§ The following Question stood upon the Order Paper in the name of Mr. MARPLES:
§ 27. To ask the President of the Board of Trade what have been the average official selling values for Egyptian cotton in this country; and what have been the corresponding replacing prices in Egypt during the same period.
§ Mr. MarplesOn a point of Order. May I call attention to the fact that after the word " country,"In the second line of the Question, the words " during the last two years " should appear?
§ Mr. BelcherThe answer has been framed to meet the Question which was asked. I would refer the hon. Member to the answer which was given on 28th March 812 to a similar Question by the hon. Member for Altrincham (Mr. Enroll).
§ Mr. MarplesAfter that tremendous amount of information, does the hon. Gentleman know that the feeling in. Liverpool is that the price at which cotton is being sold is—
§ Mr. SpeakerIt looks as if the hon. Member is giving information and not asking for it.
§ 36. Sir Waldron Smithersasked the President of the Board of Trade why the Cotton Control has sold Ashmouni cotton at 14.50d. per lb., when the replacement value is 22.50d. per lb., a difference of 8d. per lb. or £24 per bale; and why the Cotton Control is selling at so much below world prices.
§ Mr. BelcherIt has not been the practice during the war and in the present transitional period, in selling to users raw materials imported on public account, to follow closely the upward movement of replacement prices abroad, but rather to take account of the overall cost of Government purchases of the material as a whole, and in this way to maintain considerable stability of prices in this country. I should add, that in view of the advance over the past two years in the overall cost of Government purchases of cotton, selling prices are now being somewhat increased, and the price of the particular type referred to by the hon. Member will be raised to 16.5od. per lb.
§ Sir W. SmithersWho will bear the eventual loss? Will it be the taxpayer? Is not the action of the Cotton Control detrimental to Empire cotton planters and their employees?
§ Mr. BelcherIt is not at all certain that there will be eventual losses. I said in the original answer that we take account of the overall cost of Government purchases of the raw material as a whole. It may be that we are making a profit on some while making a loss on others. In any case, the justification is the maintaining of a stability of prices in this country, which, I think it will be agreed, enabled this country to emerge from the war with very remarkable stability.
§ Mr. R. S. HudsonHow is the individual manufacturer of that particular forward contract going to meet the additional cost of cotton, deprived, as he is now, of a futures market?
§ Mr. BelcherI am afraid that that is quite a different question.
§ Mr. MarplesIs the principle of selling cotton in this country at values below the replacement price abroad consistent with our obligation under Bretton Woods?
§ Mr. BelcherThat again is another question. In any case, we have not yet entered into the Bretton Woods Agreement. The point is, we have been doing what we are doing in order to maintain a stability of prices in this country and, in doing so, as far as I am aware, we have not hurt anybody.
§ Sir W. SmithersWill the hon. Gentleman answer my supplementary question, namely, whether the policy of the Cotton Control is not detrimental to Empire cotton planters?
§ Mr. BelcherSurely not.
§ Sir. W. SmithersOf course, it is.
§ Mr. BelcherThis appears to be a matter of a difference of opinion, at which I am not surprised. The point is, we are paying the Empire cotton producers the price which we think and they think is fair.