§ 12.19 p.m.
§ Colonel WEDGWOODI beg to move, in page 3, line 10, to leave out, "fair conditions of labour are observed," and to insert:
trade union rates of wages are paid.
§ I move the Amendment in order to make clear the question of the fair conditions of labour which are to be observed in the carrying out of the works. The words "fair conditions of labour" are, I think, those which were put into the last Bill dealing with this subject. The real difficulty has been in carrying out and interpreting those words in actual construction. When the original Bill went through I, and, I think, the Labour party on that occasion, did the best we could to secure more definite words which would really establish a fair wages clause such as we have in this country for public works in Palestine. We were beaten on that occasion. We were told that it was impossible to establish a fair wages clause in Palestine, and that exactly the same protection of labour would be given by the words "fair conditions of labour" as though it were a fair wages clause such as we know in this country. The result, especially in the case of the Haifa Harbour works, has proved far different.
§ The real labour difficulty in that country is that the trade unions, of course, are not as strong as they are here, and they are not as strong because it is difficult for the more educated Jewish trade unions to get Arabs into their trade unions, and to establish one rate of pay for both races. That is an admitted difficulty, but the difficulty of making their trade unions strong enough has 519 been made infinitely worse by the presence of these words in the old Act, because the Government, under these words, have, in effect, set up different rates of pay for the same work according as it is done by Arabs or by Jews. That is to say, the Jew is paid a higher rate per hour or per piece than the Arab is paid. That, of course, has had the effect of preventing the consolidation of the unions, and of checking the unity of spirit which has got to be produced in Palestine if you are to get real harmony between the Arab labourer and the Jew labourer. I really cannot see why we should not get the words I propose inserted in the Bill. The argument from precedent that the words in the Bill were put in before is not a sound one. We were then told that they were the best words which could be found, and that they would produce something akin to a fair wages Clause in Government contracts.
§ The troubles at Haifa have been insistent. The trade union position has been very much weakened, and, at the same time, the Tories hope, under these words, to bring division in the labour of that country. On the principle of divide and rule they have now set the Arab labour against the Jew labour. They are having clashes all over the country to-day in the unskilled labour market, and the tendency caused by these words, and by the actions which the Palestine Government have taken on these words, is to divide the working classes in Palestine into the unskilled Arab workers and the skilled Jewish workers. Nothing more fatal to the unity of Palestine and to the success of the Labour movement in Palestine can be conceived than a division such as that. It is for that reason that I ask the right hon. Gentleman to consider whether it is not possible to amend this Clause so as to give us what we have in England for the benefit of the working classes, that is, a fair wages Clause, so that wages shall not be undercut for certain nationalities and certain persons, and thereby the working classes set against each other.
§ 12.25 p.m.
§ Mr. TINKERI am glad the right hon. and gallant Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Colonel Wedgwood) has 520 brought this matter before the Committee, because when the Money Resolution was before the House I mentioned the point about paying trade union rates of wages. I wondered how it could be inserted in the Bill, however, because one realises that in Palestine the conditions are more difficult than they are here, where we have long recognised trade union rates of wages. I can see how extremely difficult it would be to have a static condition of trade union rates of wages in Palestine, more especially with the two kinds of labour available there, namely, the Jewish and the Arab; but while we are conscious of the difficulty, it is up to us in the House of Commons to try to lay down conditions that will be a guide to them. Fair conditions for the Arab labourers may be quite different from fair conditions for the Jews, and I want to be quite satisfied on that point.
I do not say at the moment that I shall vote for the Amendment, because it would be foolish to say that without understanding the position in Palestine, but I want the right hon. Gentleman to realise that we on these benches, especially those of us who come from the trade unions and who want to get fair conditions for our workmen, know that even in this country, where we have established fair conditions for a long time past, there are many times difficulties in getting the employers to keep up to that standard, so that in a new country, where contracts are given to all kinds of people, one can easily recognise that they might all try to undercut one another and, therefore, make it very difficult for fair wages to be paid. I join with the right hon. and gallant Gentleman in hoping that we shall get a better explanation from the Minister on this question.
