon. Members to consider the position of this House in regard to the Import Duties Advisory Committee and the Government. The Committee is inacessible to hon. Members. When we go to the Department we are told that the duty of the Advisory Committee is to advise the Government, and that no Government Department exercises any control over them. Now we know that when they come to a decision it may be delayed for weeks and months while negotiations go on with foreign countries dealing perhaps with industries which had no relation whatever to the industry which has been the subject of the recommendation.
§ I want to know when this recommendation was made. Was it this year; since Christmas? I was under the impression the other day that the Board of Trade were waiting for the recommendation of the Advisory Committee. I want to know why workpeople should be thrown out of work, as in this case, and why this industry should be sacrificed in the supposed interests of other work-people? Is it a question of the greatest goods to the greatest number. The fabric glove industry is practically destroyed in this country. Only one or two little factories are operating at all, and only a minute fraction of those employed a few years ago are now in employment.
509§ It is only in one special line, fabric gloves made from artificial silk that any business at all is done. This industry had protection under the Abnormal Importation Duties Act, because there was an abnormal flood of dumped goods into this country. The position in January was worse than it was 12 or 13 months ago. In January, 107,000 dozen fabric gloves were imported from abroad, and in one case an order has been placed by a firm of wholesale glove buyers in London for the purchase of 24,000 dozen simplex cotton gloves in a single line which had been bought by a firm in America. They were sent to this country because there was no demand for them in New York, and were sold at 7s. 6d. per dozen pairs, which is about half the price of the cost of production in Saxony and about one-third of what they would cost to produce in this country.
§ There is every evidence therefore, that as far as the abnormal importation of dumped goods is concerned, the position is worse now than when there was a 50 per cent. duty. The condition of the industry is deplorable. The industry is practically wiped out. There were considerations that related to Lancashire yarn. Now, far from Lancashire yarn being used in the production of these Saxony fabric gloves, the yarn that is being used in Germany is almost exclusively German-spun cotton yarn, which is very much cheaper than anything which could be imported from Lancashire.
§ I want to know when this recommendation was made, and with what country these negotiations are taking place. If the Minister cannot tell us that, let him tell us whether the negotiations relate to any industry connected with glove-making. The industry in this country lately employed 1,000 hands, at another time 2,000 hands, and if we made here all the fabric gloves that we use it would employ 6,000 hands. Is the Minister sure that in keeping us waiting until the industry is finally destroyed, for some hypothetical advantage we shall get for some other industry, he is not grasping at the shadow and dropping the bone?
§ 11.12 p.m.
§ Mr. HALESI want to put before the House the very desperate condition of the pottery industry of North Stafford 510 shire. To a large extent the pottery industry is affected similarly to the glove industry, inasmuch as the Abnormal Import Duties Act resulted in a duty of 50 per cent. From that moment a new era of prosperity dawned on the district. Factories were employed on full time, more hands were engaged and machinery was ordered for the increase of business which rapidly came in. Then, to the consternation of the district, the Advisory Committee was appointed. It adopted a course which to every business mind seemed amazing. Instead of allowing the existing duties to remain until they had had an opportunity of going into matters in detail, and seeing whether the duties were ample or insufficient, they adopted the course of making a 20 per cent. datum line, raising the duty by 10 per cent. up to 20 per cent., and reducing the 50 per cent. to that 20 per cent. level.
The results were disastrous. Immediately the new duties came into force many orders from the Continent and home buyers were cancelled, and to-day in Staffordshire you can see thousands and thousands of tea sets lying unsaleable in the warehouses.
