CUTLERY AND SILVERWARE INDUSTRIES (Hansard, 12 December 1952)

§ Mr. Frederick Mulley (Sheffield, Park)

I think it not inappropriate, after discussing matters in the foundry industry, that I should call attention to a metal using industry. Before doing so, I should like to congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Lanarkshire, North (Miss Herbison) on raising the question of foundry workers and securing a Second Reading for her Bill. That is a matter of great interest to those of us who represent constituencies in the Sheffield area.

My purpose in the short time at my disposal is to try to state the main and serious problems facing the cutlery and silverware industries, to make some suggestions to help them and to endeavour to solicit the interest, sympathy and support of the Parliamentary Secretary and his right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade whom we hope is making a good recovery from his illness.

By way of definition I should say that by cutlery I mean the industry covered by the Working Party Report, briefly table knives, spring knives, scissors and long handled razors and by silverware both flatware or spoons and forks and also hollow-ware. As the Parliamentary Secretary will know in many cases firms are engaged in some parts of both trades and in fact the basic problems are common to both.

Sheffield, a constituency of which I have the privilege to represent, has a deservedly high reputation for craftsmanship and quality goods. The words, "Made in Sheffield" are a hallmark of quality recognised throughout the world, bringing credit not only to the city but to the country also. It is on the long and proud tradition of excellence of these industries over 600 years that this prestige is based. Craftsmen of Sheffield have striven to fulfil the two conditions of Confucius, who said: How may I recognise a good craftsman" First by the reputation of his ancestors for honesty and sincerity; then by his ability to 928 create something new with an experience that is old. Today there is a grave danger—and I say this with a due sense of responsibility and without desiring to be dramatic—that these ancient crafts will die out and the industries be crippled beyond repair within the next 10 years unless something is done. I submit that that would be a national as well as a Sheffield tragedy. Writing in the current issue of the "Westminster Bank Review," two Sheffield economists, G. P. Jones and H. Townsend, say: but unfortunately the survival of craftsmanship, a vital necessity for the industry is threatened … more menacing is the gap in training brought about by the industrial depression between the two world wars. Only craftsmen can train their successors and an interruption of the process endangers its continuance. The position today is even more serious than between the wars. I quote from the "Sheffield Star" of 2nd December: No marked improvement in the state of the cutlery industry has been recorded since September and the drift of operatives to other industries continues to be a worry. This summing up of the position in the cutlery trade was given by the Regional Commissioner of the Board of Trade today. It is estimated that over 1,500 workers out of a total labour force of about 8,000 left the cutlery industry between May and September and many others are working short time. The earnings of those left in employment have been cut by more than half in most cases. The position in silverware is if anything worse. It is estimated that the labour force has been reduced by at least 25 per cent. and a further 50 per cent. have suffered from short time and under-employment.

Happily many of the displaced workers have found other employment, but they are lost to the industry for good. While I agree that a substantial re-shaping of our economy may be necessary, I cannot think it is advantageous to kill industries which alone by virtue of their high craft standards can compete in any market and which in addition do so much to enhance the reputation of British goods. Well-made cutlery and silverware is a standing advertisement for Britain on dining tables all over the world.

The industries are already short of craftsmen and of the skilled workers at least half are over 60. In many cases men of 80 are still employed and when 929 they leave their craft will go with them. Hand forging has almost gone. I should like the Parliamentary Secretary to look at this blade which I am holding and which I saw forged entirely by hand in a few minutes from a simple bar of steel. That process is almost dead in the trade in Sheffield.

I regret that there are no training apprenticeship schemes for cutlery, although the silversmiths have done excellent work in this direction in conjunction with the School of Arts and Crafts. This, together with the uncertain economic future, and the bad working conditions in many cases, as described in the Shimmin Report, is having a bad effect on recruitment. Indeed, the Cutlery Working Party is the only one of the many set up whose recommendations have been completely ignored. Not one recommendation has been implemented. Cannot the Board of Trade give a lead in training craftsmen?

The industries have suffered badly on account of the restrictions imposed on many export markets. For example over 50 per cent. of the exports went to Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. Can the Parliamentary Secretary give us any encouragement about negotiations to open up these markets? I am bound to say that while it is true now that North America is the only free market, and that in the United States we have to contend with tariffs against us up to 244 per cent. ad valorem, with some honourable exceptions, the manufacturers have not shown much enterprise in promoting exports, and in advertising and publicity.

