HC Deb 03 June 1947 vol 438 cc78-81
Sir S. Cripps

I beg to move, in page 4, line 27, at the end, to insert: (3) Before making such an order the Board or Minister concerned shall satisfy themselves or himself that the incidence of the charges as between different classes of undertakings in the industry will be in accordance with a fair principle. This Amendment is moved as the result of the representations of the Opposition in Committee to make quite sure that the incidence of the charges which can be raised as between different classes of undertakings in an industry should be in accordance with a fair principle. It was thought that if charges were raised simply upon raw materials used, it might fall very unfairly on those firms when one a large amount of raw materials when one compares them with those firms which use only a comparatively small amount of raw material but by a large amount of processing work give the materials a greater value. This Amendment will enable that danger to be obviated.

Mr. Lyttelton

I would like a little further elucidation from the President of the Board of Trade. I thank him for bringing forward this Amendment. The particular point which worries me is that we might have in an industry three or four companies of a progressive nature. I turn aside to say that "progressive" is not a word which should be used in the sense that the Paymaster-General used it earlier this afternoon. I took it from his remarks that those who agreed with the Government were progressive and those who did not, were not. That is a particularly repulsive form of definition to my hon. Friends. Leaving that aside, let us imagine that in an industry there are three or four, in a truer and wider sense, very progressive firms which spend large sums of money on the promotion of their exports and upon research and development. It is unfair that those firms should be required to pay a substantial levy to bring up the laggards who have neglected to gain the same standard of efficiency which these firms have achieved with their own money. I do not suppose that the Government would be particularly upset if it was unfair. They would say that the big people could probably afford it. I do not mind that so much as the fact that it might frustrate the object we all have in mind.

We must not get a feeling abroad in industry that if we spend as little and in as niggardly a fashion as possible on research and development for export promotion the Government will do the work for us by raising a levy upon all those who are engaged in the industry, or, in other words, to replace the private individual responsibility which they may feel now with a comfortable leaning back on a levy. If the President of the Board of Trade, by bringing in "a fair principle," is directing his mind to that particular subject, I welcome this Amendment all the more. I do not think, for example, that it would be a fair principle to assess a firm for purposes of a levy for research and development by the number of people it employs or by the number of square feet of floor space it occupies in the process of manufacture. I am sure the House will forgive me if mention that if that way of doing it was applied to my own company, we should find ourselves providing very nearly the whole of the research and development for the electrical industry, which I do not think would be a fair principle.

Again, I see great difficulties in trying to get a definition which will enable a reasonable levy to be made, which does not put unnecessary restrictions on the amount and, at the same time, will not inflict the injustices and the disadvantages I mentioned. If the President can assure me that his phrase "a fair principle "—which seems to be a very ingenious one in this connection—is intended to protect people who spend large sums of money on export promotion and research work from having to pay large sums twice, then I should feel all the happier that this Amendment is being introduced. If the levies for research and development, and maybe for fundamental research, run into hundreds or even into a small number of thousands, there are few of the big companies which would have any objection to paying, but firms spending perhaps over half a million pounds a year on research would think it hard if they had to pay again in order to bring the laggards up to the state of efficiency which they have reached with their own money. I am only speaking on this Amendment to ask the President to give us a little further elucidation. If he can do that, I will accept it all the more readily; if he cannot, I still think the Amendment is an improvement to the Bill.

Sir S. Cripps

With the permission of the House, may I say that it is certainly not the object of this Amendment to penalise people who are doing a good job. It will be observed that the development council order will provide for the imposition of the levy, whatever it may be, by the development council with the approval of the Board. The matter will therefore have to be laid down in the order which comes before the House. It will have to be discussed with both sides of the industry beforehand, and one imagines that some sensible and fair method will be worked out and, with the addition of this Subsection, it is made the particular care of the Board or the Minister to satisfy himself that such a fair principle is applied. It is quite impossible to say what that would be. There are certain industries where it is comparatively simple, like the cotton industry, where it has been accepted as a fair levy, but there are other industries, like the engineering industry, where it would be extremely difficult to work out a fair levy. Therefore that will be largely for the industry to do, and if they desire to have such a levy raised, I think they will be able to devise some method which will broadly meet the desires and needs of the industries. The expression "in accordance with a fair principle" is purposely put in to cover everybody, and not merely to cover one particular section. I can assure the right hon. Gentleman that the matters he has in mind, in addition to others, will be borne in mind.

Amendment agreed to.