I am very pleased indeed to find that there is some possibility of the duties being enhanced. After 10 months of weary waiting, during which time the whole district has been on tenter hooks, not knowing what was to happen, we find that after a recommendation has been made which means the enhancement of the existing duties, we are told that for some mysterious reason of international bargaining the duties are not to be divulged, and we are still in uncertainty. I demand on behalf of the potters and manufacturers in North Staffordshire that we should not be victimised, that this industry should not be made a counter in some bargaining business abroad and brought to the verge of ruin. The situation is desperate, and I hope that the Government will see the importance, at this time, when everybody is asking for more employment, of not taking away the livelihood of these people, who have been waiting for 10 long months for the restoration of their prosperity. I hope the Government will at once carry out what the committee have advised.
§ 11.16 p.m.
§ Mr. HOLDSWORTHTo those of us who never believed in tariffs as a bargaining power, some of the statements made during the last two or three weeks by different Ministers have been very interesting. Only a week ago, the Chancellor of the Exchequer referred to the use of tariffs as a bargaining weapon. This afternoon, the Lord President of the Council made the point that, if the world was to recover, there must be a lowering of tariff barriers. The Prime Minister last week said that at the World Economic Conference the opportunity would be taken of pressing home the necessity for lowering tariff barriers, and that our tariff would be used to that end. Members of the Conservative party have told us repeatedly that the purpose of placing tariffs on the Statute Book was that they should be used to bring in Free Trade throughout the world. We desire to impress that point of view on the Minister to-night. All these questions that are being raised show how little sincerity there is in many of the statements about the use of tariffs as a bargaining weapon. But I assure the Minister that so long as tariffs are used, in order to restore world trade, we shall give them every support in our power. We would like the Minister to-night to reassure us that the statements of the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Lord President of the Council can be accepted as positive proof of the intention of the Government to use tariffs and promote freedom of trade among all the nations of the world.
§ 11.19 p.m.
§ Sir FRANK SANDERSONIt was not my intention to take part in this Debate but the point raised by the hon. Member for Barnstaple (Sir B. Peto) is so important that I would like to mention the case of the duty upon linseed in this connection. A few weeks ago I raised the question of the import duty upon linseed and the seriousness of its effects. I pointed out that the result would be that we should be inundated with linseed oil from abroad and what I then intimated has proved correct. During December and January no less than 5,000 tons of linseed oil—
§ Sir B. PETOMay I make an appeal to my hon. Friend? The point that I 512 raised has nothing to do with the question of linseed oil and it is unfair when a question has been raised on the Adjournment that the Minister should not be given time to reply.
§ Sir F. SANDERSONI was under the impression that my hon. Friend's point was in regard to delay both by the Treasury and by the Advisory Committee in coming to a decision in regard to import duties. If I am wrong, I will give way.
§ 11.20 p.m.
§ Lieut.-Colonel COLVILLE (Secretary, Overseas Trade Department)I am glad the hon. Baronet the Member for Barnstaple (Sir B. Peto) has raised this question, because it gives me an apportunity of dealing with a point of importance, which refers not only to fabric gloves, but to the general position of industry in this country, in relation to reports from the Import Duties Advisory Committee and commercial negotiations. The word "hypothetical" has been used tonight, but I can assure hon. Members that there is no question of jeopardising industries in this country in order to obtain hypothetical benefits. It is recognised that we are in this country, and have been for many years, the greatest individual market in the world for foreign goods, and that we are entitled to use our bargaining power, and the argument it has given us, in our discussions with other nations; in other words, that the British tariff is not only for the purpose of giving stability and strength to our industries internally, but that we should be neglecting our duty if we did not make use of it also, as far as we can, in order to obtain better opportunities for the United Kingdom export trade.
The position is that the Import Duties Advisory Committee make reports based upon their views as to the need of industries in this country for Protection, in order to enable them to compete in the home market. That is the function of the Advisory Committee, which they carry out independently, as hon. Members know, and they make their report. It is not their function to consider the repercussions which their recommendations may have on negotiations which may be in progress, or immediately pending, with foreign countries, but His Majesty's Govern- 513 ment must clearly retain the right to take into account these wider questions when they decide whether or not to publish or to put into force the recommendations of the Advisory Committee. Let me explain the reason for that. Publication of a negative report, a report saying there was to be a decrease of duty, at a particular juncture might very well weaken our hands in negotiation, while equally action on a positive report, to increase a duty, at a particular juncture might have an effect on current negotiations which would damage British trade generally out of all proportion to the value of the duty to the particular trade concerned. That is a consideration which His Majesty's Government must have before them in dealing with the question.