§ 12.28 p.m.
Sir P. GUNLIFFE-LISTERI think the Committee will agree that the hon. Member for Leigh (Mr. Tinker) has put an important point in an extremely reasonable way. There is really no difference of opinion between any of us on this matter. What we wish to do is to get fair conditions of labour observed in Palestine, whether the labour employed be Jew labour or Arab labour. I can set the hon. Member's mind at rest at once by saying that there cannot in 521 this case be any question of some contractor trying to cut wages. I think the whole of this work will be done by Government Departments, and, therefore, the labour will be employed direct by Government through the different Departments. The right hon. and gallant Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Colonel Wedgwood) really appears to get some very inaccurate information. He said the most awful conditions had arisen on the works at Haifa Harbour. I know from my own experience and from reports that I have received that so far from there having been labour difficulties at Haifa, things there were admirable. The greatest care was taken by the people responsible for the work——
§ Colonel WEDGWOODRubbish!
§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTERThe greatest care was taken to give fair conditions both to Jew and to Arab. You have there, not created by Government, but existing already, different standards of labour and different wage rates obtaining. What was done with perfect satisfaction at Haifa was that rates of pay for the Jews and Arabs were fixed in this way, that the Arab was paid by time and the Jew by piece, and I have never heard a single complaint from anybody about the way in which the work was conducted there. The conditions there are different, and the only result of putting in the Amendment of the right hon. and gallant Gentleman would be to preclude the Government from employing any Arabs at all on any of these works, because the only trade unions are Jewish trade unions, and you would have to pay—although it would be entirely inappropriate and although it has never been paid to any Arab before, and is not fixed at least in relation to Arab capacity for work or circumstances of employment—whatever happened to be the nearest possible rate of wages for that kind of work which you found agreed by the Jewish trade unions. The only result of that would be to prevent the Government from employing Arabs on these works. I do not know whether the right hon. and gallant Member thinks that that would make for unity between the Jews and the Arabs, which I am glad to find is his attitude. The words in the Bill were very carefully thought out and discussed between parties in this House, and they are put in advisedly as the most practical 522 way in which we can give effect to the general desire of the House. This is Government work, and the sole object will be to see that there are fair conditions of labour; and in the light of past experience, I suggest that these words should stand.
§ 12.32 p.m.
§ Mr. RHYS DAVIESWe have reached a very interesting point in this Bill, a point in which I have taken a little personal interest. With regard to the reply of the right hon. Gentleman, I do not think that he will be offended when I tell him that he is about the last person in the world to hear any complaint from the Arabs as to their conditions of employment on the Haifa Harbour works. I think any complaint would much more likely reach my right hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Colonel Wedgwood) and myself, but, as the right hon. Gentleman said, the situation is indeed very difficult. First of all, I would like to point out to the right hon. and gallant Gentleman who moved the Amendment that it is quite possible that his Amendment might not work, because payments of rates of wages do not include conditions of employment, which sometimes are as important as the rates of wages. There is, therefore, a little difficulty on that score.
There are two standards of life in Palestine—the European standard, brought there by the Jew, and the African standard, which has always been there for the Arab. The argument for differentiation in wages always has been, I am informed, that when the Arab gets work in Palestine to-day his standard of life is improved by about 200 per cent., but the standard of life for the European Jew who has emigrated to Palestine is improved by about 25 per cent. That has taken place when the wages have been differentiated to a very great extent. I was very keen to find out why contractors and employers were not paying the same wages to the Arab for doing exactly the same work—and exactly the same amount of work too, by the way—as the Jew, and I had rather an interesting answer from one gentleman. He told me that there were Arab employers in Jerusalem who themselves were paying more to their Jewish servants than to the Arab servants for exactly the same kind of work. We have, 523 therefore, that difficulty. I am not without hope that the British Government in Palestine will not allow that differentiation to continue for all time. It seems ridiculous in the extreme that two men should perform exactly the same task and turn out exactly the same kind of work, as I have seen them doing, and that one of them should be paid, merely because he is a European Jew, from two to two and a-half times as much as the Arab in wages. When the Arab gets accustomed to all this differentiation and the improvement in the standard of life in Palestine, which is consequent upon our being there, I cannot conceive that he will be satisfied for all time with that situation.
