HC Deb 23 February 1938 vol 332 cc490-500

10.32 p.m.

Captain Wallace

I beg to move, in page 22, to leave out lines 20 to 24, and to insert: (b) the studio, if any, used in making the film is within His Majesty's Dominions.

This Amendment is, in effect, a drafting Amendment made as a preliminary to a new definition of "studio" in Clause 42, page 35, line 28. It provides that instead of the requirement that the studio scenes in a film have been photographed within the Empire, as in the Clause in the Bill, any studio used in making the film must be within the Empire. One of the objects of the legislation is to ensure that British studios are, as far as possible, used in the making of British films.

10.33 p.m.

Mr. Mander

I should like to know whether the right hon. and gallant Gentleman is attempting to carry out a promise made in Committee in connection with this Clause. If not, perhaps, he will say how he is proposing to do it. In the Committee on 16th December, when we were discussing an Amendment moved by me concerning the definition of what part of the British Empire should be included, the President of the Board of Trade said, I do think that after a period of 10 years we have waited a very long time for the same gesture to be made to us that we have made to the Dominions. It might be that the mere fact of this discussion taking place, and these views being aired, might improve the possibilities, but even so an Amendment somewhat on the lines of that in the name of the hon. Member for Frome (Mrs. Tate) and others, which enables the Board of Trade, after consulting the Films Council, to approve the inclusion in this Clause of particular Dominions at any time, is sufficiently flexible to meet that. That is a definite promise and I should like to ask how the right hon. and gallant Gentleman proposes to carry it out. Is it intended to carry it out in this Amendment? I cannot see how it can be. The President of the Board of Trade concluded by saying: I suggest that it would be better to withdraw all these Amendments, and to leave me, in the light of the discussion which has taken place, to see before the next stage what I think would be the appropriate action to take, and to put the appropriate Amendment down for the consideration of the Committee." —[OFFICIAL REPORT (Standing Committee A); 16th December, 1937, col. 352.] The Moyne Committee dealt with this matter and suggested that the question should be taken up with the various Governments concerned. They point out: It was not unnaturally anticipated that in the course of time reciprocal treatment of this kind would be given to films made in Great Britain by other parts of the Empire where film legislation might be passed. Upstairs hon. Members argued the importance of something being done and the President undertook to put down an Amendment. I am asking the Minister to redeem that promise.

Captain Wallace

I am advised that this Amendment does redeem that promise, and that it does that in this way, that for the purpose of renters' quota studios in the Dominions will not count, but they are also in a halfway position as they are eligible for exhibitors' quotas.

Mr. Mander

I cannot see how this Amendment can refer to that question at all.

10.37 p.m.

Mr. T. Williams

I think the point should be further elucidated. In Committee I moved an Amendment eliminating the Dominions altogether from the Bill. It was suggested that foreigners who would want to short circuit the spirit of the Measure, could have films produced in Canada or India and other odd places within the Dominions, and that we had not the machinery to determine such an important question as whether labour costs had been fairly and squarely dealt with. I thought the easiest way out of the difficulty would be to eliminate Dominion films altogether from the Bill, so that films produced in the Dominions could be brought here and sold on their merits without regard to the quota at all.

Captain Wallace

I must offer my profound apologies to the hon. Member and to the House for having misled them. I was misinformed. This Amendment does no more than what is stated in the actual words. The promise which the President gave to the hon. Member is implemented in an Amendment to Clause 26.

Amendment agreed to.

10.39 p.m.

The Solicitor-General

I beg to move, in page 22, line 26, to leave out from "than" to the end of line 30, and to insert "the requisite amount of labour costs."