I shall get into trouble for saying this, but I say it nevertheless, that I would like to see them helping themselves more in this direction. I admit that this is a problem in that the size of most firms does not permit individual sales promotion. Cannot the Board of Trade do something to assist them in forming collective export and selling schemes, or encourage them in the Canadian market, or to show at the Toronto International Fair?

What are the trade commissioners and the commercial attaches doing to help? To what extent are films used in export promotion? If films were made in Sheffield could the Board arrange for them to be shown to merchants and 930 retailers? I have heard it said that the collective efforts of the Board of Trade could not sell a hack-saw blade to a convict, but I hope we shall have some conclusive evidence from the Parliamentary Secretary to disprove this.

To a large extent the export efforts of both industries are hampered by, and the dearth of craftsmanship is due, to the Purchase Tax especially at the 100 per cent. rate, which is outside the control of the industries. I know that this is a matter for the Treasury but, as the Minister is responsible for these industries. I hope that at least he will press these considerations upon the Treasury and succeed where so far we have failed.

Time prevents my developing the general case for the abolition of Purchase Tax on cutlery and table silverware, though I am convinced that the case can be proved most emphatically. I want to plead for a slice rather than for the whole loaf and to ask that at once consideration be given to reducing the 100 per cent. rate to 33⅓ per cent. In my submission, there is no need to wait until the Budget. The interests of the industry and the Treasury are at one in this matter. Sheffield would get more work and, indirectly, more exports, and the Treasury would get more revenue.

The surprising feature is that, although maintaining this tax, the Treasury have no idea of the revenue derived from it. No figures can be produced. It is playing blind man's buff with the national finances and ducks and drakes with the industries to continue a tax of this sort. I can only touch on the case today, but full memoranda have been sent by the trades and myself both to the Treasury and the Board of Trade. Of course, we should be only too delighted to send more if required.

Receipts from Purchase Tax generally on cutlery and silverware have dropped substantially. From the returns of 115 firms, it can be seen that for the quarter ended in June last the figures were 32 per cent. down compared with the previous year, and for the quarter ended September last they were 42½ per cent. down. Those figures are based on the 100 per cent. and the 33⅓ per cent. rates combined. Some idea of the 100 per cent. rate and its consequences can be gauged from the returns of the Sheffield Assay Office. During the year ended June. 1947, they assayed 927,000 ounces. 931 In 1952 they assayed only 386,000 ounces, and during the last six months, only 151,000 ounces. There is no shortage of silver. Its greater use would economise in the use of scarce nickel which is required for E.P.N.S.

The 100 per cent. tax is also killing two valuable ancillary trades, pearl cutting and ivory cutting. Whereas before the war nine firms were concerned with pearl cutting in Sheffield, now there are only three. The absurd feature of the 100 per cent. tax on mother of pearl and ivory is that for the most part the scales used by the cutlers are waste and can be used for nothing else. From one pearl shell three or four essential compass dials required for the Services may be obtained. The rest, except for buttons, can be used only for items which carry 100 per cent. tax and which are therefore unsaleable. The addition of pearl or ivory scales—waste material worth, say, ninepence—adds 100 per cent. to the entire wholesale price of a pocketknife.

The impossibility of home sales means that there is no hope of training craftsmen to perform these highly skilled processes. It also restricts the range of designs which the industries can offer for export. It is an urgent matter for the future of these industries that this 100 per cent. Purchase Tax should be reduced immediately. I have noticed in the Estimates of the Board of Trade, Class VI, an Item covering assistance to craftsmen handicapped by the imposition of Purchase Tax. I wonder if the Parliamentary Secretary can tell us how much of this money has been used for craftsmen employed in these industries. If substantial help has not been forthcoming, could not funds from this sub-head be used to finance some of the suggestions I have made?

There are two special points to which I wish to refer briefly. On both I have had considerable correspondence with the Parliamentary Secretary. I think that he will appreciate the points at issue. Of course, he has also received representations from the trade. First, there is the question of Coronation souvenirs. The cutlery trade rightly expected to derive additional work as a result of the demand for souvenirs of the Coronation. The Board of Trade introduced an order to prevent foreign goods being imported in the form of souvenirs.