Let me say a word on this problem of paying wages and the employment of the two races on these contracts. I would like to ask the right hon. Gentleman how the Arabs and Jews are going to be employed. Is there a policy in Palestine as to how many Arabs are to be employed and how many Jews? What is the ratio to be? I should like to know, also, whether there is anything in Palestine which is detrimental to the Arab coming into the trade unions. I have reason to ask that, because in Palestine many obstacles are placed in the way of trade unions, and were it not for the great courage and determination of the European Jews in Palestine, I do not think that their particular unions would live. For some unknown reason the atmosphere created by our Government in Palestine is not as conducive to trade unionism there as it is here, and it is not too good here on occasions.
We are, as the right hon. Gentleman has said, in a difficulty. If the right hon. and gallant Gentleman presses this Amendment, I would vote for him except for one difficulty. I am not satisfied that merely to insert "trade union rates of wages" would cover all that I want in respect of conditions of employment, because I have found that, even in this country, the payment of wages in itself does not bring the workman to the point that I think he ought to reach. There are other conditions connected with employment apart from wages. I do not know whether the right hon. and gallant Gentleman will press this Amendment to a Division, but he and the Secretary of State seem to be on very good terms this 524 morning. The temper has not risen quite as high as I have seen it on other occasions, because, I suppose, the Chairman has been good enough to rule out any debate on the Holy Sepulchre, I would again like to ask the right hon. Gentleman a question as to the ratio of employment for Arab and Jew, and as to the actual differentiation in the rates of wages as between Arab and Jew in any work that is carried on now and in any of these contracts. I am afraid that these are rather subtle question. I do not expect the right hon. Gentleman to carry the answers in his mind, but I thought perhaps he might be well informed on these issues.
§ 12.40 p.m.
§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTERI am frankly floored by the hon. Gentleman's second question. I cannot give the wages actually paid to Jew and to Arab, and the fact that it would probably also be complicated even if I could, owing to the differences of piece rates and time rates, it would make my answer hardly intelligible. I must, therefore, admit myself beaten on that particular detail. With regard to the proportion, it is the aim to get a fair proportion as between Jew and Arab labour, assuming both are available. I think it is actually something like 30 per cent. Jew and 70 per cent. Arab.
§ Colonel WEDGWOODNumbers or money spent?
§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTERI think money spent. Anybody who has had practical experience will realise how impossible it is to work rigidly to any kind of formula. It would be quite easy for me to say that a mathematical formula has been devised which will be carried out. I am too practical, however, to pretend that you can carry out completely any arbitrary formula of that kind. Of course, the division of labour as between Jew and Arab naturally assumes that there are both Jews and Arabs who are available for the job. It would, of course, be ridiculous in public works and relief works such as we have had in Palestine, to say that there must be a certain proportion of each race whether they were available or not. So far as they are both available, we maintain a reasonable proportion.
§ 12.42 p.m.
