IRON (ANTI-DUMPING DUTY) (Hansard, 3 April 1973)

§ Mr. Roy Mason (Barnsley)

The Minister has been saved by the Whip formally moving the motion in his absence. I wish to speak briefly on the matter. This is the second anti-dumping order affecting East Germany to come before the House in the last five months. The Minister no doubt remembers that last November his Department placed a duty of £2,250 per machine on sweet-wrapping machines from that country.

Now we have the order imposing antidumping duty of £5 a tonne on pig iron and cast iron. Will the Minister say who complained? I know that the British Steel Corporation, the private sector and the British Scrap Federation might have been involved, but the Minister must inform the House who has complained sufficiently to insist upon an examination of the matter.

Will the Minister also tell us what was the extent of the material injury and what tonnage of pig and cast iron has been coming in from East Germany? I take it that this £5 per tonne duty will be retrospective. From what date will it apply? How much will Customs gather as a result? Because the Department of Trade and Industry has had to impose two duty orders within five months against the German Democratic Republic, it may give the appearance of being vigilant. This vigilance is absolutely necessary.

The Department and Customs and Excise must observe more closely the numbers and types of products coming into Britain from Eastern Europe. Its system of trading is quite different from our own. It has a State monopoly and State control of products and exports. No 398 doubt State subsidies are involved too. This is also true of other Eastern European countries. That is why there are constant complaints, for example from the National Union of Mineworkers and the National Coal Board, about the dumping of cheap Polish coal on the British market. It is about time that an examination was made of that.

At the moment the German Democratic Republic is guilty of malpractice in international trading. The Minister might care to say what representations he has made or intends to make to the GDR Government about the question of fair trading and the need to observe international trading agreements. I cannot understand why it persists in this practice. Apart from Parliament having to be informed each time it is caught, many firms and businesses must get to know of these malpractices and that must do the offending nation greater harm.

The Eastern European bloc, particularly the USSR, Romania and the GDR, has been guilty of the dumping of goods into Britain which has caused material injury to our producers on at least six occasions in the last three years. I hope that the Minister and the Department will inform it that it is six times too often. It is now necessary to inform the Eastern European countries, particularly the GDR, that these malpractices cannot be tolerated. In their own interests they ought to curtail their dumping practices.

§ The Under-Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (Mr. Anthony Grant)

I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Lord Commissioner of the Treasury for moving acceptance of the order. Some of us were taken by surprise at the remarkable taciturnity of our legal friends in the preceding debate.

This order, which was made under the Customs Duties (Dumping and Subsidies) Act 1969, imposes an anti-dumping duty of £5 per tonne on pig iron, originating in East Germany, prospectively from 9th March 1973 and retrospectively to 12th September 1972 when a provisional charge to duty was imposed. That deals with one of the points raised by the right hon. Member for Barnsley (Mr. Mason).

The anti-dumping action which we have taken follows a thorough investigation by the Department in response to 399 an anti-dumping application submitted by the United Kingdom producers of pig iron. The application came from the British Steel Corporation and was supported by Ford.

Our investigation established that the East German pig iron was dumped by reference to the price paid for imports of comparable pig iron from Norway, after adjustments had been made to allow for differences in the composition of the pig iron imported from these two different sources. The 1969 Act allows us to use this method of assessing dumping in the case of imports from State-trading countries when satisfactory information cannot be obtained about their domestic prices.

We were also satisfied, after a thorough investigation of the position of the British producers by our professional accountants, that the dumping had caused material injury and threatened to cause further material injury to the British industry. In the light of these findings, and after considering representations made to us by importers and users of the pig iron, we concluded that it was in the national interest to impose the duty.

The right hon. Gentleman asked me about the extent of the imports. Between August 1971 and July 1972 imports from East Germany amounted to 58,000 tonnes, and they were on a rising curve. The Department's estimate was that at the peak rate of imports in 1972 the maximum loss would be about 80,000 tonnes a year out of a total open market purchase of about 600,000 tonnes. Therefore we took the provisional action in September, after which imports ceased.

We did not receive all the information we required from the British Steel Corporation on the financial position until about November last year. Therefore, bearing in mind that there has been a court case on this matter in which judgment was given in the Department's favour on 6th March, I think that the Department has acted as expeditiously as possible.

The right hon. Gentleman also mentioned coal. Imports of coal from all sources are currently at very low levels, and imports of Polish coal form only a small proportion of the total. The Gov- 400 ernment are nevertheless keeping the situation under close review.

Finally, I will say a word on the general observations of the right hon. Gentleman about the Eastern bloc in general and East Germany in particular. He is right in saying that this is the second occasion on which an anti-dumping order has had to come before the House dealing with East Germany. Naturally we deplore dumping, and we have shown that we are prepared to take action. But we have to investigate the cases very thoroughly to ensure that there is material injury and that there is dumping. We also have to have regard to the interest of consumers, which we must never forget, and the consumers' interest is obviously to get as cheap products as possible. But we are determined to see that dumping is safeguarded against, and I assure the right hon. Gentleman that we note carefully the countries from which there seems to be a spate of dumping.

The right hon. Gentleman will understand that the Department also has to have regard to the broad trade interests of this country. We export substantially to the Eastern bloc countries, and we cannot allow any feelings we have on particular dumping issues to cloud our minds on the general overall trade position. Nevertheless we have acted in this case, and we will act in other cases where substantial dumping is proved, whether by East Germany or any other country.

I therefore hope that the House will approve the order.