IMPORT DUTIES (IMPORT DUTIES ACT, 1932). (Hansard, 26 June 1935)

§ The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD OF TRADE (Dr. Burgin)
I beg to move, That the Additional Import Duties (No. 15) Order, 1935, dated the third day of June, nineteen hundred and thirty-five, made by the Treasury under the Import Duties Act, 1932, a copy of which was presented to this House on the said third day of June, nineteen hundred and thirty-five, be approved. This is one of a series of Orders to adjust the rate of duty upon a number of products of which the most important is that in the first Order which I have moved, namely, spectacles. Spectacles were previously subject to varying rates of duty dependent in the main upon the nature of the frame. Tortoise-shell spectacles were 30 per cent., metal frame spectacles 20 per cent., and other spectacles 10 per cent. Since 1932 there has 1182 been a steady development of the manufacture in England of spectacle frames, and a very large part of our needs can now be met by home manufacture, but last year very strong competition from foreign countries was experienced, and the price of foreign spectacle frames was reduced. This retarded the home industry, and the Committee recommended that all spectacle frames should be subject to a uniform duty of 33⅓ per cent. The supply of spectacles under the National Health Insurance Scheme is controlled by the Ophthalmic Benefit Joint Committee, which sets up the standard of frame and quality, and, incidentally, insists on the very desirable qualification that the frames supplied should be of British manufacture. I can tell the Committee that the spectacles supplied under the National Health Insurance Scheme account for somewhere between 10 per cent. and 20 per cent. of the entire service.

§ Mr. THORNE
What about glasses?

§ Dr. BURGIN
I will deal with that matter in a moment if I may be allowed to give a general review first. We will take the Orders together, and I will answer questions. That is the way we have dealt with these matters hitherto. Order No. 16 relates to wood split pulleys. I am usually given rather a miscellaneous collection of materials. We first deal with spectacles and then we have split pulleys. It is very extraordinary how there are holes in the manufactures set up by a country. Here we have great industries and the Mercantile Marine, but for some reason or other little pulley blocks have been imported instead of being made. There is no reason for it. We can make them. We have the wood and material, and yet we have lazily been importing them. We can very well afford to have a duty upon these cheaper foreign split pulleys. Order No. 17 deals with brooms and brushes—everything from a toothbrush to a charwoman's implement. The new duties are not high. For the toothbrush the duty is a halfpenny each, and for other brushes about one-eighth of a penny each. For most classes of brushes the Order will not affect the rate of duty payable.
Order No. 18 is a specific duty dealing with foreign competition, that is, hair clippers. [Laughter.] I do not know why this observation should provoke laughter. 1183 A hair clipper for the human toilet is a sensible article we might as well make, and the duty amounts to 8d. per clipper, and will apply to every clipper that costs less than 3s. 4d. There has recently been an increase in foreign clippers from Japan. Personally—I do not know whether it is prejudice or not—I should prefer to have my hair clipped by a homemade article. Order No. 19 is one to which I call the special attention of the House. It relates to a really important subject—the key on a tin-opener. [Laughter.] Hon. Members laugh, but three firms alone exporting canned goods deal with 30,000,000 keys in one year. These openers were liable to duty as manufactures of wire, and when tinned goods were imported with a tin-opener, there was a separate assessment of duty on the tins. It is much more convenient to make all openers liable in respect of the same goods as they accompany. That is done in the present Order.

§ Mr. THORNE
What about the material inside the tin?

§ Mr. RHYS DAVIES
The hon. Gentleman has, indeed, given us a mixed grill in these duties, but he has not told us the whole of the story. I am in due course going to examine every one of these articles in detail so that the House of Commons may know exactly the frame of mind of the National Government. I want to point out, first of all, that the hon. Gentleman has not said a word about monocles, which are very appropriate for a tariff proposal.