HC Deb 09 June 1936 vol 313 cc85-7

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."

5.50 p.m.

Mr. LEES-SMITH

This is the Clause which extends the period of Imperial Preference for one year. We have not yet had any explanation of this proposal. Indeed, I do not think the opportunity arose upon the Budget Resolutions. Perhaps the Financial Secretary will tell me whether my interpretation of it is the right one. I gather that it refers only to the pre-tariff duties, which were stabilised in 1926 for the next 10 years, bringing us to this date. If they are extended for another year, they will continue until 19th August, 1937. The Ottawa Duties were imposed in 1932 for five years and they will also expire this year. I imagine that the purpose of the Clause is that, when the Ottawa Duties are once again discussed, the whole range of Imperial preferential duties can be dealt with at the same time. I rise now not to express any opinion on the Clause but to ask for an explanation of what it really indicates.

5.52 p.m.

Mr. W. S. MORRISON

The right hon. Gentleman is perfectly correct in his assumptions as to the purpose of the Clause and the ground that it covers. These duties were stabilised by Section 7 of the Finance Act, 1926, and the effect of this Clause is to extend that stabilisation until 19th August, 1937. The reason why that particular date has been chosen is that it is the earliest date on which any of the Ottawa Agreements can expire, with one exception. The reason why the Clause extends the stabilisation to that date is because of the convenience which it is anticipated will be found in having that particular period in which to negotiate any fresh agreements or alter agreements now existing. I think I can commend the machinery to the Com- mittee with complete confidence. There is one thing I ought to say, because a certain amount of anxiety has been expressed in some quarters. The Government gave an undertaking with regard to the existing sugar preferences to both Australia and South Africa, that 18 months' notice would be given of any modification. That is not the same period of time that is stated in the Clause, but I can assure the Committee that it is without prejudice to that undertaking and the Government have no intention of departing from it.

Mr. LEES-SMITH

That is the answer that I rather anticipated would be given and it certainly satisfies me.

Question "That the Clause stand part of the Bill," put, and agreed to.