HC Deb 11 June 1964 vol 696 cc775-8

10.17 p.m.

The Minister of State, Board of Trade (Mr. Edward du Cann)

I beg to move, That the Import Duties (General) (No. 5) Order 1964 (S.I., 1964, No. 658), dated 7th May, 1964, a copy of which was laid before this House on 8th May, be approved. I regret having to weary the House with these technical explanations, but I have been asked for them, and I am sure that the request of the right hon. Member for Battersea, North (Mr. Jay) is entirely right and proper.

This Order does three things. It is slightly more complicated than the last. It gives effect to a corrigendum issued some time ago by the Customs Cooperation Council in Brussels intended to align the English and the French texts of Heading No. 41.08 of the Brussels Nomenclature. The corrigendum extends the heading to cover imitation patent leather as well as patent leather. I find myself in some difficulty because I understand that there are divided opinions throughout the world whether the word "patent" should be pronounced with a long or short "a". The right hon. Gentleman says that it should be pronounced with a long a. I can only tell him that majority opinion does not agree with him. In order to please him I will vary the pronunciation from time to time

Sir Harmar Nicholls (Peterborough)

Can the hon. Gentleman explain how he thinks the OFFICIAL REPORT will be able to distinguish one pronunciation from the other?

Mr. du Cann

That is not a matter for me, but I am certain that with their usual excellence and competence those concerned on HANSARD will solve the matter adequately.

Secondly, the Order prescribes a new tariff sub-heading for imitation patent leather within the amended Heading, 41.08. Before the Order took effect—some while in advance of this debate—imitation patent leather was classifiable according to the type of leather to which the patent type glossy surface was applied—bovine, sheepskin, pigskin, etc., as the case might be. In practice nearly all known imports have been of the type of leather classifiable under sub-heading 41.02(A)—box and willow calf, etc., imported in skins or pieces weighing less than 4 lb. each. The full rate of duty payable on this leather is 20 per cent. This is the full rate, therefore, applicable against the new sub-heading for imitation patent leather. The Order as a whole is subject to the affirmative rather than the negative resolution procedure only because the full rates of duty on other kinds of leather are less than 20 per cent. and of the consequent possibility that a few consignments of imitation patent leather may be charged with a higher rate of duty now than they would have attracted before the Order took effect. These two points, although complicated, are matters of pure routine, but are of great interest to those people in the trade who are concerned with them.

The third point is a new one. The Order prescribes that the E.F.T.A. rate of duty on imitation patent leather shall be the same as the E.F.T.A. rate on patent leather itself—that is to say 3 per cent. rather than the 8 per cent. which would correspond to the full rate of 20 per cent. This is because it has been difficult to determine whether certain E.F.T.A. products should be admitted as patent or as imitation patent leather.

The difficulty is that recent technical developments in methods of giving leather the glossy type surface characteristically associated with patent leather are making it extremely difficult, I am advised, even for trade experts to define precisely where the line should be drawn between "genuine" and "imitation" patent leather. As the House will know, the changed rate of duty will in any case become nil by the end of 1966, and we have decided that it would be appropriate to equalise the rates now at the lower rate applicable to patent leather. In other words, we are moving forward a little which seems a practical thing to do in the context of the technical difficulties which I have endeavoured to explain to the House.

Question put and agreed to.