§ Colonel WEDGWOODI do think that considering this Amendment has been on 525 the Paper, the right hon. Gentleman might have got up his case a little better beforehand. I want to know what are his ideas of fair conditions of labour as stated in the Bill. The Bill says that fair conditions of labour are to be observed in the execution of these works. I have not the faintest idea, having listened to the right hon. Gentleman, what are his ideas as to the meaning of those words. I gather from the speech of my hon. Friend the Member for Westhoughton (Mr. Rhys Davies) that they deal with the wages that are to be paid to the Jews and those that are to be paid to the Arabs, and the proportions of Jews and Arabs who are to be employed. I really do not know that this is the whole meaning of these words. We had the same thing in Tanganyika, where fair conditions of labour were held to refer to the conditions of wages and the medical attention given to the Kaffirs working on the bridge. What do they mean here, however? Does the right hon. Gentleman really say that he has come down to the House without having the faintest idea what wages are paid to the Jews and the Arabs?
I think there are now really three classes of labour in Palestine. You have the Jew, admittedly civilised and a worker who has to support an entire family. You have also the Arab, who has for many years under our rule, in close association with the Jews, improved his standard of life and comfort, and whose wages have risen remarkably in the last 13 years. I do not know whether the right hon. Gentleman noticed it, but the really remarkable change in Palestine to-day is the way in which the natives now travel about. There are omnibus services all over the country; the means of intercommunication have very largely increased. Whereas in old days the people never went outside their villages, they now go into the towns and visit the cinemas. In addition, the whole style of architecture has changed. The standard of comfort of the ordinary native, not merely the rich native but the poor native, has definitely and very largely increased. If the administration in Palestine wanted to point to one thing which did justify their administration I think they could very rightly point to the increased standard of comfort of the indigenous inhabitants of the working 526 class. We want to encourage that class and to bring them up to the Jewish level, so that they may have Western wants and Western minds, trade union organisation and the intelligence to hold their own in the stiff competition which exists everywhere among coloured people in the labour market.
A new element is coming into Palestine which is a real menace not merely to the Jews but to the advancing civilisation of the Arab or Levantine labour in Palestine. We find this element particularly on the Haifa Harbour works. If the right hon. Gentleman will make inquiries he will find that much of the Levantine labour—the non-Jewish labour—on the Haifa works has come in recently. It is engaged more particularly in the stevedore business and in the discharging of ships' cargoes. It consists of Arabs of a distinctly lower level of civilisation, who have come in and replaced the educated intelligent natives, doing to them precisely what, in past days, they did to Jewish labour, that is, undercutting it and tending to drive down the standard of comfort. Of course, I know that it is no use dividing the Committee on this Amendment, and I do not propose to do so, but I hope that before the right hon. Gentleman actually authorises the expenditure of money under this loan we may be able to get from the Colonial Office a report of what exactly is meant by "fair conditions of labour," showing whether that phrase applies not merely to work done direct by the Government but to work which they sub-contract, and showing, also, whether they are alive to the importance of protecting the civilised standards of the Jew, improving the already semi-civilised standards of the indigenous dative population, and helping labour to organise and to get into a position to bargain, in preference to following the natural tendency of all administrations to get cheap immigrant labour from outside.
I do not think the Committee realise that the chief advantage to this country from the development of a place like Palestine is that if we raise the standard of comfort among the people we create a market for our goods. So long as the people are content to follow their old-fashioned customs—never to go anywhere except on their flat feet, for instance— 527 there is no sale for motor cars or for omnibuses, or for many other things; but as the standard of civilisation rises, new wants are created among them. I do not think it is at all a bad thing to stimulate wants in uneducated primitive people, because the satisfying of them will make a call upon the labour of this country
§ 12.50 p.m.
§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTERThe right hon. and gallant Gentleman asked a specific question as to whether this phrase "fair conditions of labour" would apply to work done by sub-contractors as well as work done direct by the Government. If any work is sub-contracted by the Government of course the same conditions will apply as in the case of direct labour. As the right hon. Gentleman pointed out, it is not only a question of wages, but of the general conditions under which the work is carried out, and those conditions would be the conditions which a good employer would observe in each area, having regard to the wage rates ruling at the time.
§ Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."
§ The Committee proceeded to a Division.
