HC Deb 05 May 1936 vol 311 cc1662-72

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Captain Margesson.]

10.57 p.m.

Mr. HENDERSON STEWART

Hon. Members will recall that recently I addressed to the Secretary of State for Scotland some questions on the subject of the Herring Industry Board. The answers did not seem to me satisfactory, and as the matter affects vitally a considerable section of the Scottish people I take the opportunity of raising it again to-night. The House will remember that a year ago we passed unanimously a Bill to deal with the herring industry. Like the recent Sugar Beet Act it was intended to do two things, first, to create a machine by which the industry could manage its own affairs in the light of present day circumstances, and, secondly, thereby to relieve Parliament and Members of Parliament of problems with which they were ill-fitted to deal. I am not going to recall the circumstances existing at the time of the passing of that Measure, but hon. Members will recall that prior to the passing of the Herring Industry Act we were bombarded month by month with deputations, protests and resolutions from the herring trade. We passed various Measures to deal with the most immediate problems, but the position was never satisfactory, and when after very careful examination by this House, following upon long and patient investigations by a Commission, a comprehensive scheme was ultimately drafted and accepted by the trade, there was not a single Member representing a fishing division who did not heave a sigh of relief and feel that now there was a little peace in store.

Judge of our surprise and disappointment when, a few weeks ago, representatives of fishing divisions were again overwhelmed with a flood of telegrams, some of them covering many pages, letters, and telephone messages from the Far North, to be followed by mass meetings in different parts of the country, and ultimately by a very imposing deputation waiting on us within the precincts of this House. All those communications and deputations told the same story we had heard years ago and made the same demands. The trade they said, was on its last legs and unless large sums were provided by the National Exchequer not a single boat would put to sea in the coming season. My first reaction to that bombardment, and I imagine it is shared by most Members of the House, is to ask, Why should the new attack be directed at the heads of Members of Parliament?

It being Eleven of the Clock, the motion for the Adjournment lapsed, without Question put.

Question again proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Captain Margesson.]

Mr. STEWART

My first reaction to the new avalanche of questions and demands from the herring trade is to ask why the attack should be directed at our heads. The Act of last year was designed specifically to take out of the hands of Parliament responsibility for any of the matters, with perhaps two exceptions, dealt with by the recent deputation; and the deputation must have known that. Their renewed appeal therefore demands some inquiry. Why should their doubt and anxiety be expressed here and not to the board which was elected for the very purpose of hearing it? Why should this deputation come to see Members of Parliament and the Scottish Office and not the Herring Industry Board? It was a deputation of 12, and it came from Scotland, a long journey, which must have cost them a good deal of money. They came here, not one of them with any instructions, I am informed, to visit the Herring Industry Board, and I am told that but for the pressure exercised by the Secretary of State, they would have returned home without so much as saying "Good day" to this new board in whose hands in fact lies the very destiny of their industry in the years to come.

That is surely an amazing state of affairs. I can offer only one explanation, and it is this, that the Herring Industry Board, for the time being at any rate, and I would say for some months past, has lost the confidence of the trade. I am sorry to say that, because I am a friend of the board. profoundly believe in it. I urged it before it was ever mentioned by the Duncan Commission. I regard it as indispensable, its leadership, its direction, its power of co-ordination to be the only hope for restoring prosperity to the trade. But there it is. That is the position, and I think we have to face it and try to overcome it.

There is no question about the unrest in the trade in Scotland at the present time. If hon. Members care to visit any of the fishing ports in Scotland and meet the men—skippers, deck-hands, share fishermen—they will find anxiety, doubts, criticism, suspicions, ail of these things, unfortunately, levelled against this new board.

