CINEMATOGRAPH FILMS BILL. (Hansard, 5 December 1927)

HL Deb 05 December 1927 vol 69 cc463-98 463

§ Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee read.

§ Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(Viscount Peel.)

464

§ On Question, Motion agreed to.

§ House in Committee accordingly:

§ [The EARL OF KINTORE in the Chair.]

§ Clause 1:

§ Restrictions on blind booking of films.

§ 1.—(1) As from the commencement of this Act, no agreement shall be entered into to rent or imposing an obligation when called on to rent for public exhibition in Great Britain any film to which this Act applies unless every such film to which the agreement relates has been registered under this Act or a valid application for the registration thereof has been made:

§ Provided that—

(a) this provision shall not apply to a film which has been exhibited to exhibitors or to the public before the commencement of this Act; and
(b) in the case of a serial film or a series of films within the meaning of this Act, it shall be sufficient if any three parts thereof have been registered or a valid application for the registration of three parts thereof has been made.

§ (2) In the case of a film which has not been previously exhibited to exhibitors or to the public in Great Britain, this section shall not operate so as to prohibit the making prior to the registration or application for registration thereof of an agreement for the exhibition of the film in one theatre only on a number of consecutive days if the film is, or when made will be, a British film.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL moved, in subsection (1) (a), after "public," to insert "in Great Britain." The noble Viscount said: This is purely a drafting Amendment. Perhaps I may be allowed to say that a considerable number of the Amendments standing in my name are of the nature of drafting Amendments, but I will call your Lordships' attention to anything that is of a more substantial nature.

§ Amendment moved— Page 1, line 19, after ("public") insert ("in Great Britain").—(Viscount Peel.)

§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL moved to omit from subsection (2) the words at the end "if the film is, or when made will be, a British film." The noble Viscount said: This is really a drafting Amendment, although it has a little more substance in it because it is introduced in order to correct a mistake made in another place when an Amendment should have been moved but for some reason was not 465 moved. The result is that the subsection is limited to British films at present, and it was always the intention that it should apply both to foreign and to British films. I move the Amendment to put right that anomaly.

§ Amendment moved— Page 2, lines 11 and 12, leave out ("if the film is, or when made will be, a British film").—(Viscount Peel.)

§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.

§ Clause 1, as amended, agreed to.

§ Clauses 2 and 3 agreed to.

§ Clause 4 [Provisions as to existing agreements]:

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
The two Amendments on this clause are drafting.

§ Amendments moved—

§ Page 3, line 5, leave out ("illegal") and insert ("invalid")

§ Page 3, line 8, after ("exhibition") insert ("in Great Britain").—(Viscount Peel.)

§ On Question, Amendments agreed.

§ Clause 4, as amended, agreed to.

§ Clause 5 [Prohibition against exhibition of unregistered films]:

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
These are also drafting Amendments.

§ Amendments moved—

§ Page 3, line 24, after ("held") insert ("at one theatre only")

§ Page 3, line 20, after ("exhibited") insert ("in Great Britain").—(Viscount Peel.)

§ On Question, Amendments agreed to.

§ Clause 5, as amended, agreed to.

§ Clause 6 [Registration of films]:

§ Amendment moved— Page 3, line 40, after ("public") insert ("in Great Britain").—(Viscount Peel.)

§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.

§ Clause 6, as amended, agreed to.

§ Clause 7 [Inspection of register, &c.]:

§ Amendment moved— Page 5, line 7, after ("and") insert ("a certificate purporting to be a certificate of registration or").—(Viscount Peel.)

§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.

§ Clause 7, as amended, agreed to.

§ Clause 8:

§ Correction of register.

§ 8.—(1) If the Board of Trade at any time have reason to believe that the length of a film has been or has become incorrectly 466 registered, or that a film has been incorrectly registered as a British film, they may call for such evidence as they think fit as to the correctness or otherwise of the registration, and if satisfied that the film has been or is incorrectly registered, they shall correct the register and issue an amended certificate of registration.

§ (2) On the issue of an amended certificate, the former certificate shall cease to have effect, except that the Board of Trade may in any particular case allow the film to be counted for the purposes of the provisions of Part III. of this Act relating to renters' and exhibitors' quotas as being of the length originally registered, or as a British film, as the case may be.

§ VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME moved, in subsection (1), to substitute "may" for "shall" ["shall correct the register"]. The noble Viscount said: This Amendment and the one which follows it are interdependent. The object is not to force the Board of Trade to re-register a film which has been incorrectly described, but to give them power to strike it off the register and cancel the certificate, which, of course, they would do only in a bad case.

§ Amendment moved— Page 5, line 19, leave out ("shall") and insert ("may").—(Viscount Bertie of Thame.)

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
This Amendment would leave it to the discretion of the Board of Trade whether or not they should make this correction in the register, but I submit that it is undesirable that they should have that discretion. The register ought to be correct and they ought to make it so.

§ VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME
I beg leave to withdraw the Amendment.

§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

§ VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME moved, at the end of subsection (1), to insert "or remove such film from the register and cancel the certificate of registration." The noble Viscount said: I do not understand the words of the subsection. How can a film once having posed as a British film and having been found to be a foreign film, regain a nationality which it never possessed?

§ Amendment moved— Page 5, line 20, at end insert the said words.—(Viscount Bertie of Thame.)

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
If the registration is cancelled it would have the effect of making the film to which it applies an 467 unregistered film, and that would not merely prevent the exhibitor from counting it in his quota although he had no means whatever perhaps of knowing whether the registration was correct, but it would actually prevent it from being exhibited at all. I submit that it is undesirable to give to the Board of Trade the right of absolutely and completely banning the film from exhibition in this way.

§ VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME
I will not press the Amendment, but if the Board of Trade do not refuse it who is going to?

§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

§ Clause 8 agreed to.

§ Clauses 9 and 10 agreed to.

§ Clause 11 [Marking of registered films]:

§ Amendments moved—

§ Page 6, line 15, leave out ("so to mark") and insert ("to comply with the above requirements in respect of")

§ Page 6, line 17, after ("public") insert ("in Great Britain")

§ Page 6, line 20, leave out ("a film has") and insert ("copies of a film have")

§ Page 6, lines 20 and 21, leave out ("an invoice has") and insert ("invoices have")

§ Page 6, line 23, leave out ("where the film has been so marked") and insert ("in the former case")

§ Page 6, line 26, leave out ("where the film has not been so marked") and insert ("in the latter case")

§ Page 6, line 29, leave out from ("person") to ("be") in line 33, and insert. ("fails to comply with any of the provisions of this section, or issues a copy of any registered film incorrectly marked or any invoice containing incorrect particulars, he shall").—(Viscount Peel.)

§ On Question, Amendments agreed to.

§ Clause 11, as amended, agreed to.

§ Clause 12 agreed to.

§ Clause 13 [Provisions as to renters' quota]:

§ Amendment moved— Page 8, line 2, after ("were") insert ("reasons").—(Viscount Peel.)