This Amendment stands with later Amendments to the same Clause, and I will, if I am not out of order, deal with them all, and also with the Amendment of the hon. Member for West Leyton (Mr. Sorensen), in line 26. That Amendment deals with the Bill as it exists, but would not deal with the Bill as it would be amended if this series of Amendments were accepted by the House. These Amendments are brought forward by the Government in order to give effect to an undertaking given by my right hon. Friend in the Standing Committee that in the case of the more expensive type of films, a little more latitude would be allowed as regards the foreigners who could be employed in their production. In the Clause as drafted, not less than 75 per cent. of the labour costs of the film, calculated on the total labour costs after excluding the payment to any person not being a British subject, has to be paid to British subjects or persons domiciled in the Empire. In order to give more latitude to makers of British films in employing outstanding artistes and others in the production, these Amendments permit, as an option, the payment to two foreigners to be excluded from the labour costs, and one of those foreigners must be either an actor or an actress. They can be excluded, therefore, from the costs on which the percentage qualification of the British film has to be calculated.

When the payments to these foreigners have been deducted, the Amendment provides that at least four-fifths of the balance must be paid to British subjects or people domiciled within the Empire. The House will have noticed the change from 75 per cent., as it appears in the Bill, to the fraction of three-quarters. That is of no consequence and is a drafting alteration. Clause 25, Sub-section (4), provides that where the Board of Trade are satisfied that the maker of the film took all reasonable steps to fulfil the 75 per cent. condition and that he could not fulfil it owing to exceptional circumstances, they may lower the percentage to 70. We delete that Sub-section and introduce a provision replacing the existing one as to 70 per cent., but amending the following one to the effect that in the case of a film where the proportion of labour costs normally required would be four-fifths of the total (excluding two foreigners), the Board may, in exceptional circumstances beyond the control of the maker, allow the four-fifths to be reduced to three-quarters. The other Amendments that follow are purely consequential.

The Amendment of the hon. Member for West Leyton would, of course, increase the proportion of British labour from 75 per cent. to 85 per cent. The matter was put to the trade unions after Christmas, and the Association of Cine-technicians agreed to the option, but wanted the figure to be 85 per cent., and made that a condition of their acceptance of the option. The National Association of Theatrical Employés did not agree to the option, but wanted the 75 per cent. to be raised to 85 per cent. In the opinion of the Government., an increase to 85 per cent., with the exclusion of one foreigner, would, especially at the beginning, handicap the producers of films owing to the possibility that there might be insufficient personnel available for their particular purpose. It is desirable that, in order that at the very outset especialy there should be the best possible chance for British films in future, there should be the widest possible choice of personnel available to them.

I should add that the fact that 20 or 25 per cent. of foreign labour can be employed does not mean that the producer is obliged to employ that quantity. In any case, the regulations which govern the entry of aliens into this country have to be considered. The main object of the Bill is to increase the efficiency of the British production of films. It may be that the best way of improving on the experience of British technicians is to permit the introduction of some highly skilled foreign artists who can do something to raise the quality of British film production to that level at which we all desire to see it.

10.46 p.m.

Mr. Sorensen

I feel that the Amendment which stands in my name ought to be pressed. I followed as best I could the rather intricate calculations given by the Solicitor-General and although they were so clearly put, I almost felt like moving the Adjournment of the Debate in order to go into the figures. At the same time, I am forced to the conclusion that the proposals put forward by the Government would be less beneficial to the technicians than the precise percentage proposed in my Amendment. That percentage would mean a definite increase in the number who would be guaranteed employment in the industry, and therefore I hope that my proposal will be accepted by the House. I must repudiate the suggestion that there is not already an ample supply of technicians for such film production as is likely in this country for some time to come. At present, 80 per cent. of British technicians are unemployed and it seems to me that the claim which has been advanced on behalf of the Government is not justified by the facts. A number of our technicians have been forced to emigrate to America and are now employed in Hollywood and elsewhere and they would be glad to be back here if they had some kind of protection or better facilities for securing employment.

I hope the House will endeavour to guarantee, not merely the interests of a certain number of financiers and producers, but the interests of those employed in the trade by insisting on a definite percentage. It is, I submit, a slur on British technicians to say that, after all these years, they are not the same level as their American brethren. On occasion, American and other foreign technicians have been brought here only to be replaced after a short while by British technicians. We know something of the procedure of many producers and artists and we recognise that sometimes there is no real technical value at all in the entourage which some of these imported artists bring with them. I am told that the entourage may include all kinds of people down to the clapper-boy and the rat-catcher and the cocktail-mixer.