932 But we have evidence, which I have already submitted to the Board of Trade, of foreign knives being brought into this country and then being mounted or impressed with Coronation marks in this country. I know that the Board of Trade have no power at the moment to stop it, but they could seek by order power to stop the imprinting of foreign goods with Coronation souvenir insignia in the same way as they sought power to stop foreign goods so embellished.

It may be a small matter, but I would remind the Parliamentary Secretary that the Prime Minister himself has said that efficient Administration manifests itself in small matters no less than great, and, in view of the figures of the imports of knives with folding blades which I have given, showing an increase from 1,953 dozen in June to 3,436 dozen in October, I submit to the Parliamentary Secretary that he should act energetically to see if something cannot be done to stop this valuable trade being taken away from British cutlers.

The other matter is the question of the Copper, Nickel and Zinc (Prohibited Uses) Order, which is having a crippling effect in the E.P.N.S. hollowware section of the silver industry. Again, I think the Parliamentary Secretary will know something about this, because, in addition to having received correspondence, he has had representations from the trade, in which it is felt that there is a very strong case for the removal, or at least the drastic modification, of this Order, in particular since I understand that both copper and zinc are much more readily obtained now, although nickel remains difficult.

I hope the hon. Gentleman will pardon my going rather fast in order to try to make up for the minutes lost at the beginning of this debate, but I will conclude with two general points, the first of which concerns the Sheffield office of the Board of Trade. Sheffield people resent very much having to go to Leeds to do business, and they resent very much more going to Leeds and finding out that the people in Leeds not only know nothing about the kind of problem which is found in the Sheffield area, but, so I am told, give the impression that they care even less. I feel that it would be a great asset to Sheffield if we could have the Board's office in Sheffield separated from the Leeds region, 933 either as a small region of its own or by having direct access to the Board of Trade in London.

I would make it clear that, in making this suggestion, it is not intended to criticise the chief officer of the Board in Sheffield. I have heard praise for his services on all sides, and people have even said that, no matter what may happen to the organisation, they would like him to remain as the chief officer in Sheffield. If the Parliamentary Secretary knows Sheffield people as well as I do, he will realise that they are not predisposed to show affection to civil servants, and I can say that this, therefore, is very great praise indeed. I should like to stress to the Parliamentary Secretary the importance of Sheffield in the region.

Finally, I should like to invite the Parliamentary Secretary to spend a little time in Sheffield to study this problem for himself. I can assure him of an interesting and instructive time, some straight talking and genuine hospitality, and if he goes, as I hope he will, I trust he will also see the unions as well as the manufacturers. In any case, I hope he can give us some assurance that the Board of Trade have sympathy with us, and can give some assistance to these industries in the brave fight which the people in them are making to meet their difficulties.

§ The Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade (Mr. Henry Strauss)

The hon. Member for Sheffield, Park (Mr. Mulley) has long shown an informed interest in the justly celebrated industry of his constituency, and I should like to thank him for his courtesy in indicating to me in advance the chief topics which he proposed to raise this afternoon.

The hon. Gentleman has been successful in getting a great many matters into his short speech, and he will realise that I have not got the time, under the Rules of the House, to answer all of them. I am quite certain, however, that he would like me to do my best to answer one point on which he said he required information, namely, the metals supply to the industry.

During the last two years the supply of non-ferrous metals has been reduced to all industries providing for civilian needs. The purpose, of course, was to divert these metals to production for 934 defence and other essential purposes, and industry has been subject to the Statutory Orders called the Prohibited Uses Orders.

These prohibited the use of copper, zinc and nickel in a wide range of consumer goods, except for certain purposes such as the more valuable exports. The silverware industry, of course, is mainly concerned with nickel silver, which is an alloy of all three metals, copper, zinc and nickel, and nearly all its products, except spoons and forks, fell under the prohibitions.