§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL moved to insert as a new subsection:— (5) Where a renter has in any such year acquired any registered films and subsequently in the same year his business as a renter by assignment or will or on intestacy or by operation of law, becomes 468 vested in some other licensed renter, that other renter and not the first-mentioned renter shall for the purposes of the provisions of this Part of this Act as to the renters' quota be deemed to have acquired the films. The noble Viscount said: This is in order that the quota may be spread over the whole year. As the Bill stands, if a renter were to transfer his business to somebody else in the course of the year, the effect would be that the first renter would have to have his exact quota for that portion of the year, and the second man to whom the business was transferred would have to have his quota for that portion of the year. Under this proposed new subsection the whole of the business is brought together, and the quota covers the whole year. If seems to me a reasonable thing to do.

§ Amendment moved— Page 8, line 15, at end insert the said new subsection.—(Viscount Peel.)

§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.

§ Clause 13, as amended, agreed to.

§ Clause 14 agreed to.

§ Clause 15 [Provisions applicable where same film rented by different persons for different areas]:

§ Amendment moved— Page 8, line 33, leave out ("who rents registered") and insert ("whose business is limited to the renting of").—(Viscount Peel.)

§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.

§ Clause 15, as amended, agreed to.

§ Clause 16 agreed to.

§ Clause 17 [Prohibition against carrying on business of renter unless licensed]:

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
This Amendment is drafting.

§ Amendment moved— Page 9, line 29, after ("public") insert ("in Great Britain").—(Viscount Peel.)

§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.

§ Clause 17, as amended, agreed to.

§ Clause 18:

§ Returns and records.

§ 18.—(1) Every person who during any year ending on the thirty-first day of March was a licensed renter shall furnish to the Board of Trade before the first day of the following May or such later date as in any particular case the Board of Trade may allow, a return giving such particulars as may be prescribed with respect to the 469 registered films acquired by him during the your in question, in order to enable them to ascertain whether the requirements of this Part of this Act with respect to the renters' quota have been satisfied by him during the year to which the return relates.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
The first two Amendments are drafting. I beg to move.

§ Amendments moved—

§ Page 10, line 11, after ("who") insert ("at any time").

§ Page 10, line 18, leave out ("them") and insert ("the Board of Trade").—(Viscount Peel.)

§ On Question, Amendments agreed to.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL moved, to add to subsection (1): Provided that if any licensed renter in the course of any such year ceases to carry on business as a renter, the return shall be made within one month from the time when he so ceases to carry on the business, unless previously and in the same year his business as a renter has become vested in some other licensed renter. The noble Viscount said: It is merely that if the renter ceases business at an early period of the year he should make his return as soon as possible within the year and not wait until the end.

EARL RUSSELL
Except in cases where someone else carries on the business within a month.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
Yes, that is so. I beg to move.

§ Amendment moved— Page 10, line 21, at end insert the said proviso.—(Viscount Peel.)

§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
The next Amendment is drafting. I beg to move.

§ Amendment moved— Page 10, line 34, after ("public") insert ("in Great Britain").—(Viscount Peel.)

§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.

§ Clause 18, as amended, agreed to.

§ Clause 19:

§ Provisions as to exhibitors' quota.

§ (4) In the case of any exhibitor who, in any such year, does not exhibit, in any one theatre on more than six days nor in more than one theatre at the same time, the provisions of thus section as to the exhibitors' quota shall apply, subject to the following modification: it shall not be necessary for any such exhibitor to comply with those provisions 470 as respects any particular theatre if, had all the exhibitions given by him in the year been exhibitions at the same theatre, those provisions would have been complied with.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
The first two Amendments are drafting. I beg to move.

§ Page 11, line 7, after ("public") insert ("in Great Britain").

§ Page 11, line 39, after ("were") insert ("reasons").—(Viscount Peel.)

§ On Question, Amendments agreed to.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL moved to leave out subsection (4). The noble Viscount said: Does that come in now? I want to insert a new clause after Clause 21 on page 13.

EARL RUSSELL
We are on page 11 now.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
Yes, I leave out this subsection in order to introduce a new clause. I move to leave out subsection (4) and in its place at a later stage I shall move to insert a clause after Clause 21. It is merely to deal with cases of itinerant exhibitors, and it relieves them from certain regulations which would apply to people who are not itinerant and are in fixed theatres. There are regulations which it would obviously be difficult to apply, or possibly would be inapplicable, to people who go about from one place to another giving one or two exhibitions at each theatre. That is really the whole account of the new clause.

§ Amendment moved— Page 11, line 40, leave out subsection (4)—(Viscount Peel.)

§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.

§ Clause 19, as amended, agreed to.

§ Clause 20 agreed to.

§ Clause 21:

§ Returns and records.

§ 21.—(1) Every person who at any time during any year ending on the thirtieth day of September was a licensed exhibitor shall furnish to the Board of Trade before the first day of the following November a return giving such particulars as may be prescribed with respect to the registered films exhibited by him in each theatre during the year in question, and the dates and number of times on which they were exhibited, in order to enable the Board of Trade to ascertain whether the requirements of this Part of this Act with respect to the exhibitors' quota have been satisfied by him in respect of the theatre during the year to which the return relates.

471

§ (2) Every licensed exhibitor shall also keep at each theatre at which he exhibits films a book, and shall as soon as practicable record therein the title, registered number and registered length of film exhibited by him at the theatre to the public (distinguishing between British and foreign registered films), the dates of all exhibitions of each film and the number of times of exhibition of each film each day during the normal hours in the ordinary programme, and every such book shall be open to inspection by any person authorised in that behalf by the Board of Trade as provided for in the following section.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL moved, at the end of subsection (1), to insert:— Provided that if any licensed exhibitor in the course of any such year ceases to exhibit at any theatre, the return with respect to that theatre shall be made within one month from the time when he so ceases to exhibit thereat. The noble Viscount said: This is merely to bring the exhibitor and the renter into line in the matter of giving their return one month after they cease business in a theatre. It is on the same lines as the Amendment I have already explained to your Lordships.

§ Amendment moved— Page 12. line 35, at end insert the said proviso.—(Viscount Peel.)

§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
The next is a drafting Amendment.

§ Amendment moved— Page 12, line 36, leave out ("at") and insert ("in respect of").—(Viscount Peel.)

§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
The next Amendment is also drafting.

§ Amendment moved— Page 12, line 39, after ("of") insert ("each").—(Viscount Peel.)

§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL moved, at the end of the clause, to insert: "The book relating to any theatre shall be kept at that theatre so long as the exhibitor continues to exhibit thereat." The noble Viscount said: This is also a drafting Amendment. I beg to move.

§ Amendment moved— Page 13, line 5, at end insert the said words.—(Viscount Peel.)

§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.

§ Clause 21, as amended, agreed to.

472

§ VISCOUNT PEEL moved to insert the following new clause after Clause 21:—

§ Provisions as to itinerant exhibitors.

§ " . In the case of any exhibitor who in any such year as aforesaid does not exhibit in any one theatre on more than six days nor in more than one theatre at the same time, the provisions of this Part of this Act shall apply subject to the following modifications:—

(a) It shall not be necessary for any such exhibitor to comply with the provisions as to the exhibitors' quota as respects any particular theatre if, had all the exhibitions given by him in the year been exhibitions at the same theatre, those provisions would have been complied with;
(b) It shall not be necessary for the exhibitor to make a return to the Board of Trade after ceasing to exhibit at any particular theatre, or to keep a separate record book in respect of each theatre at which he exhibits;
(c) A licence to carry on the business of exhibiting films to the public shall suffice, and it shall not be necessary for the exhibitor to obtain a licence in respect of each theatre at which he exhibits."