I had hoped very earnestly that the hon. and gallant Member for South Paddington (Vice-Admiral Taylor) who, I regret is not now in his place, would support my proposal. I have had a great deal of sympathy with him during these proceedings. It reminded me very much of Casabianca, though unfortunately it does not now, because he has fled. I should like to ask him and the hon. Member for Tonbridge (Sir A. Baillie), after their various followers have failed to stand by their guns, to support this very practical and effective means of guaranteeing to a large number of efficient technicians in this country employment in the British pictures that are to be produced in the near future.

Mr. Speaker

I find that the hon. Member cannot move his Amendment. The first word that it is proposed to leave out is "seventy-five," so that if that is carried I should be unable to put the hon. Member's Amendment. I am afraid I misled him on this question.

Mr. Sorensen

If the House rejects the Amendment moved by the hon. and learned Member opposite, would it then be possible for my Amendment to be moved?

Mr. Speaker

No I do not think it will be possible, because it will have been moved "That those words stand part of the Bill."

10.52 p.m.

Mr. G. Strauss

I do not think that this Amendment proposed by the Government is really very satisfactory. It is not satisfactory from the point of view of the British labour which will be employed in the films to be produced under the quota. Certain concessions have been made, it is true, but experience shows that in the administration of the labour Clause in the past the Ministry of Labour has not always acted in the best interests of the technical workers in the trade, although that may have been their object. We have in fact found that the production of British films and the establishment in this country of a considerable number of experienced technicians, which is essential if we are to have good film-producing units, has been handicapped by the permission given to people to come into this country from abroad who are not first-class technicians themselves and who, moreover, have not been able to train our people to become first-class technicians, nor have they been able to produce good films.

The sort of thing that has happened in the past is that the interests producing films in this country have applied for permission for some foreign technician to come here to help in the production of a film. Neither I nor, I am sure, British technicians who are working in this country desire to exclude from this country any first-class person who could really help in the production of films, or who could teach the people here how to do the business better. But too often the producing interests in this country— financed, it may be, with American capital—have brought in second or third-class people. They have told the Ministry of Labour that it was essential to get such a person in, yet that person perhaps was not an outstanding man in his own trade in America. It has very often happened that the person came here because he had got into some trouble in America, had been in disgrace, and it was thought by those who employed him in Hollywood that it would be a good thing to get him out of Hollywood for six months or a year, so that he could go back with a better reputation.

That man has come over here, has been employed in our own producing studios, and has been patently inferior to some of our own first-class people. His work has sometimes gone some way towards spoiling a good film, and sometimes, before the production of a film has been finished, he has been replaced by an English director or technician. There is one case, at least, on record where a man was brought into this country as a first-class director. The Ministry of Labour gave permission, he went to the film studios, and he started work. Complaint was made by certain interests—probably an English director, though I do not know—who went to the Minister and said, "Why should this man come in and work here? He is no use, and we have any number of people who are far better." The answer of the Ministry of Labour was, "We are told that this man is a first-class director of films." It was made quite plain that the man had never directed a film in his life, and—

Captain Wallace

If I may interrupt the hon. Member, he has not argued that the rejection of these Amendments would help any of these people of whom he is speaking, and I cannot see that his remarks have any actual relevance to this particular series of Amendments.

Mr. Strauss

They surely have relevance in this way, that the Amendments do not meet a serious situation, that they are not adequate for that purpose, and surely on those grounds I am in order in suggesting that these Amendments are no good or do not go as far as they ought to do. If we are to have in England the production of really good films, we must give opportunities, not only for our artists and directors, but also for our technicians, to show their mettle. Up to now it has usually been the case that our very good people have been prevented from taking positions of responsibility in the production of films because those positions have been a monopoly of foreigners from other countries, although those foreigners have not been really first-class people or as good as our own. That process has seriously handicapped the establishment here of good producing units and first-class technicians, who are so essential if we are to establish that industry firmly in this country.