I have taken the trouble to examine some of these criticisms and to probe some of these doubts. I have found that most of them are due to misunderstanding. For example, it is the common view of rank and file fishermen in Scotland that the chief aim of the board, if not its sole policy, as some of them have said, is drastically to reduce the fleet of drifters without care or concern for the fate of the crews thus displaced. That is what they think. It may be wrong and absurd, but that is what they believe at the present time. Other criticisms are due to prejudice. They are told by some of their leaders that the board is being run in the interests of the English trade. The leader of the deputation told us last week that the board viewed all Scottish matters through English spectacles. That also may be absurd, but that is what the men are thinking and saying to-day. These misunderstandings ought to be removed.

But as I have spoken frankly of the board, may I speak plainly also about the trade itself. Many of the anxieties felt and expressed by ordinary fishermen are due to misdirection by the fishermen's leaders themselves, and I am bound to say that sometimes it appears as if it were almost deliberate misdirection. The longer I live among fishermen, the more I admire them as men, but I confess the more I watch the direction of their affairs, the more I deplore the leadership which these fine men have to suffer. Indeed I have come to the conclusion that the herring fishing industry must be about the worst led trade in the country. That is a calamity which may have very serious consequences. Some of the proposals recently put about are not only absurd, but ludicrous; they have discredited the herring industry and, unfortunately, have misled some of these simple men to believe certain things are possible which we know are impossible. Sometimes too opposition has been organised against the Herring Industry Board, which I can only regard as rather discreditable. The interests of the fishermen in most of the schemes that have been put forward seem to have been the last thing considered by those supposed to speak on their behalf.

These are not new conditions. It has always been so, and it was largely on the ground of lack of leadership and to ensure a square deal for the men on the boats that I supported the creation of the new board, to take charge of the business. I beg the Herring Board, as a friend, to realise that since disinterested leadership and efficient leadership does not exist in the herring industry, the board must come in and provide it. I would ask them to believe that the fishermen are looking for such leadership. But if the board is to lead it must first of all gain the confidence of the men. It must realise that it is dealing with rather a peculiar person in the Scottish herring fisherman, one of a race which has never known any control by an outside authority upon any of its efforts, a race which has been accustomed to unfettered freedom of action, and a race, therefore, which naturally looks with suspicion and not a little fear upon this new instrument designed to control their enterprise.

In these circumstances I would beg the board to come out of its London office, to go into the fishing villages, to mix with the men, to go into their homes, as we who represent fishing villages do, to hear what they say, to sit in their cottages, to meet them on the quays, to talk with them, to get to understand their problems. If, having done so, they find misunderstandings and gross misstatements made, then let the board answer them at once. You cannot go on for ever ignoring these unfortunate rumours and criticisms. A dictator, if you like, can ignore hostile comment, and even a public company can pass it by, but never an organisation like the Herring Industry Board, which depends for its life on retaining the confidence of its producers. Above all, let the board be frank with the trade about its proposals, what it has done, and what it pm-poses to do. I am told that when the deputation met the Herring Industry Board last week they were surprised to learn of many of the things which the board had achieved in recent weeks. A deputation of 12 picked men from Scotland apparently did not know what had happened! That is not the fault of the fishermen; it is the fault of the board. It is a grave reflection upon what I would call the public relations department of the board, upon the business acumen of the board.

If when the board has made its enquiries personally and stated its case, it finds that it has not sufficient powers for dealing with the task committed to it by Parliament, let it come openly to the House and ask for more powers. If I understand the temper of the House aright, we are ready to grant whatever further powers are necessary. We have demonstrated more than once that the herring industry has a warm place in the hearts of the British House of Commons. We look back with pride and gratitude upon the magnificent services of the fishermen during the War. We stand in awe of their nightly heroism. And looking on the dangers that lie ahead, I am certain that this House is determined, whether the outcome be peace or war, to maintain for the glory of our race the strength, spirit and man power of the Scottish fishermen.

Mr. LOFTUS

The hon. Member stated that the accusation made by the fishermen was that the Herring Industry Board saw Scottish matters through English spectacles. Is it not a fact that of six trade representatives on the board five are Scottish, and does the hon. Member endorse that accusation?

Mr. STEWART

I am glad that the hon. Member raises the point. I do not endorse it because I think it is an unjustifiable accusation.