The noble Viscount said: I beg now to move the insertion of a new clause after Clause 21. It is described as "Provisions as to itinerant exhibitors" and I explained it very briefly to your Lordships just now.

§ Amendment moved— After Clause 21 insert the said new clause.—(Viscount Peel.)

§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.

§ Clause 22 agreed to.

§ Clause 23:

§ Proceedings for failure to comply with provisions as to quotas.

§ 23.—(1) Any offence of failing to comply with the provisions of this Part of this Act as to the renters' quota or exhibitors' quota may be prosecuted summarily or on indictment, and—

(a) if the accused is proceeded against summarily, he shall on conviction if a renter be liable to a fine not exceeding one hundred pounds, and if an exhibitor to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds; and
(b) if the accused is proceeded against on indictment, he shall on conviction be liable to a fine not exceeding five hundred pounds.

§ (2) In the case of a conviction on indictment, the Court, in addition to imposing any such fine as aforesaid.—

§ (a) where the offender is a renter, may on a third offence order that his licence be revoked, and may order that 473 no licence shall be issued to him, or to any person with whom he is financially associated, or to any person who acquires his business, or to any person who took part in the management of his business and was knowingly a party to the offence, for such period in each case as may be specified in the order:

§ Provided that where any such order is made the order shall not operate so as to prevent, the renter carrying out for a period not exceeding six months any obligations under any contract entered into by him before the institution of the proceedings;

§ (b) where the offender is an exhibitor, may on a third offence order his licence under this Act in respect of the theatre with respect to which the offence was committed to be revoked, and may order that for such period in each case as may be specified in the order no licence in respect of that theatre shall be issued to him or to any person with whom he is financially associated, or to any person who took part in the management of his business and was knowingly a party to the offence, or to any person whose licence in respect of any theatre has been revoked during the twelve months previous to the date of the conviction.

§ EARL RUSSELL moved, in paragraph (a) of subsection (2), after the first "may," to insert "if of opinion that the offence was deliberate." The noble Earl said: The principle of this Bill was, of course, carried against us on the Second Reading and I have not put down any Amendments which challenge that principle, although I have been invited to do so. I hope that abstention will be counted to me for righteousness by the noble Viscount opposite in regard to the Amendments which I have put down. There are two in fact, but both deal with the same subject. This clause has rather a curious history. If your Lordships will look at Clause 23, you will see that subsection (2) provides that in the case of the conviction on indictment, the Court, in addition to imposing a fine may on a third offence order the licence to be revoked and "order that no licence shall be issued to him"—and in fact, put a stop to his business.

§ This clause was in the Bill as originally introduced. When the Bill was considered in Standing Committee in another place and on an adjournment from one day to another, I think, but I am not quite sure about that, the question of whether this clause should remain in the Bill or not was left to a free vote of 474 the Committee. On that free vote the clause was deleted by a majority of four to one, I think. Then, when the Bill reached Report stage in another place a Motion was made to re-insert this clause and again, in accordance with what had been done in Committee, it was left to a free vote of the House, but with this difference, that on that occasion the Under-Secretary of the Board of Trade stated which way he was going to vote, and although the Whips were not put on and the vote was technically a free vote, it really looks from the Division List, as if it took place on the ordinary party lines. The result was that the clause was re-instated by a majority of two to one in the full House on the Report stage.

§ I am not now seeking to leave out this subsection altogether, although, I think, it might well be left out, because it is a very severe penalty to impose upon a man that he shall lose his entire means of livelihood and the means by which he can carry on his business on a third conviction for not exhibiting his quota of British films. Your Lordships will notice that under the immediately preceding subsection he is already liable to a fine of £500, which is a pretty considerable amount. A net profit of £500 is not so easily made ever in this business, I imagine. In addition to that, the court has power to impose this penalty. There was one feature of the discussion in another place which rather impressed me and which, I think, really was a mistake. It was stated over and over again that this penalty could only be imposed by a Judge of the High Court. Those are not the words in the Bill. The words in the Bill are "a conviction on indictment," and I know of no reason why that conviction could not take place at Quarter Sessions, and might very well be at Quarter Sessions in the country. As your Lordships know, there is no necessity for Quarter Sessions to be presided over by a lawyer; any magistrate may be Chairman of Quarter Sessions. Therefore you have not that tempered judicial direction which a High Court Judge exercises always available in these cases.

§ All I suggest to your Lordships is that you should indicate to the Court that it is not intended to deprive a man of his livelihood altogether unless he has deli- 475 berately flouted the Act of Parliament and deliberately set himself to do that which the Act says he shall not do. I do that with the more confidence because it was also said again and again in the discussions in another place that this was a proper arrangement for film exhibitors or film corporations, who were so wealthy that even a fine of £500 made no difference, who set themselves deliberately to flout the law. Lawyers might take some objection to these words on the ground that they are vague, but, after all, the power of the Court is only a permissive power and this is merely an indication to the Court of the intention of Parliament as to the occasions on which this very heavy penalty should be put into effect. I do not wish to weary your Lordships with some of the arguments used as to how this precedent might be extended in other cases and to other businesses, but I feel rather strongly that it is a great penalty and I am asking the noble Viscount for a very little softening of it, which, I think, will restore confidence to minds that are agitated, perhaps not always with reason but that are agitated, by the prospect of a loss of livelihood owing to an unreasonable decision. I trust the Government and the noble Viscount in charge of the Bill will find themselves able to accept this Amendment. The Amendment that comes later on the Paper really is the same Amendment except that in one case it applies to a renter and in the other case to an exhibitor. I beg to move.

§ Amendment moved— Page 13, line 40, after ("may") insert ("if of opinion that the offence was deliberate").—(Earl Russell.)

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
I am extremely sensitive to the appeal of the noble Earl that he has not moved any Amendment on the Bill until Clause 23, although he moved the Bill's rejection. I am most grateful to him for his action in that matter. I understand he wants to insert here certain words: "if of opinion that the offence was deliberate." I would point out that this applies only to cases of conviction on indictment and the discretion may only be exercised where the offence has been committed three times. As the noble Earl says, it is a very serious thing to take away a man's living by revoking his licence, but surely the 476 deliberateness of the act is implied in the conviction, is it not! If the person had been sentenced previously on indictment to a fine not exceeding £500 surely he would not be penalised in that way unless there had been some deliberate intention to break the law. If it was only an accident or an error, surely he would not be convicted on indictment of having broken the law. If he has done that three times and necessarily has done it deliberately and the Court has found that he has done it with intent, does not that imply what the noble Earl seeks to introduce by his Amendment? Is it really wise in those circumstances to insert some specific words which could, I think, only cause difficulty to the Court? Is it not better, under the circumstances, to leave the full discretion to the Court itself, assuming that the Court will act justly in the case that is brought before it? If the words of the Amendment are, as I think they are to some extent, superfluous, would it not be better not to insert them as they might tend to confusion?

