CINEMATOGRAPH FILMS BILL.

HL Deb 21 March 1938 vol 108 cc251-87

Amendments reported (according to Order).

Title: An Act to make further provision for securing the renting and exhibition of a certain proportion of British cinematograph films, and for restricting blind booking and advance booking of cinematograph films; to make provision as to the wages and conditions of employment of persons employed by makers and processors of films; and to provide for purposes connected with the matters aforesaid.

LORD TEMPLEMORE moved to leave out "and processors." The noble Lord said: My Lords, this Amendment was arranged by my noble friend after some observations of the noble Lord opposite (Lord Strabolgi) on the Committee stage. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Line 7, leave out ("and processors.")—(Lord Templemore.)

LORD STRABOLGI

My Lords, might I draw the Minister's attention to the consequential Amendment which he has tabled, which I think goes rather far? Before we alter the Title perhaps I may be allowed on this Amendment very briefly to discuss what the Government propose to do. I was responsible first of all for widening a clause to include processing as well as making of films, the idea being to bring in the workmen and technicians in the laboratories. The noble Lord, Lord Templemore, explained on the Committee stage that that went rather far because it might bring in people who did ordinary photographic work in the laboratories and so on, and it was not the intention of the Bill to legislate for them. I quite understand that, and therefore I was prepared to drop "and processing." If your Lordships agreed to alter the Title, it would then be in order to carry the Amendment in Clause 43, on page 43, line 17, and there I think that the Government have rather sought to narrow the meaning of the words "the making of a film" beyond what I understood to be the case. I do not know whether it would be convenient to discuss this now, or when we reach page 43, line 17. I do not want to lose my rights by agreeing to this alteration of the Title now.

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR AIR (VISCOUNT SWINTON)

My Lords, probably it would be convenient to take the Amendment to the Title now, and I shall be glad to give an explanation when we come to Clause 43, but I do not think the noble Lord need be under any anxiety in that matter. The object of the Amendment which is being moved to Clause 43 is to define what is meant by making a film. That has, of course, reference to the costs of making a film, and the only object of the Amendment with regard to Clause 43 is to make it plain that by "making" a film we regard a film as finished when the original negative is ready for delivery to the renters. It is in order to cut out purely repetitive processes like making positive prints for exhibition purposes or the production of new negatives made by copying, which have nothing to do with the work of processing. It is merely in order to make sure that we have a definition by which the making of a film includes those things which we intend it should include, and excludes those things which, by common consent, we desire excluded.

LORD STRABOLGI

My Lords, it might therefore be better to wait until we come to that Amendment. In the meantime, I have no further observations to make on this one.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD TEMPLEMORE moved, before "films," where that word last occurs, to insert "cinematograph." The noble Lord said: My Lords, this is a drafting Amendment.

Amendment moved— Line 7, after ("of") insert ("cinematograph.")—(Lord Templemore.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 1:

Determination of renters' quotas for period beginning 1st April, 1938, and ending 31st March, 1948.

(4) The power conferred by the last preceding subsection to lay in draft before Parliament and to make an order shall be construed as including a power, exercisable in the like manner and subject to the like conditions, to lay in draft before Parliament and to make an order varying or revoking an order having effect by virtue of that subsection.

LORD TEMPLEMORE

My Lords, the Amendment to insert "or" in subsection (3) is simply a drafting Amendment to make it clear that paragraphs (a) and (b) of that subsection are alternatives. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 3, line 36, at end, insert ("or").—(Lord Templemore.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD TEMPLEMORE moved, at the end of subsection (4), to insert: Provided that an order varying or revoking such an order as aforesaid shall not have effect in relation to any period prior to the first day of April next following the date on which the order is made.