11.12 p.m.

The SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Sir Godfrey Collins)

The hon. Member for East Fife (Mr. Henderson Stewart) has displayed his interest in this subject since he entered this House, and the claims of the fishermen have been impressed upon His Majesty's Government from the Floor of this House. We believed, when we passed the legislation that set up the Herring Industry Board, that we were, to a large extent, finished with their difficulties. When the claims come before us of any body of our fellow countrymen who are suffering from bad economic conditions, or when any section of the British public, feeling the pinch of poverty through hardship in their trade, looks to the House of Commons to redress their grievances, if possible, it is a great tribute to the House of Commons. I take no exception to, in fact I welcome, that spirit, for it shows that in our history, going back now for many hundreds of years, if any section of our people feel that they can come to this House, they always do so, especially those who ply their trade on the high seas. That is a tribute to the common sense and fair mindedness of the British House of Commons.

The hon. Gentleman said that the Herring Industry Board had lost the confidence of the trade. I was glad that, in the next sentence, he told us that he thought that was due very largely to misunderstanding and, in many cases, to misdirection. I hope before I sit down to cover the points which he has raised and the numerous points which we have learned from our meetings with the Herring Industry Board, which we held a week before the fishermen came to London, last week. Having sat in conference with the board and heard the board and the fishermen, we are, indeed, in possession of the full facts of the case. The hon. Gentleman said that the claims of the men would always find a warm reception in the House of Commons. If I am not able to find a solution of the difficulties that beset the industry I hope the House will believe that it is not through any lack of desire or study of their problems.

The first meeting that we held was with the board. It is only some 15 months since Parliament decided to set up the board, and since that time the board have been studying the problem which has baffled the ingenuity of many people in the past. Naturally, during these 15 months, they have been concerned with trying to secure foreign markets, and to open up new channels of distribution in Palestine and other places which may be fruitful sources of increased prosperity for the industry. In addition, they have be en studying how to increase the home market, where some 30 to 40 per cent. of the product of the herring fishery is consumed. I am glad to say also that the board have arranged for an active advertising campaign, carried out with all the arts of modern propaganda, during the next few months; and they have also arranged with a large number of chain stores throughout the country that the public of Great Britain should be supplied, for a penny apiece, with herring caught by British fishermen in the North Sea.

When these herring fishermen, who spend their days on the North Sea, came to See me, they thought, as I think wrongly—living, as they do, in small isolated ports around our coasts—that the Herring Industry Board had not been sufficiently in touch with their interests and with their desire for help during this short period of 15 months. I can quite understand the fishermen having those thoughts. I tried, with such imagination as I possess, to enter into their difficulties, and I said to the board, "I put myself in the position of a fisherman in some of our ports in the Moray Firth, who is asking what the Herring Industry Board are doing for him." I put that question to the board, and throughout the negotiations my sole objective was to try to interpret the interests of the board to the fishermen and the interests of the fishermen to the board. I had no solution of their problem. Parliament had decided in its wisdom to set up the board, and I thought I should be doing no service to the fishermen if I, as a Minister of the Crown, held out hopes that Parliament this year would find some solution of their immediate problem. I though that the best thing to do was to try to show them that the welfare of their industry was wrapped up in endeavouring to get these two interests to come together, to see the problem from each other's angle and understand each other's difficulties, to sit round a table and discuss the problems which concern their industry. We were fortunate in securing, as my hon. Friend has said, that, the day after the fishermen came to see us, they had a meeting with the board.