EARL RUSSELL
I am very glad to discover from the speech of the noble Viscount that we really are to some extent of the same mind on this matter, although he does not at this stage accept the Amendment. But is the noble Viscount right in saying that this has to be a third conviction on indictment? I think not. It is perfectly true that the conviction from which these consequences may flow has to be a conviction on indictment, but all it has to be a conviction for is a third offence and I see nothing to prevent the two previous convictions having been summary convictions and there surely is nothing to prevent the summary conviction, or even the conviction on indictment, from having been a conviction in a case in which a man has indeed broken the law but has not broken it deliberately. It may be that he has broken it through some carelessness. For instance the quota has to be in some cases 20 per cent. and he may have shown 18 per cent. and, through carelessness, omitted 2 per cent. In that case he must be convicted, but he has committed an offence that is a different thing from deliberately flouting the intention of the Act. I can see nothing against what I suggest. I am merely saying: Is there any harm in putting in words which really carry out 477 what you actually mean? Will it hamper the Court in any way? Will not the Court rather be glad to have some guidance instead of being compelled to treat a third, conviction as an automatic disqualification? I press the words upon the noble Viscount and I should be glad if some other noble Lord would support me.

§ LORD DARLING
I have no right to intervene in this matter, but it does occur to me that the noble Viscount might fairly accept this Amendment. The reason I would give is one of rather general application. It is that, contrary to what occurs in many foreign systems of jurisprudence, the Judges in our country, whether they be Judges of the High Court or of Quarter Sessions, or even if they are no more that Justices of the Peace, are given a wide discretion when it comes to crimes committed which are indictable offences. There are not many where the sentence is bound to be passed if any sentence at all is given. One knows that in convictions for murder there is only one sentence which the Judge is allowed to pass but that is rare in our jurisprudence, and it does not appear to me this is a case in which it would be wrong to allow that discretion to the Judge, whoever he may be, which is so usual in trials before any tribunal in an English Court.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
I do not know that I have any strong feeling against this Amendment and, if the noble Earl presses it, as it has been supported by my noble friend behind me (Lord Darling), I will not offer any objections to inserting it.

EARL RUSSELL
I am much obliged to the noble Viscount. I can assure him it will do something to reassure apprehensions outside—quite unreasonable, no doubt. Still I think the reassurance will have a good effect.

§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.

§ Amendment moved— Page 13, line 40, leave out ("on") and insert ("if the offence is").—(Viscount Peel.)

§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.

§ EARL RUSSELL moved, in subsection (2), after the first "may," to insert "if of opinion that the offence was deliberate." The noble Earl said: This is the same Amendment as the one I moved just now.

478

§ Amendment moved— Page 14, line 15, after ("may") insert ("if of opinion that the offence was deliberate").—(Earl Russell.)

§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.

§ Amendment moved— Page 14, line 15, leave out ("on") and insert ("if the offence is").—(Viscount Peel.)

§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.

§ Clause 23, as amended, agreed to.

§ Clause 24:

§ Provisions as to licences.

§ 24.—(1) A licence under this Act shall be granted by the Board of Trade to any person applying for the licence if the applicant is not disqualified for holding a licence as hereinafter provided and if the application is accompanied by such information as the Board may reasonably require to comply with this section and by the prescribed fee.

§ (2) A person shall not be qualified to hold a licence under this Part of this Act unless he has a place of business within Great Britain.

§ (3) A licence granted under this section shall remain in force until the expiration of the year ending on the thirty-first day of March or the thirtieth day of September, as the case may be, in respect of which it is granted, unless previous to that date the holder thereof ceases to be qualified for holding a licence.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
The first three Amendments in my name are drafting Amendments.

§ Amendments moved—

§ Page 14, lines 39 and 40, leave out ("a licence as hereinafter provided") and insert ("the licence applied for")

§ Page 14, line 41, after ("information") insert ("verified in such manner")

§ Page 14, line 42, leave out ("to comply with this section") and insert ("in order to satisfy themselves that the applicant is not disqualified for holding the licence applied for").—(Viscount Peel.)

§ On Question, Amendments agreed to.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL moved to add, after "Britain" in subsection (2), "and has sent notice thereof and of any change therein to the Board of Trade." The noble Viscount said: This merely requires the licensee to send notice of his place of business or of any change in it to the Board of Trade. I beg to move.

§ Amendment moved— Page 15, line 3, alter ("Britain") insert ("and has sent notice thereof and of any change therein to the Board of Trade").—(Viscount Peel.)

§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.

479

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
The next Amendment is a drafting Amendment.

§ Amendment moved— Page 15, line 9, leave out ("a") and insert ("the").—(Viscount Peel.)

§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.

§ Clause 24, as amended, agreed to.

§ Clause 25 agreed to.

§ Clause 26:

§ Films to which Act applies.

§ 26.—(1) The films to which this Act applies are all cinematograph films other than—

(a) films depicting wholly or mainly news and current events;
(b) films depicting wholly or mainly natural scenery;
(c) films being wholly or mainly commercial advertisements;
(d) films used wholly or mainly by educational institutions for educational purposes;
(e) films depicting wholly or mainly industrial or manufacturing processes;
(f) scientific films, including natural history films.

§ Provided that—

(i) if it appears to the Board of Trade, on application by the maker or renter, that, having regard to the special exhibition value of the film, any film of any such class as aforesaid should be allowed to be registered and to count for the purposes of the renters' quota and exhibitors' quota, they may allow the film to be registered and so counted; and
(ii) any film being a British film and a film of class (b), (d), (e) or (f) of the classes above mentioned shall be registrable as if it were a film to which this Act applies, and, if so registered, shall be deemed to be a registered film for the purposes of the provisions of this Act other than those relating to the renters' quota.

§ (3) For the purposes of this Act a film shall be deemed to be a British film if, but not unless, it complies with all the following requirements:—

(i) It must have been made by a person who was at the time the film was made a British subject, or by two or more persons each of whom was a British subject, or by a British company;
(ii) The studio scenes must have been photographed in a studio in the British Empire;
(iii) The author of the scenario must have been a British subject at the time the film was made;
(iv) Not less than seventy-five per cent. of the salaries, wages and payments specifically paid for labour and services in the making of the film (exclusive of payments in respect of copyright and of the salary or payments to one foreign actor or actress or producer, but inclusive of the payments to the author of the scenario) has been paid to British subjects or persons domiciled in the British Empire.

§ (4) Every film which is not a British film shall for the purposes of this Act be deemed to be a foreign film.

§ (5) For the purposes of this section—

§ The expression "British company" means a company registered under the laws of any part of the British Empire, the majority of the directors of which are British subjects;

§ VISCOUNT PEEL moved, in proviso (ii) of subsection (1), after the first "shall," to insert "without being trade shown." The noble Viscount said: This Amendment will permit certain films taken from what are called the excepted classes to be registered without being trade shown.

§ Amendment moved— Page 16, line 12, after ("shall") insert ("without being trade shown").—(Viscount Peel.)

EARL RUSSELL
I want, if the noble Viscount will allow me, to put a question on this Amendment. I did not raise it upon the Second Reading, but I did not understand and I do not understand now why importance is attached to films being trade shown.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
The main reason is that is prevents anything in the nature of blind booking. If films are shown to the trade—not to the public—then these people can see the films and can rent them. This is the only way really of preventing blind booking.

§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.

§ VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME moved, at the end of paragraph (i) of subsection (3), to insert "employing British subjects to make it." The noble Viscount said: I take it that the importance of this subsection is that films should be produced by British people. If you allow a company to employ foreign producers surely the importance of the clause almost vanishes. I submit it is unfair to give to individuals or to people who may form a private company advantages over 481 an ordinary company. It may be said hat subsection (3) (iv) deals with this question, but there is nothing to prevent a company paying 75 per cent. of the wages to British subjects and yet employing a foreign producer.

§ Amendment moved— Page 16, line 30, at end insert ("employing British subjects to make it").—(Viscount Bertie of Thame.)

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
I do not think this Amendment is necessary. Apparently the noble Earl wishes to say that all the persons employed in making a British film shall be British. That would mean that the producer, the actors, supers, workmen, etc., should all be British subjects. It would impose upon British film makers a burden larger than is necessary. There are ample safeguards as regards the wages paid—75 per cent. of the wages must be paid to British subjects—and the exclusion of everybody who is not a British subject from any part in the making of a film would not be necessary to secure that.

EARL RUSSELL
I think there is rather more than that in it. As I understand the Amendment the words "employing British subjects to make it" are not intended to apply only to a British company. If so, the Amendment is rather ill-conceived because it says if the film is made by a British company the company is to employ British subjects, but if I understand the noble Viscount aright he wants the same to apply to a British subject or two or more persons.

§ VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME
In the case of individuals the whole of their employees must be British whereas in the case of a company it is only three-fourths. What I want to secure is that the producer shall be a British subject. If the noble Viscount in charge of the Bill will consider the matter between now and Report I shall be very much obliged to him.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
Whore it is not a person company that is concerned but a person it is required by Clause 26 (3) (i) that he shall be a British subject. I really think that point is covered and it is unnecessary to make this Amendment. In other cases I think it is covered by the observations I have already made.

482

§ VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME
That is what I want to secure.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
I have already said if the maker is not a company but an individual he must be British.

§ VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME
My point is that I want the producer to be British.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
Yes, but in the case of a company the Bill provides that three-quarters of the wages must be paid to British subjects. I suggest that it is too severe to insist that everybody should be a British subject—the actors, supers, workmen and all other people. You may want to employ a certain percentage of persons who are not British.

§ VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME
I agree, but my point is that the producer should be British. If the noble Viscount will consider the point I shall be satisfied.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
I will certainly consider it.

§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

§ LORD DANESFORT moved, at the beginning of paragraph (ii) of subsection (3), to insert "After the thirty-first day of December, nineteen hundred and twenty-eight." The noble Lord said: The effect of the first of the Amendments which I have on the Paper is that, in the event of its being agreed to, British films for a period of one year after the passing of the Act may be produced abroad. Normally, and according to the clause as it stands, British films must be produced within the British Empire. The object of this Amendment is to make temporary provision for a temporary difficulty. I may say at once that Viscount Peel has been good enough to tell me that the Government will accept the Amendment, but before I ask your Lordships to accept it I should like very briefly to explain the real reason for it. It is this. There are British companies in this country who are now ready to produce and desirous of producing British films in accordance with the Bill, and they are in a position to comply with all the provisions of the Bill for qualifying as British films, with this exception, that they cannot at the present moment get studios in this country in which to produce them. The truth 483 is that at the present moment all the studios available in this country are booked up for the next twelve months. The number of studios is limited. My information is that there are only three studios in which there can be produced what are popularly known as super films.

§ It may be asked: If you cannot produce these films in Great Britain, why cannot you produce them in other parts of the Empire—in Australia, for instance? The reply is that that is too far away for the purpose, and therefore there really are no available studios for producing these films which people are ready to produce and are desirous of producing. There are available, however, I understand, studios in France and in other places not far away, where these films could be produced in the course of the next year. If my Amendment is accepted then these films can be produced and will be available for exhibition before the expiration of next year. After the production of the film some little time must elapse before it can be exhibited. It has to be trade-shown, as my noble friend has explained, it has to be registered, and some little delay must occur before it can be exhibited to the public. It is most important for the purposes of this Bill that as many good British films as possible shall be produced as soon as possible to fill the quota for the year ending March, 1929. Unless this Amendment is accepted the companies to which I have referred will be unable to produce these films and qualify for exhibiting them as British before the year is out.

§ Amendment moved— Page 16, line 31, at the beginning insert ("After the thirty-first day of December, nineteen hundred and twenty-eight").—(Lord Danesfort.)

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
I do not think that my noble friend is quite correct in saying that I told him that the Government were going to accept the Amendment. It was my noble friend who told me that this was the case.

§ LORD DANESFORT
May I interrupt for one moment? I had been told by the President of the Board of Trade.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
I do not know from what sources my noble friend is able to 484 draw information that is not open to me, but I have no objection to the Amendment, on the very simple ground that there is, I understand, some shortage of photographic studio accommodation which may be remedied in a year or so. I should point out also that no great harm will be done by this Amendment, on account of the provision concerning the payment of 75 per cent. of the wages of those engaged in the business being retained. This provision comes into operation at once, and accordingly I do not think that there is any danger in granting the concession for which my noble friend asks.

§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.

§ LORD DANESFORT moved, in paragraph (iii) of subsection (3), after "scenario," to insert "and after the first day of January, nineteen hundred and thirty-three, the producer." The noble Lord said: As the Bill stands no provision whatever is made that the producer of films shall be a British subject. This omission will last, if the Bill stands as it is, for the whole of the ten years during which it is to operate. My Amendment provides that after January 1, 1933—that is, after five years have elapsed—the producer must be British, but up to that time he may be a foreigner. The main reason for this Amendment is that the producer is perhaps the most important person in film production. If your Lordships are inclined to turn to the definition clause of the Bill, you will see that it says: The expression 'producer' in relation to any film means the person responsible for the organisation and direction of the scenes to be depicted on the film. No more important function could possibly be discharged. As a matter of fact, I think there is general agreement that the producer is the man who to a great extent creates what may be called the atmosphere of the film.

§ He has really more influence on the question whether the film is to have a British atmosphere and to represent British ideas and sentiments than any other person—more even than the author of the scenario. I understand that the author of the scenario arranges for the story and arranges the general outline of the scenes, but the producer can, if he thinks fit, introduce important amendments and alterations into the scenario 485 as furnished by the author. Your Lordships will therefore see that it is really vitally important, if it can be done without injury to the production of films, that the producer who exercises this great influence should be British. This was so strongly felt in the Standing Committee in another place, where the Bill was considered most carefully for a great number of days, that a provision was inserted into the Bill that during the whole period of its operation—that is, for ten years—the producer must be British. On subsequent consideration it was found that at the present moment, although there are some admittedly first-rate British producers in this country, the supply is insufficient, and that unless for a time—I will ask your Lordships to observe that limitation—you permitted foreign producers, the want of first-rate producers would be a great handicap to the production of first-rate British films. To meet that difficulty fairly, as I hope, the Amendment proposes that for the first five years of the operation of the Bill the producer may be either a foreigner or a British subject, but that at the end of five years he must be British. I have ventured to put this proposal forward as a fair compromise between those who say that the producer may for the whole of the ten years be a foreigner and those who say that for the whole of the period he should be British.

