HC Deb 14 February 1977 vol 926 cc9-12
5. Mr. Madden

asked the Secretary of State for Trade what progress is being made in the renegotiation of the Multi-Fibre Arrangement; and if he will make a statement.

30. Mr. Nicholas Winterton

asked the Secretary of State for Trade what further progress has been made in renegotiating the Multi-Fibre Arrangement; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. Dell

The first round of discussions about the future of the Multi- Fibre Arrangement took place in the GATT Textiles Committee in Geneva in December. At that meeting the EEC spokesman made a strong statement in favour of renewal of the arrangement with major changes. A further round of discussions is expected to take place in Geneva at the beginning of March.

Mr. Madden

Does my right hon. Friend accept that these negotiations are regarded as crucial to the future of the British textile industry? Will he give an undertaking that the British Government will continue to pursue a most vigorous approach to these negotiations and will not be persuaded by anyone to agree to a built-in increase in imports into Britain? Will he also arrange for a recession clause to be inserted into the agreement? Will he tell the House when he expects the negotiations to be concluded?

Mr. Dell

I agree entirely that the negotiations are crucial to the textile industry. I can assure my hon. Friend that our approach will bear that in mind. We are discussing our negotiating position within the European Community, but I think that the first statement of the Community's position was right. The particular points that my hon. Friend mentioned, such as a recession clause, are among the matters that we have in mind in renegotiating the agreement.

Mr. Arnold

Is it not the case that the original agreement was based on a demonstrably false premise—namely, that the developed world would always require more textiles?

Mr. Dell

The original arrangement was based on the premise that the developing world and the developed world had to trade, but there must be controls if there is to be a possibility of survival for the British textile industry and the necessary process of adjustment.

Mr. Hoyle

Will my right hon. Friend please take note that the last Multi-Fibre Arrangement was regarded among the textile companies as being meaningless in many respects? Many of the quotas were far too high Will my right hon. Friend press for something that will help the hard-pressed textile industry in respect of low-cost imports in future?

Mr. Dell

We shall press for a renewed Multi-Fibre Arrangement with major changes along the lines discussed with both sides of the industry in this country. I do not accept my hon. Friend's statement that the existing agreement is meaningless. On the contrary, it has provided a valuable degree of protection for the industry.

Mr. Nott

As changes to the Multi-Fibre Arrangement are undoubtedly very necessary, is the right hon. Gentleman aware that burden-sharing within the Community is also very important? When is there to be an opportunity for the right hon. Gentleman to discuss with his European partners the present burden-sharing arrangements and our own view that these are not fair to Britain?

Mr. Dell

That is a matter that will arise when the present arrangement is renegotiated. The burden-sharing arrangements within the existing agreement are a valuable feature of it and are the sort of thing that we wish to see continue.

Mr. James Lamond

Has my right hon. Friend read the 31st January edition of the American magazine Business World, which clearly shows the fundamental difference of approach between the American negotiators and the British and EEC negotiators? The Americans are anxious to make political capital in countries such as Korea, Taiwan and Brazil, and the EEC negotiators are anxious to see that the last arrangement, which cost 400,000 jobs to the textile industry in this country, is not repeated.

Mr. Dell

I have not seen that edition of Business World. I am aware that the United States' approach to the negotiations is different from that of the European Community. But the level of penetration of the United States market is much lower than that of the Community market.

Mrs. Kellett-Bowman

Will the Secretary of State disillusion his hon. Friend the Under-Secretary, who imagines that the textile industry is protected under the existing agreement? Clearly the right hon. Gentleman has a better appreciation of that matter than his colleague has. When negotiating another agreement, will the right hon. Gentleman please be certain to relate the level of imports in any year to the state of the market and secure a clear definition from all the signatories to that agreement of what constitutes a cottage industry, so that there can be no cheating under the guise of helping "cottage industries" which are nothing of the kind?

Mr. Dell

My hon. Friend is well aware of the problem, both as a Minister and as a constituency Member. I do not think that he needs any education on the nature of the current arrangements. Whether the details of the arrangements should require that trade be related to the state of the market is one of the matters under consideration in the present discussion. I know what the hon. Lady is referring to when she speaks of cottage industries. That is a matter which is under separate discussion in Brussels and Delhi.