The noble Lord said: My Lords, subsection (4) of Clause 1 empowers the Board of Trade, after consulting the Films Council, to lay before Parliament the draft of an order varying or revoking a previous order modifying the degree to which the treble-quota provision can be applied. This Amendment provides that such a varying or revoking order shall not have effect earlier than the 1st April following the date on which it is made. This will ensure that the trade interests concerned and particularly the renters will have ample notice of any change which such an order would effect. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 4, line 12, at end insert the said new proviso.—(Lord Templemore.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 3 [Special provisions with respect to British films rented in foreign countries]:

LORD TEMPLEMORE moved to insert after subsection (3): (4) If, and to the extent that, Section one of this Act has effect subject to the modification made therein by an order containing such a direction as is authorised by paragraph (a) of subsection (3) of that section, this section shall have effect as if in subsection (1) of this section for the words 'doubled or trebled for the purpose of renters' quota' there were substituted the words 'doubled for the purpose of renters' quota or capable of being doubled under this section,' and as if in subsection (2) of this section for the words 'trebled for the purpose of renters' quota' there were substituted the words 'capable of being doubled under this section'.

The noble Lord said: My Lords, this Amendment is consequential on the Amendment made in Committee to Clause 1. It is designed to make it clear that if the concessions on treble-quota films as at present embodied in Clause 1 are withdrawn, the position of such films under Clause 3 will not be affected for purposes of reciprocity. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 7, line 14, at end insert the said new subsection.—(Lord Templemore.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD MOYNE moved, after Clause 14, to insert the following new clause: —.(1) Subject to the following provisions of this section the Board of Trade, after consulting the Cinematograph Films Council and considering its advice in the matter may, not later than the end of June, nineteen hundred and thirty-nine, lay before Parliament the draft of an order reducing in relation to long films the proportion prescribed in Part II of the First Schedule to this Act for the year beginning with the first day of October, nineteen hundred and thirty-eight, and if before the end of July, nineteen hundred and thirty-nine, each House of Parliament has resolved that the order be made, the Board of Trade shall forthwith make the order in terms of the draft and the order shall come into operation upon the making thereof. (2) Subject to the provisions of the next following subsection the Board of Trade, after consulting the Cinematograph Films Council and considering its advice in the matter, may at any time during the year nineteen hundred and thirty-eight, lay before Parliament the draft of an order reducing in relation to long films the proportion prescribed by Part I of the First Schedule to this Act for the year beginning with the first day of April, nineteen hundred and thirty-eight, and the next succeeding year, and if before the end of the calendar year in which the draft of such an order is laid before Parliament each House of Parliament has resolved that the order be made, the Board shall forthwith make the order in terms of the draft, and the order shall come into operation upon the making thereof. (3) This section shall not authorise the making of an order—

1. (i) reducing the proportion prescribed by Part I of the First Schedule to this Act to a proportion being, in relation to long films, less than fifteen per cent., or
2. (ii) reducing the proportion prescribed by Part II of the said Schedule to a proportion being, in relation to long films, less than twelve-and-a-half per cent.

(4) As from the coming into operation of an order under this section altering any of the proportions prescribed by the First Schedule of this Act, that Schedule shall have effect as if it prescribed, instead of that proportion, the proportion substituted therefor by the order. (5) In this section the expression 'calendar year' means year beginning with the first day of January.

The noble Lord said: My Lords, this new clause is consequential to Amendments made during the Committee stage. Clause 15 gives to the Board of Trade, on the advice of the Advisory Committee, the power of varying up and down in case experience proves that renters and exhibitors are not able to carry out the full quota. In the Schedule last week we raised the initial renters' quota by five per cent. and the exhibitors' quota by two-and-a-half per cent., and, though I believe it is quite practicable for these requirements to be carried out, it would seem desirable that the general machinery of the Bill should be followed and that there should be provided a means of varying the quota, omitting it if necessary during the first year, just as Clause 15 allows it to be varied in the subsequent years. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— After Clause 54, insert the said new clause.—(Lord Moyne.)