Let me remind the House of the problems which concern the fishermen. They are interested in the loan for nets. Some £20,000 already has been arranged by way of loan for the use of the fishermen, and the number making use of it is still increasing. Then the problem of redundancy arises, and I am glad to say here, on the Floor of the House of Commons, that there is no foundation whatsoever for the fear which was present in the minds of the fishermen that there would be some drastic reduction. I was glad that my hon. Friend made that point and I am glad to repeat it. I find there is much agreement between the Herring Industry Board and the fishermen as to the number of boats which should go to sea. I think the fear was very natural in the minds of those men that some drastic ruling would emanate from the Herring Industry Board and that they would be deprived of the opportunity of seeking their living in the North Sea during the coming year. That fear, I hope, has been completely removed. Then the question of the terms of reconditioning were mentioned. I cannot say more to-night than that the Herring Industry Board are giving sympathetic consideration to the case submitted by the fishermen. When the fishermen met the board they were able to discuss their problem round a table and explain the difficulties which always arise when any business board, set up by Parliament or otherwise, tries to direct and control and manage the daily lives of any particular class of the community in the interests of that class. When I listened to their stories I felt sometimes a little sorry for the members of the Herring Industry Board. I have been, with the Minister of Agriculture, responsible for asking some seven or eight men drawn from various sections of the industry to try and help to solve that problem, which was, and is, and will be, a difficult problem for any body of men, however constituted, with all the skill and wisdom that any body of men could have; but having said that I am glad to think that the situation is better as the result of this meeting and that there is, indeed, as I know from official information, increased activity among our fishing fleet. It is a problem that is always present in the mind of every business man day by day.

The question of grants was raised, and I am glad to think that that difficulty is completely out of the way. I fear I was a little blunt and brusque on that subject, but I thought that the interests of the fishermen would not be served by dangling any hope that money would be found by this Parliament for their present needs. At the meeting of the industry with the board, I am glad to tell the House that after some of the difficulties were looked straight in the face, the fishermen left with a. deeper appreciation and a more clear understanding of the difficulties which will always face any party which may aim at controlling an industry, and, though I may be imbued sometimes with too much hope, I still hope and believe that the fears expressed by some of the most pessimistic of the fishermen's speakers may not be realised in the future. One of the main points that the fishermen placed before us was their desire to secure for every man who went to sea a guaranteed weekly wage of 30s. besides the cost of his food. Apart from the merits of that proposal we had to advise the board that it was outside the scope of the Act. However much we all desire to see that each of these men should receive that wage, and more, it is outside the terms of the Act of Parliament which was passed with full knowledge by this House some 15 months ago. That being so, we should have been false to the trust which the House gave to us when we passed the Act if I did not say this quite clearly. The hon. Member in his speech referred to the location of the head office of the Herring Industry Board and also to the lack of touch with the fishermen. I believe that these meetings may result in a much closer contact between the fishermen and the board. When I say that, I do not wish to imply Any criticism of the board. That would be entirely outside my desire in any shape or form.

The fishermen also pressed us to try and use influence with the Admiralty in view of the increased interest in this House and the country in our Defence Forces. There were also views put forward in writing on the subject of grants from Navy Votes, but it is not for me as being responsible for the Scottish Office to reply. It would be unwise for me to raise any hopes that such grants could be made. Having sketched briefly to the House the situation which faced us last week, may I remind the House of the really improved situation which existed last year in the herring fishing fleet. The catch increased from 1,590,000 barrels to 1,960,000 barrels, and the number of barrels exported from 768,000, to over 1,000,000 in 1935. I quote those figures in no spirit of complacency. I should like to see them doubled. The Herring Industry Board has been entrusted by Parliament with the responsibility of trying to safeguard the interests of herring fishermen and I suggest that, having accepted the decisions and recommendations of Sir Andrew Duncan and his commissioners, who have studied the problem over a long period of time, and visited every port in the country, the House can rest assured that the board will do its best to solve the problem. Although the conditions fall short of what every hon. Member desires as a result of setting up of the board, the right thing to do, and here I appeal to the leaders of the fishermen, is not to criticise the board, that is easy, but to come inside the board and in a spirit of mutual help, with the knowledge they possess to try and secure better conditions not only for the seamen who go to sea but for all interests in the industry. I think the hon. Member has done a public service in raising this question on the Floor of the House this evening.

It being Half-past Eleven of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER adjourned the House, without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.