§ Why do I say that, it will be reasonable to insist that the producer must be British at the end of five years? My reasons are these. There is every reason to suppose—and this view found great support from those who examined the question most carefully in another place—that at the end of live years there will be an amply sufficient supply of British producers. I may remind your Lordships that the position of producer is an exceedingly well-paid job. As compared with other industries it is quite amazingly well-paid. I do not say that it is paid too well for what the producers do, but it is rewarded very adequately. Accordingly there will be every incentive to British subjects during those five years to devote themselves to a careful study of the art of production in all its branches, artistic, technical and so on. During those five years British subjects will have every opportunity of training themselves to attain perfection in that art, and I confess that for my own part 486 I cannot believe that British brains and British enterprise are so far behind the rest of the world that in five years' time, with all these incentives and inducements, there will not be a sufficient supply of British producers to produce British films. On the contrary, I think it stands to reason that at the end of five years—and in this I am not expressing my own view alone, but the view of those who have studied this question most closely—there will be an entirely sufficient supply of British producers.

§ Let me quote a, rather important passage in the speech made by the President of the Board of Trade, Sir Philip Cunliffe-Lister, in the House of Commons on November 17 of this year. After referring to the fact that at the moment there was not a sufficient number of British producers, he used these words:— How are you to train up these producers? Only by giving them the greatest possible opportunity to learn the technique that is required, and if you can bring in some great master of technique from outside, you will give your Englishman a chance of working under that man and of profiting by his experience and skill. That opportunity is given by my Amendment. British producers have five years' opportunity of studying under great masters, profiting by their experience and making themselves perfect and adequate to fulfil these duties. A little later in his speech the President of the Board of Trade added these important words: Some of the best producers in this country are adequate to-day, and the only case where the foreign producer is willing to be brought in is the case of a big production when the A1 British capacity is for the time being absorbed on come other films. If this was true it the time when he spoke, does it not lead to the conclusion that at the end of five years there will be a perfectly adequate supply of British producers?

§ When this thing came before the Standing Committee of the other House the word "producer" was inserted by three to one, without any limitation of time, but when it came up on Report a somewhat strange thing happened. It was discussed in another place in somewhat of a hurry, on November 17, in the afternoon of a day when the Report stage had to be finished and the Third Reading taken before the dinner hour. Conse- 487 quently there was little time for adequate discussion. I have read the whole of the report of the proceedings, and it appears to me that the discussion was somewhat hurried, and that, though perhaps it would not be polite to say so, there was some confusion in the voting. On an Amendment, of exactly the nature which my Amendment possesses, the President of the Board of Trade said he would leave it to the free vote of the House. That worked out in a most singular way. Some two or three Ministers voted for the Amendment, but the President of the Board of Trade said he would vote against it, and when the Division was taken there was really a most remarkable result. Out of loyalty, I have no doubt, to the President of the Board of Trade, all the Ministers except these two or three voted with the President and against the Amendment. I do not say they had not listened to the discussion, but they had not taken part in it in any way.

§ Not unnaturally, when the Ministers, colleagues of the President, and the rank and file of the Party, voted in support of the President's view, the Amendment was lost; but an even more strange thing than that happened. Out of 128, chiefly Labour members, who voted against the Third Beading, being opposed to the whole Bill, lock, stock and barrel, 121 voted against this Amendment. The result, not unnaturally, was that the Amendment was rejected by a very considerable majority. From the facts which I have mentioned, however, I think your Lordships will gather that the Division in another place was not a very accurate register of the opinions of the House of Commons on a free vote. Here, fortunately, we are in a different position. Your Lordships are in a position to say whether the arguments which I have ventured to put forward to this House, in support of my Amendment, are worthy of acceptance. The Government, I understand, are not going to oppose me. I am afraid that I shall not have their active support, but I trust that at any rate I shall have their neutrality, and, I hope, benevolent neutrality. You are therefore asked to vote on this Amendment as a free vote.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
You seem to know all about it.

488

§ LORD DANESFORT
My noble friend does not seem to be well instructed. May I read him the letter which I have received from the President of the Board of Trade? It is a letter in which I was told that my first Amendment would be accepted by the Government, and with regard to the second Amendment, it says that the President would be prepared to leave the matter to a free vote, although, in view of what had happened in the House of Commons, he would have to ask Lord Peel to state in the House of Lords the reasons why the President of the Board of Trade had felt bound to give the vote which he had given. Having regard to this letter, I ask for the Government's benevolent neutrality, and I do hope that your Lordships, not being pressed by the Government to take one view or another, and having heard the arguments, will be in a position to support me if I go to a Division on this Amendment.

§ Amendment moved— Page 16, line 33, after ("scenario") insert ("and after the first day of January, nineteen hundred and thirty-three, the producer").—(Lord Danesfort.)