I am glad to tell the hon. Member that supplies are now better. The restrictions on the use of zinc were removed in August last, and those on copper have now been removed. I have just signed an Order which will revoke the zinc and copper Prohibited Uses Order with effect from next Wednesday. A parallel Order is being made by the Ministry of Supply. There will then be freedom in the use of copper and zinc, but the restrictions on nickel will have to be continued. Even for nickel, however, minor relaxations in the operation of the control Orders are proving possible.

The hon. Member will have seen the Press announcement this week of two modifications in the licensing procedure under the nickel Order. These apply to all industries. One will allow nickel silver products of lower conversion value than hitherto to be made for export and so allow manufacturers to increase somewhat the range and scale of their production. The other will permit the use of nickel silver in certain circumstances in the manufacture of medals and other small Coronation souvenirs. My Department is also considering, in consultation with the silverware industry, whether it would be possible to make other changes that would help that industry in view of its peculiar dependence on the use of nickel silver.

I apologise to the hon. Member if I leap from one topic to another in order to answer as many points as possible. He mentioned the question of labour. There is no evidence of any general shortage of labour in the industry, and the hon. Member will be aware from the answer given to his Parliamentary Question last Tuesday by my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour that there was a substantial increase in the labour force 935 between the middle of 1948 and the middle of 1951.

But he did mention—and I have a good deal of sympathy with what he said—the question of apprenticeship in the cutlery industry. I should like to remind him, on that subject, that early in 1950 the Ministry of Labour suggested to the industry that they should introduce apprenticeship and training schemes in the cutlery industry. More recently—in fact, last month—the Central Youth Employment Executive approached the same bodies which had been approached in 1950 offering help in devising training and recruitment schemes for young entrants to the industry. I should share the hon. Member's satisfaction if that led to further encouragement of these schemes.

The hon. Member asked me about the Assistance to Craftsmen Scheme. Not only is this scheme used to help this industry, but it is, indeed, the principal industry which is so helped. The total grant for the scheme in the present year is £45,000, and more was allotted to gold and silverware—principally silverware—than was spent on any other industry. For this purpose alone £20,000 went to the Design and Research Centre. I may say that not only does this industry derive more benefit from this scheme than any other industry, but where relief is given it is given to the extent of the whole Purchase Tax.

One of the last topics the hon. Gentleman mentioned was that of the Sheffield office of the Board. It is quite true that for purposes of organisation it comes within the area of the Leeds office, but I can assure the hon. Gentleman that there is no bar whatsoever to direct communication, for a great many purposes, between Sheffield and London, and those communications proceed in both directions.

The hon. Gentleman was good enough to suggest that I should visit Sheffield and see this industry first-hand. I can assure him that that is my intention, Parliamentary work is such that my visits to industries in different parts of the country have to be taken, unfortunately, during the time when Parliament is adjourned, but nothing gives me more pleasure than those visits to industries. I have visited some in the past and I am visiting others in the future. I need hardly say that I 936 have not visited any in which I have not had the pleasure of meeting trade union representatives, as well as other representatives of the industry.

The hon. Gentleman also referred to exports. There are, of course, a great many countries which are themselves suffering from the necessity to reduce their imports, a problem with which we, too, are familiar on balance of payments grounds. I need not go into that, because the facts are well known to the hon. Gentleman. Fairly new home industries are growing up in those countries. Australia, India, Pakistan, Chile, the Argentine, Brazil—all have new home industries. The hon. Gentleman asked whether trade commissioners could give any help. Well certainly, by advice. They will always give advice on the position in the countries concerned to the exporter from this country; and they will also advise importers in the countries concerned where to turn in this country for their supplies. They will also give the best advice they can on the probable effectiveness of various forms of publicity.

The hon. Gentleman mentioned films. I do not suppose he would suggest otherwise than that the actual publicity is a matter for the industry itself, but the advice of our trade commissioners is always available to those who ask for it.

The 100 per cent. Purchase Tax is, of course, an important matter for the silver side of the industry. As the hon. Gentleman recognised, that is a matter for the Treasury; he has had some correspondence with my hon. Friend the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, and it will not be necessary for me to take any steps in that direction except to say that I will see that what the hon. Gentleman has said this afternoon is considered by my hon. Friend.

Without starting on a topic which I could not develop very far, I really think that is as far as I can go this afternoon in answering the questions the hon. Gentleman has raised.