HC Deb 30 June 1949 vol 466 cc1497-9
23. Mr. Granville Sharp

asked the President of the Board of Trade in what main ways the compromise proposals suggested by Sir Richard Hopkins for a development council for the wool textile industry differed from those submitted by the employers' delegation; and what are the main additional benefits expected from a statutory, as opposed to a voluntary, central body for the industry.

Mr. H. Wilson

In an effort to meet the views of the employers' delegation, Sir Richard Hopkins proposed a Development Council with the functions of promoting research, exports and design and of administering a statutory levy in connection with these purposes. He also proposed a non-statutory body to advise on all the other matters reviewed by the Wool Working Party. The Wool Textile Delegation proposed that there should be a non-statutory body for all these purposes and that the Board of Trade should be responsible for the collection of a statutory levy for the promotion of research, exports and design. As regards the second part of the Question, a statutory central body has, in my view, the advantages of being consistent with the machinery which Parliament has provided for this purpose, of ensuring greater continuity and security in the provision of funds for all required purposes and greater flexibility in their administration and use and, generally, of ensuring that the recommendations of the Wool Working Party's Report can be more fully secured both now and in the future.

Mr. Sharp

Has my right hon. Friend received a letter from the Chairman of the wool textile delegation sending him a copy of the resolution passed by the wool textile trade associations on 16th June in which, among other things, deep resentment was expressed at the fact that no reasoned justification had been given by my right hon. Friend for his decision to establish a development council; and can he say whether that statement is correct?

Mr. Wilson

I have spent what seemed to me to be the best hours of my life in the last two years explaining to the wool employers why a development council is desirable for the industry. If they still feel that they have had no reasoned statement, I trust they will wait until the matter is debated in the House.

Mr. Walter Fletcher

Can the right hon. Gentleman dispel the impression which is gaining ground that he is always going to be against voluntary organisation and in favour of statutory organisation?

Mr. Wilson

I do not know how such an impression could get round. We have agreed to a number of voluntary organisations, but I am not prepared in every case to bow to the wishes of the employers and say that there shall not be a development council in a certain industry.