§ LORD ASKWITH
The noble Lord has taken pains, at some length, to dissect, what took place in the other House, and he has come to the conclusion that the vote given in that House was very unsatisfactory, and that here you will be guided by his arguments and give a vote which will be the final die in which this matter is to be settled. I venture to suggest that there may be a good many noble Lords who will troop into this Division and will not have the slightest idea as to what we have been talking about, or what is the proper way to vote. With regard to the Amendment, it was brought before me some considerable time ago, and I have taken pains to consider the matter and find out the truth about it. I disagree, and I am sorry to do so, with my noble friend on two principles, (1), that it is most unsatisfactory to the trade, and (2), from the point of view of the interests of art.
Let me consider the question of trade. I am informed on most credible evidence that producers, renters and exhibitors consider that this introduction will go far to cause the Bill to be a failure; that with one or two exceptions none of these want it; that they feel it would lead, 489 among the eight producers who at present have got any name in Great Britain, to the possibility of a combination, and to some of these persons being bought up—people must go occasionally where money is—by Hollywood, and by the big American money. My noble friend hopes that in five years, or some such period, a sufficient number of British producers would be produced to prevent anything of that kind happening. I am very doubtful about it. I do not think they would have a fair chance. I think they would do much better by having the market open and having to compete, and also having an opportunity of getting from foreign countries suggestions and ideas which would enlarge their minds and enable them to come forward with finer films than they are even now producing. I think that with a mainly British cast, with a British scenario, photographed in a British studio, and with British environment, it is impossible to suppose that you cannot gain the effect of British atmosphere in the films produced.
Then again, apart from the difficulty of possible combinations, there is a chance that a famous British producer may be bought up by the Americans. That has happened before. I believe Charlie Chaplin was an English subject who was bought up by America, and he has entranced the world in a way which very few people have done in history before. If a British producer were a man of superlative merit is it likely that he would remain here when offered any amount of hard cash, instead of migrating to Hollywood—unless indeed he were more patriotic than most producers would be likely to be? I think this Amendment would have most unsatisfactory results. I have never heard that it has been to the advantage of the country to prevent art being international. The best of these producers are like artists in many senses. They come here and give us the value of their artistic achievements, and if, in this country we had had protection against the finest artists of the world coming here to give us some instruction it might have been a fatal thing for the development of art in this country. I feel very strongly that it is one of the best points about this particular clause that the hands are left free, and that the best 490 producers in the whole world will be able to come to this country without undue restriction.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
The noble Lord, Lord Danesfort, seems to think that in this House we are bound to follow the instructions of the President of the Board of Trade. I have the greatest, respect for my colleague the President of the Board of Trade, but your Lordships are, of course, free, and always have been free, to have your own opinion on the subject, and I entirely dissent from the doctrine that there is any obligation on this House to take a certain view, merely because a Minister in the other House takes that view. I hope, on the contrary, that your Lordships will deal with the matter quite independently according to your own best judgment. The noble Lord, Lord Askwith, made, I thought, a very powerful appeal on the ground that if the producer was bound to be a British subject after the year 1933 this would hamper, rather than assist, the production of films.
Let us see exactly what the terms in the Bill mean, because a good deal turns upon them. The definition of the producer reads "the person responsible for the organisation and direction of the scenes to be depicted on the film." It is quite true, as Lord Danesfort has said, that that means a considerable amount of influence on the course of the production of the film. But what are the safeguards to ensure that the film will be a British film, because we want not only to have British films, but a sufficient number of British films and an increasing number of good films, in order to fulfil the rising quota during the next ton years? First, the film must have been made by a person who is a British subject, or by a British company, or two or more persons, both of whom are British subjects. Therefore the makers of the film must be British subjects, and I call your Lordships' attention most, particularly to that. Then the studio scenes must have been photographed in the British Empire, and the author of the scenario must have been a British subject at the time the film was made. Not only that, but 75 per cent, of the salaries must have been paid to British subjects, or persons domiciled in the British Empire. Therefore good precaution has been taken to ensure that the films really are British films.
491 Then what about the producer? Is it essential that he should be a British subject? I think there are a good many considerations why it would be well in many cases to leave the matter open. I quite agree with the speech made by my noble friend behind me, but, after all, it is a very highly technical subject, and it might quite well be that the particular kind of technical expert that you require for the production of a certain British film is a foreigner—an American or a Frenchman. It is also possible that there may not be enough skilled British producers to go round. Further, although the salaries that we can pay in this country will, I trust, be good, they really are, and must be for some time, I think, very small compared with the gigantic salaries enjoyed by some of these film producers in the United States. I am afraid also we cannot always keep our good producers in this country. They will be attracted by the very large sums paid in America.
It would be desirable in my opinion to allow some of these foreign experts to be employed here, having regard to all the securities taken in the Bill to see that these films are British films. After all, a large amount of money must be spent in wages in the production of these films, and it would be very unfortunate if some fine films were not produced because the man specially qualified to produce them is a foreigner, who could not be engaged under the strict exclusions of this Amendment. I do not think there is the slightest chance of our being flooded with foreign producers. On the contrary, I think it most probable, in view of the various securities in the Bill, that the greatest number of producers will be British. But it is a matter for nice argument, I agree. I myself distinctly lean to the view that it would probably be better not to put in this provision of Lord Danesfort, On the whole it would probably conduce to the best production of British films if it remained possible to employ a foreigner as producer. But it is a matter for your Lordships to decide.

§ LORD OLIVIER
I think that we on these Benches must support the noble Viscount in the small scintilla of liberalism which he desires to retain in this Bill, as against the whole-hoggishness, if I may so term it, of Lord Danesfort, 492 who wishes to make it more thorough in its exclusion of any possible kind of foreign talent than it is at present.

§ THE EARL OF IDDESLEIGH
I should like to support the noble Viscount on one ground—namely, that there exists on the Continent of Europe, notably in Germany, a film technique which it would be undesirable for us to exclude. That technique was recently witnessed in London in some very remarkable German films. It is desirable that British companies should have liberty to experiment in that new and very interesting technique. I therefore hope that your Lordships will not adopt this Amendment.

§ LORD DANESFORT
I believe that the noble Earl to whom we have just listened was speaking for the first time in this House and I am sure that many of your Lordships will welcome the opportunity of hearing him again in the future. The only comment I would make upon his speech is that, as regards German films, I was unfortunate enough only the other day to see produced, after a very excellent natural history film, one of the most disgusting German films you could possibly imagine. I hope it will never be my unfortunate lot to see anything of that type again.
As to what the noble Viscount said, I think he a little, misunderstood me when I spoke of the attitude of the Government as I understood it to be. The Government always take up an attitude in this House. They cannot force your Lordships' House to follow it. Your Lordships are an independent body and can do what you think proper. I am asking you in this case to do exactly the same—to be independent either of the noble Viscount's advice or the advice of anyone else. When I referred to what was done by the President of the Board of Trade, all I meant to indicate to your Lordships was what I understood the whole attitude of the Government to be—namely, that at one time they left it to a free vote and that at the other they did not.
The noble Lord, Lord Askwith, gave us some admirable principles—when I say "admirable" I mean that they appeared to be admirable—which, if they were carried out, would entirely destroy the whole foundation of this Bill from top to bottom. He said that art is international 493 and that assistance should be got from everywhere all over the world in the production of films. That is precisely what this Bill does not do. It says, and in that it is supported by what was said at the Conference, that it is of paramount importance that the films produced in this country and in our Dominions should have a distinctly British atmosphere as opposed to the atmosphere of any other country, and that they should not misrepresent the ideas and sentiments of the British people when they are performed in any part of the British Empire either here or elsewhere. This Bill provides that we shall take every step that we can in reason to see that the films produced shall be British and, as the Bill stands, it is ordered—and my noble friend does not propose to alter it—that the scenario shall be British. What becomes of art as an international matter?
I think it would be hard to say that the scenario writer is not an artist. As I understand it, the contention underlying this Bill is that we have material in this country for producing the most perfect films in the world; that we have in this country men, producers, authors, artists and others, who can produce the best films and the best British films. Therefore, as I venture to think, my noble friend's appeal to you to let in every one falls to the ground. I regret very much to note from his speech that he appears to misunderstand completely what the nature of the producer is. I do not know whether he agrees with what I am saying, but the producer is the most important person for giving character to a film, for producing its atmosphere. If that be so I should have thought it was at least as important that the producers, if there is enough of them, should be British as well as the authors of the scenarios. My noble friend drew a lurid picture of what might happen to us if Charlie Chaplin were bribed to go away and produce pictures in America. I believe he is there already. We still manage to exist as a nation although Charlie Chaplin is in America, and my Amendment would not have the slightest effect either in bringing him away from America or in inducing him to stay there.

§ LORD ASKWITH
I never suggested anything of the sort. The noble Lord is mistaken.

494

§ LORD DANESFORT
Then why refer to Charlie Chaplin? I put him out of the picture altogether. My noble friend Lord Askwith said he doubted whether there would be a sufficient number of producers in fives years. I have given your Lordships reasons why I think there will be a sufficient number. Therefore I ask your Lordships to accept this Amendment.

§ On Question, Amendment negatived.

