§ 39. Mr. STOURTONasked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the Anglo-Indian Trade Agreement has been under consideration for a year; whether he can state the reason for these protracted negotiations; and whether the terms of the agreement are likely to be concluded before the new year?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANThe negotiations for a trade agreement supplementary to the main Ottawa Agreement with India arise from the fact that it was not possible at Ottawa to deal with the question of Indian protective duties. Our purpose in the present discussions has been to conclude an agreement which would cover those duties. The negotiations are a direct outcome of the work done by the mission which went out to India in the autumn of 1933 from Lancashire under the able chairmanship of Sir William Clare Lees. This mission, besides negotiating an agreement with the Millowners' Association of Bombay, represented to the Government of India the indeterminate nature of the Ottawa provisions relating to cotton and artificial silk, and expressed their desire that these industries should be brought within the scope of the Ottawa Agreement. For several months active negotiations have been in progress between His Majesty's Government and the Government of India. In the nature of the case these have been prolonged.
I am glad, now, to report that the main difficulties have been surmounted, and there is every reason to hope that the agreement will be settled at an early date.
At the present stage I only wish to say one word regarding the scope of the agreement. It does not deal with the actual rates of duty on particular commodities. 541 What it does is to lay down the principles to be followed in fixing the Indian protective duties on United Kingdom goods, not only on textiles, but also on other goods subject to protective duties.
We for our part, of course, give certain assurances in return.
The text of the agreement will, of course, be published as soon as possible.
§ Mr. STOURTONIs my right hon. Friend aware that there will be serious misgivings in Lancashire, if the terms of the Agreement are not disclosed before the Second Heading of the Government of India Bill?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANI am keeping in the closest possible touch with the representatives of Lancashire, and only this morning we had a conference on the subject.
§ Mr. LANSBURYMay I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it would be possible to discuss this matter rather more fully on the Motion for the Christmas Adjournment? We should very much like to do so, but we should be guided by him if he thought that it would militate against any success he hopes to achieve in the negotiations. We think the matter is so important that it ought to de discussed at the earliest moment.
§ Mr. RUNCIMANIf the material is ready for a discussion, I will communicate with the right hon. Gentleman, and we might then perhaps make arrangements for suitable publicity.
§ Mr. LANSBURYWe should like the publicity to be a discussion between the Members of the House and the right hon. Gentleman on the Christmas Adjournment, which is the earliest opportunity we should have of discussing the question, together with other matters connected with trade and unemployment in other districts.
§ Mr. RUNCIMANI think we shall be able to fall in with the desire of the right hon. Gentleman on the Adjournment.
§ Mr. LANSBURYI should like to say that of course we accept the offer of the right hon. Gentleman, and shall do our best to raise the matter on the Christmas Adjournment.
§ Sir JOSEPH NALLMay I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that the conclusion of the Indo-Japanese Agreement was followed almost immediately by an adjustment of the duties on foreign cloth, and why has it taken so long to reach an agreement, which he now informs the House can only deal with principles and not with facts?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANThere has been no difficulty in arriving at an agreement, which would have been reached long ago but for the fact that the negotiations between ourselves and India have had to cover a great deal of detail, and we have not been able to make progress as, rapidly as we would have liked.
§ Sir J. NALLDuties of 75 per cent were quickly reduced to 50 per cent., and later to 35 per cent., and in this case only a mere reduction of 5 per cent. is involved, and even that is not yet agreed.
§ Mr. STOURTONIs my right hon. Friend aware that Lancashire expects that not only shall there be no commercial discrimination against British trade in India but that substantial preferences shall be granted?
§ Mr. REMERHas my right hon. Friend taken the manufacturers into consultation, or is he only taking the advice of the Manchester Chamber of Commerce?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANNo, Sir, those I have seen are fully representative of Lancashire interests.
§ Mr. KIRKPATRICKWill this Agreement be included in the new Constitution for India, or will a new Agreement have to be made with the new Constitution?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANI think that my hon. Friend had better put a question of that kind to the Secretary of State for India.