I maintain, therefore, that these Amendments are not satisfactory, unless perhaps we may get some assurance that they will be administered through the Ministry of Labour in the future with greater care than has been the case in the past. I have no quarrel with the principle laid down here. I have quarrelled with the details, and more particularly am I anxious about these Amendments because the method of administering a similar scheme in the past has been exceedingly bad. If we could have some assurance from the Government that all applications to the Ministry of Labour in the future for the employment of foreign technicians on films which are to count for British quota will be most scrupulously examined, that the standard of ability of the technicians or artists coming into this country will be looked at very carefully, and that the number of unemployed of technicians or artists here of similar or superior ability will also be considered, then I think I would not have very much quarrel with the Amendments. It is really an important matter, as the establishment of a good film industry in this country depends very largely on the administration of this Clause as well as on the actual proportions laid down by the Amendments.

10.59 p.m.

Sir K. Wood

We are anxious not to keep the House late to-night, and I suggest to hon. Members opposite that we might conclude our proceedings in a very few moments by not going further than Clause 25. I would like to assure the hon. Member who has just sat down that with a good deal of what he has said I think the House has considerable sympathy. I will convey his remarks on this matter to my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour, who, I have no doubt, will have due regard to them.

Mr. Sorensen

Could not the right hon. Gentleman insert some words to safeguard the position?

Sir K. Wood

It is very difficult, but I will ask my right hon. Friend to consider the matter.

11.1 p.m.

Mr. Duncan

There are two persons on the Films Council representing the employés, but there is nothing in the Bill to allow them to increase the 75 per cent. Would my right hon. Friend, in consulting with the President of the Board of Trade, consider whether it would be possible to make this provision a little more elastic so that on a recommendation from the council the figure may be increased? There is a good deal in what the hon. Gentleman opposite says.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made:

In page 22, line 31, leave out "made," and insert "paid or payable."

In line 33, leave out "so domiciled," and insert "domiciled in some part of His Maiesty's Dominions."

In line 34, after "In," insert "paragraph (a) of."

In line 43, at the end, insert: and in paragraph (c) of that Sub-section the expression 'the requisite amount of labour costs' means, in relation to any film.—

  1. (a) (in a case where the total labour costs of the film amount to not less than twenty-two thousand five hundred pounds, and the quotient derived from dividing the amount of the said total labour costs by the number of feet comprised in the length of the film is a sum of not less than three pounds) whichever of the two following amounts is the less, that is to say—
    1. (i) the amount arrived at by applying the fraction three-quarters to the total labour costs of the film, after deducting therefrom, if the applicant for registration so desires, the amount of any payment which, as part of those costs, has been paid or is payable in respect of the labour or services of any one person who was, while engaged in the making of the film, neither a British subject nor a person domiciled in some part of His Majesty's dominions;
    2. (ii) the amount arrived at by applying the fraction four-fifths to the total labour costs of the film, after deducting therefrom the amount of any payments which, as part of those costs, have been paid or are payable in respect of the labour or services of any two persons neither of whom was, while engaged in the making of the film, a British subject or a person so domiciled, and at least one of whom was so engaged in the capacity of an actor or actress; or
  2. (b) in any other case, the amount arrived at under sub-paragraph (i) of the preceding paragraph:
Provided that if, upon the application for the registration, as a British film, of a film in respect of which the condition imposed by paragraph (c) of the preceding Sub-section is not fulfilled, the Board of Trade are satisfied that the maker of the film took all reasonable steps to fulfil the said condition, and that the non-fulfilment thereof was due to exceptional circumstances beyond his control, the Board, if they think fit, may direct that this Sub-section shall have effect in relation to that film, as if in paragraph (a) of this Sub-section for the words 'three-quarters' and the words 'four-fifths' there were respectively substituted the words 'seven-tenths' and the words 'three-quarters.'

In page 23, line 16, leave out Subsection (4).—[Captain Wallace.]

Ordered, That further Consideration of the Bill, as amended, be now adjourned."—[Captain Margesson.]

Bill, as amended (in the Standing Committee), to be further considered To-morrow.