§ Mr. BLINDELL and Major G. DAVIES were appointed Tellers for the Ayes; hut there being no Members willing to act as Tellers for the Noes, the DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN declared that the Ayes had it.
§ 12.54 p.m.
§ Colonel WEDGWOODI beg to move, in page 3, line 12, to leave out paragraph (b).
I am certain the Secretary of State is delighted to see that I am moving to omit this paragraph. It lays down that all plant, machinery and materials imported into Palestine and used in the execution of the work must be manufactured or produced in the United Kingdom, except where the Secretary of State has special reasons for allowing them to be obtained elsewhere. I do not intend to press this Amendment to a Division.
§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTERI should like the right hon. Gentleman to press it to a Division.
§ Colonel WEDGWOODI have known the right hon. Gentleman for a great many years, and I am perfectly certain that when he drafts this sort of paragraph 528 he puts his tongue in his cheek and says "Well, that will please some fools." Now, that is not the way in which the Secretary of State should conduct business. He knows, just as I know and everybody else knows, that every penny of this £2,000,000 will somehow leave this country for Palestine, and even if the Palestinian Government, with their natural pro-Nazi proclivities, bought all the machinery in Germany, still that money would leave this country somehow. It might go to Germany, although I do not recommend that. All loans made to any foreign country or any colony must sooner or later leave this country either in gold, machinery or goods. The right hon. Gentleman knows that as well as anybody, but he has, I suppose, in order to please the groundlings, to exercise a certain amount of coercion upon the Palestinian Government, and he therefore puts in this Clause to say that what must be will be. It is supererogatory—is that the right word? and it is typical of the right hon. Gentleman, who has always been one of those tariff reform people and insists upon it. I am satisfied with moving this and directing attention to an example of pre-historic obscurity or obscurantism which ought not to find its place in an Act of Parliament, and against which those of us who are still reasonably intelligent economists may rightly and properly protest.
§ 12.57 p.m.
§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTERThe right hon. Gentleman criticises the simple and proper provision that the orders arising out of the loans for which the British Government are giving the guarantee shall be placed in this country. I believe that it is entirely fallacious to say that every penny will necessarily find itself spent on orders in the country of the lender. I do not think that it does it "sooner or later," as the right hon. and gallant Gentleman said, but even if his economics are sound, and I do not think they are, I prefer that the orders shall come here sooner, rather than later or not at all. That is why the orders are coming here in the first instance, and that is a very reasonable arrangement. We enable Palestine to borrow money cheaply in this country by reason of this guarantee, and in consideration we get the orders. That seems to me to be a sound and businesslike proposition.
§ 13.58 p.m.
§ Mr. RHYS DAVIESI hesitate to enter into this controversy between the two right hon. Gentlemen on a technical economic problem. Am I right in assuming that, in spite of the desire of the Minister that all the goods necessary for these contracts to be entered into by Palestine shall be manufactured in this country, it is still possible for some of those contracts to go to Germany, Italy or elsewhere? The Minister in his answer administered a dose of medicine to my right hon. and gallant Friend, based on the assumption that this is a loan; but all we are doing is to guarantee the loan. We are laying down certain conditions in connection with it, but it is not as if the guarantee were in itself the loan. I have no intention of entering into the discussion between the two right hon. Gentlemen, except to ask whether it is not possible that, under the wording of this Clause, some orders might go to other countries outside?
§ 12.59 p.m.
§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTERI think that this phrasing follows the usual form in these cases, as there may be some special reason for placing an order outside. I do not contemplate any difficulty under this Bill, but you may have, in certain cases, an order for a particular kind of thing which can only be obtained in one particular place, and then you place the order there. Once or twice in other cases, prices have been raised unreasonably because there was a monopoly, and the House has therefore always put words of this kind in in order to make sure of being able to buy at a reasonable and proper price.
§ Amendment negatived.
§ Motion made, and Question, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill," put, and agreed to.
§ Clause 3 (Short title) ordered to stand part of the Bill.