My hon. Friend raised, very properly, the point, Who takes this responsibility, when the Import. Duties Advisory Committee have made their report to the Treasury, of that report not being immediately acted upon? I answer that by saying that the Government take that responsibility. They must do so, and they must do it with the knowledge, which only they have, of the reactions which this would have on trade as a whole. Therefore, we do not in any way seek to shirk the responsibility of delaying, in a particular case, the action recommended by the Committee, or of delaying publication of their report. I was asked the specific question, which I think I can answer, in relation to fabric gloves, When did the Treasury receive the report from the Advisory Committee? I find that in that case the report was received on 26th January. It was published in the Press later after consideration by the Government, and there was a delay.
§ Lieut.-Colonel COLVILLEI cannot answer that without notice. In the case of fabric gloves I ascertained the position because it was on that particular matter that the hon. Baronet gave notice. It is obvious it is not possible to debate in the House the reasons which may have been in the minds of the Government in taking a decision on any particular kind of goods, for these reasons. Hon. Members who have been engaged in any 514 negotiations of any kind will realise that to disclose information might very well be an embarrassment to them, and, of course, anything that I shall say to-night would have very wide publicity. Therefore I will ask my hon. Friend not to press his point as to the particular countries to which this bas relation. The trades which he and the hon. Member for Hanley (Mr. Hales) have raised are very closely before the Government. In determining what action they will take, they are having full regard to the variations in duty in those trades. My hon. Friend the Member for Barnstaple has outlined, in the case of fabric gloves, the ups and downs of the movements in regard to duties over a long period of years, but we are well aware of that, and we have fully in mind the desire of the fabric glove industry to know what future is in front of them. I can assure the hon. Baronet that we have that fully in mind. I would also add that I hope that an early decision will be possible on this matter.
My hon. Friend the Member for Hanley also raised the question, in relation to pottery, of the variation of duty. I would make it plain that the abnormal import duties which were applied at the rate of 50 per cent. were for a specific purpose. They were applied to prevent forestalling while the tariff was being more carefully developed. Therefore, it was made plain at the time that it was not intended that it should be a continuing rate of duty, and the machinery which was set up in the form of the Import Duties Advisory Committee was for the purpose—and I think hon. Members will agree that it was wisely set up—of having an independent committee to examine all the aspects of the questions put in front of them. At this stage I can say no more except to assure the House of two things. One is that there will be no question of jeopardising British industries for the sake of hypothetical advantages. We shall make certain in any negotiations in which we are engaged that there must be real and definite advantages before any concessions can be given. But we shall also have in mind the value of the industries spoken of to-night from the point of view of employment. Lastly, I would like to say that from the time the Import Duties Advisory Committee makes its report His Majesty's Govern- 515 ment assumes full responsibility for action in regard to that report, both as to publication or the Order which is made as regards increase of duties.
§ Sir B. PETOMay I know whether these negotiations relate to industries which have any connection with the fabric glove industry or are totally different industries?
§ Lieut.-Colonel COLVILLEI have answered that in a phrase which quite purposely was a little vague and that was "the repercussions of the result of action on the recommendation." I ask 516 my hon. Friend not to press me beyond that point. There are negotiations going on over a fairly wide range of goods, and the repercussions spoken of may not be taken to mean that a particular industry is being negotiated with, but it may be that the country with which we are dealing has a special interest in a trade, and that repercussions would have an effect. I hope my hon. Friend will not press me further.
§ Adjourned accordingly at Twenty-nine Minutes after Eleven o'Clock.