§ LORD ASKWITH moved to add to subsection (3): "but it shall be lawful for the Board of Trade to relax this requirement in any case where they are satisfied that the maker had taken all reasonable steps to secure compliance with the requirement, and that his failure to comply therewith was occasioned by exceptional circumstances beyond his control, but so that such power of relaxation shall not permit of the percentage aforesaid being less than seventy per cent." The noble Lord said: This Amendment is rather like Lord Danesfort's first Amendment, which was comparatively innocuous, and not like the second. It has the object of giving some relaxation in cases of difficulty where a bona fide producer has, by chance, not quite been able to come within the time. There maybe accidents in many of these cases. Exteriors and so on have to be taken on foreign soil. Delays may occur in transport, and bad weather or illness or anything of that sort may happen. It may be pointed out that if any little delay of this kind occurs and they do not know the exact percentage put in the Bill, it becomes ipso facto a foreign film and, by becoming a foreign film, it requires its quota to be produced. In order to give a chance to a bona fide producer of that, kind, it is suggested and was suggested in another place, that some relaxation should be given. The President of the Board of Trade remarked that many hon. Members themselves had been a few pounds out in speculations, and suggested a stricter form might be brought up. I have brought up a much stricter form. It is only in cases where 70 per cent, occurs that such power of relaxation is to be given. The last three lines are of importance "but so that such power of relaxation shall not permit of the percentage aforesaid being less than 70 per cent." This is suggested by influential people in the industry as a reasonable relaxation which might be of great value to them in certain circumstances. I beg to move.

495

§ Amendment moved— Page 16, line 43, at end insert the said words.—(Lord Askwith.)

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
This gives a 5 per cent, power of relaxation to the Board of Trade, making it 70 per cent, instead of 75 per cent, to meet certain difficulties. I think it is a reasonable discretion to leave to the Board of Trade and I am inclined to accept my noble friend's Amendment.

§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
My next Amendment is drafting.

§ Amendment moved— Page 17, line 5, leave out ("registered") and insert ("constituted").—(Viscount Peel.)

§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.

§ VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME moved to add to the definition of "British company" the words, "such of the directors who are British subjects shall be required to make a statutory declaration that they are not the representatives or nominees of foreign interests." The noble Viscount said: The object of this Amendment is, I think, made plain from its words. I do not think any director who has the welfare of the Empire and the industry at heart will take any exception to being required to make this statutory declaration. I beg to move.

§ Amendment moved— Page 17, line 7, at end insert ("such of the directors who are British subjects shall be required to make a statutory declaration that they are not the representatives or nominees of foreign interests")—(Viscount Bertie of Thame.)

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
I am afraid I am opposed to the Amendment of my noble friend, not so much on the ground of principle as on the ground of practicability. I am apprised that a director represents all shareholders and, therefore, it would be impossible for a director of a company with a large number of shareholders to assure himself whether anyone of those represented any foreign interest. In those circumstances I hope my noble friend will not ask us to lay upon directors a duty which it is impossible for them to perform.

§ LORD DANESFORT
I see no difficulty in a director making such a declaration as is suggested in this 496 Amendment of my noble friend. A British subject might be put upon the directorate who holds his shares in trust for some foreign representative and he might—I do not say many British subjects would, but there are British subjects who might—be induced to hold these shares in trust for a foreign firm and to vote on the board in the interests of foreign persons rather than in the interests of Great Britain. That is not at all an impossible thing. My noble friend Lord Peel, I am sure, would say it would be a most undesirable thing if that did happen. Therefore I do not see any difficulty in asking directors to make a statutory declaration that they are not the nominees of foreign interests; in other words, that they are independent. This would secure that the persons who are on the boards of British companies who make films shall act entirely in the interests of the British film. I see no difficulty, but I see a great deal that is commendable.

§ VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME
I am afraid I must press this to a Division.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
I am sorry that my noble friend should wish to press this to a Division. With regard to what Lord Danesfort said, I do not question the admirable intentions of the noble Viscount who moved the Amendment, but what I do ask your Lordships to consider is what would be the effect of the Amendment if it were adopted. The effect would be quite different from that which my noble friend suggested. The effect would be to put many difficulties in the way of directors and make it impossible for them to make the declaration suggested. Does my noble friend really desire that every British director should be prevented from being a director because he cannot make the declaration for which the noble Viscount is asking?

§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

§ Clause 26, as amended, agreed to.

§ Clause 27 agreed to.

§ Clause 28:

§ Power of Board of Trade to make regulations.

§ 28.—(1) The Board of Trade may make regulations for prescribing anything which under this Act is to be prescribed, and generally for carrying this Act into effect, and in particular may, subject to the consent of the Treasury so far as they relate to fees, by regulations prescribe—

497

§ (c) the particulars and evidence necessary for establishing the British nature of a film;

§ (3) Regulations under paragraph (c) shall provide that the particulars required as to salaries, wages and payments shall be certified by an accountant being a member of an incorporated society of accountants.

§ VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME moved, at the end of subsection (3), to insert "of British nationality." The noble Viscount said: My object in moving this Amendment is to ensure that the incorporated society of accountants shall be of British nationality, but I will not press it if the noble Viscount does not like it.

§ Amendment moved— Page 18, line 19, at end insert ("of British nationality").—(Viscount Bertie of Thame.)

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
I do not think that the Amendment as it stands is possible.

§ VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME
The words in the Bill are:— Regulations under paragraph (c) shall provide that the particulars required as to salaries, wages and payments shall be certified by an accountant being a member of an incorporated society of accountants. I propose to put in after that "of British nationality."

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
Which is to be of British nationality—the accountant or the society?

§ VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME
The incorporated society.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL
You cannot have an incorporated society of British nationality and if the noble Viscount desires that the accountant should be of British nationality then he had better bring it up in proper form and move it on Report.

§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

§ Clause 28 agreed to.

§ Clauses 29 and 30 agreed to.

§ Clause 31:

§ Interpretation.

§ 31.—(1) For the purposes of this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,—

§ The expression "theatre" includes any premises in respect of which a licence is required to be issued under the Cinematograph Act, 1909, or would be so required 498 if the film were an inflammable film, except that it does not include—

§ (b) any premises performances at which consist partly of the exhibition of films, but so that at no one performance in any such year does the total length of the registered film or films exhibited exceed fifteen hundred feet.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL moved to substitute "two thousand" for "fifteen hundred" in paragraph (b) of subsection (1). The noble Viscount said: This is in order to give a little more freedom for the exhibition of films in the middle of other entertainments. It lengthens the number of feet which may be exhibited and I believe it is a reasonable suggestion.

§ Amendment moved— Page 20, line 18, leave out ("fifteen hundred") and insert ("two thousand").—(Viscount Peel.)

§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.

§ Clause 31, as amended, agreed to.

§ Clause 32:

§ Short title, extent, commencement, and duration.

§ 32.—(1) This Act may be cited as the Cinematograph Films Act, 1927.

§ (2) This Act shall not extend to Northern Ireland.

§ (3) This Act shall come into operation on the first day of January, nineteen hundred and twenty-eight.

§ (4) Part I. and Part II. of this Act shall continue in force until the thirtieth day of September, nineteen hundred and thirty eight, and no longer.

§ VISCOUNT PEEL moved to add to subsection (2) "and for the purposes of the Government of Ireland Act, 1920, the enactment of legislation for purposes similar to the purposes of this Act shall not be deemed to be beyond the powers of the Parliament of Northern Ireland by reason only that such legislation may affect trade with places outside Northern Ireland." The noble Viscount said: This Bill does not extend to Northern Ireland and this Amendment declares that Northern Ireland is not prevented by its Constitution from enacting similar legislation.

§ Amendment moved— Page 20, line 34, after ("Ireland") insert the said words.—(Viscount Peel).

§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.

§ Clause 32, as amended, agreed to.

§ Schedules agreed to.