VISCOUNT SWINTON

My Lords, I am much obliged to my noble friend for putting down this Amendment, because I wanted to have an opportunity of considering with the Board of Trade whether an Amendment of this kind ought to be inserted. My noble friend was good enough on the Committee stage to agree not to move it until the House had taken a decision on the Schedule as to the amount of the quota. This clause is in the nature of what in treaties is called an "escape clause," and it is intended to provide that if the optimism of my noble friend in persuading the Committee to increase the quota were found to be excessive or unjustified, there then would be a way of escape for renters or exhibitors who could not fulfil their quota requirements. I am entirely in agreement with the desirability of there being a means of relieving both renters and exhibitors of obligations which experience might show it was beyond their power to carry out; but after careful consideration the Government have come to the conclusion that this clause really would not do that, and that the power on which reliance must be placed is the general power in the hands of the Board of Trade to excuse either renters or exhibitors, in appropriate cases, from fulfilling to the full their obligations.

I am sure my noble friend will see that that is the only way in which that power could reasonably be exercised. He said, with perfect truth, that there was a power already in the Bill for the Board of Trade to make an order either raising or lowering the quota after close consultation with the Films Council, and that that would be based on experience. But my noble friend will observe that wherever such an order is made—and indeed it is of the essence of that procedure—the order of the Board of Trade varying the quota for a future year shall be made before the year begins. That is a very necessary provision because it is most desirable that both renters and exhibitors should have certainty as to what their obligations are. If we accepted my noble friend's clause that possibly could not operate with rapidity. The period during which it is to operate is the year beginning on the 1st April next when these new obligations under the new Act start. If we adopted the procedure of my noble friend's clause it might easily be possible that you could not decide until the exhibitors' quota had been running for ten months whether the exhibitors would be relieved or not, and, equally, the renters' quota might have been running for nine months before a decision was taken as to whether they were to be relieved. I am sure my noble friend would agree that a relief of that kind would be entirely illusory. The exhibitors, of course, would have filled their book long before the time of relief came, and the relief would only come to them too late to be of any value. In those circumstances I am sure my noble friend will agree that the only practical way of doing what he wants to do, and what I agree ought to be done, is to rest upon the discretionary power of the Board of Track to relieve renters and exhibitors in appropriate cases. In view of the explanation I am sure my noble friend will feel it right to withdraw this Amendment.

LORD MOYNE

I think there is a great deal in what the noble Viscount says, and I shall be glad to withdraw the Amendment.

LORD STRABOLGI

Before it is withdrawn I want, if I may, to ask the noble Viscount to explain one point. I take it, as I see no Amendments on the Paper at this stage of the Bill, that he intends to abide by the decision of the House a week ago, and that the Government are not seeking to put back the Bill where it was. When I saw the Amendment in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Moyne, circulated with my Parliamentary Papers I thought that Lord Moyne was trying to soften the blow a little, and probably had had consultations through the usual channels with the Board of Trade. Now that he is going to withdraw his Amendment I do not feel quite so happy. I thought it was a kind of compromise.

LORD MOYNE

No, it is nothing of that sort.

LORD STRABOLGI

In that case perhaps it is not improper for me to ask the noble Viscount if he is quite satisfied as things stand in view of the powers which he has reminded your Lordships that the Government have.

VISCOUNT SWINTON

With permission of the House, I will reply, though I am always learning the truth of the saying that there are indeed no rules of order in your Lordships' House. As regards this clause I am quite satisfied, and I think the House is, that the proper procedure in order to give relief is not this, which could not operate in time, but the provisions already in the Bill giving the power to the Board of Trade. No Amendment is required to those provisions, because they are in perfectly, general terms, to give relief wherever relief is called for. The noble Lord will have seen that there is no Amendment on the Paper in my name for the purpose of inviting the House to rescind a decision which it took on the Committee stage. I think it would be both out of order and improper for me to anticipate what might hereafter happen in another place. Over that we have no jurisdiction, and I can only invite my noble friend to possess his soul in patience and await whatever may be the result of another place considering such Amendments as your Lordships may have thought it wise to make.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 15 [Power of Board of Trade to alter quotas by order]:

LORD MOYNE had given Notice of Amendments, in subsection (3), to alter the limits in paragraph (i) in relation to short films from "ten per cent." and "twenty per cent." to "fifteen per cent." and "thirty per cent." respectively, and to substitute for the limits in paragraph (ii) in relation to short films "twelve-and-a-half per cent." and "thirty per cent." in place of "seven-and-a-half per cent." and "twenty per cent." The noble Lord said: My Lords, these Amendments are really made necessary only if we succeed in persuading the Government to amend the Schedule. They are consequential on the Schedule, and I think, therefore, it would be more convenient if I did not move them at this stage but hold them over until the Third Reading in case at that stage the Schedule stands in a different form.

VISCOUNT SWINTON

I entirely agree. I think that would be the convenient course.

Clause 23:

Applications for registration, and information to be furnished in connection therewith.

23.—(1) Every application for the registration of a film shall be made by the maker of the film or, if the film has been acquired by a renter for distribution in Great Britain, be made by the renter, and shall be accompanied by the prescribed fee.

VISCOUNT SWINTON

My Lords, the Amendment down in my name on this clause is drafting. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 24, line 5, after ("made") insert ("either").—(Viscount Swinton.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD TEMPLEMORE moved, in subsection (1), to leave out "if the film has been acquired by a renter" and insert "by a renter who has acquired it" The noble Lord said: My Lords, this Amendment is designed to give effect to the original intention of the clause that either the maker or a renter who had acquired the film for distribution in Great Britain could register it, as at present provided in the Act of 1927. As drafted the maker would not have the right to register the film if the rights of distribution in this country had already been acquired by a renter. It often happens that the United Kingdom distribution rights are acquired by a renter before the film is made, and if in such circumstances only the renter could register it the maker would have no control under the Bill over its use for quota purposes here, and might, therefore, be unable to dispose of the reciprocity rights under Clause 3.

Amendment moved— Page 24, line 5, leave out from ("or") to ("for") in line 6 and insert ("by a renter who has acquired it").—(Lord Templemore.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD TEMPLEMORE

My Lords, the next Amendment in my name is drafting. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 24, line 7, leave out ("be made by the renter").—(Lord Templemore.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 25 [Conditions governing registration of British films as quota films]:

LORD TEMPLEMORE moved to insert at the end of the clause: (7) If, and to the extent that, Section one of this Act has effect subject to the modification made therein by an order containing such a direction as is authorised by paragraph (a) of subsection (3) of that section, subsection (6) of this section shall have effect as if in that subsection for the words 'trebled for the purpose of renters' quota' there were substituted the words 'capable of being doubled under Section three of this Act.'

The noble Lord said: My Lords, this Amendment is consequential. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 29, line 36, at end insert the said new subsection.—(Lord Templemore.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 33 [Wages and conditions of employment of persons employed by makers and processors of films]:

LORD TEMPLEMORE

My Lords, the first Amendment to this clause is consequential. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 32, line 22, leave out ("or processor").—(Lord Templemore.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD TEMPLEMORE

My Lords, the next Amendment is drafting. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 32, line 23, after ("of") insert ("cinematograph").—(Lord Templemore.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 39:

Regulations of Board of Trade.

39.—(1) Subject to the following provisions of this section, the Board of Trade may make regulations prescribing anything which by this Act is required or authorised to be prescribed, and may make regulations prescribing—

1. (a) the form of applications for the registration of films,
2. (b) the particulars and evidence necessary for satisfying the Board that a film is a British film, and
3. (c) the form of the returns to be made, and the record books to be kept, under this Act;

and also regulations providing that any statutory declaration which a person is required by this Act to make shall be deemed to be properly made if it is made on his behalf by any such person as may be specified in the regulations, but no such regulations prescribing the payment of fees shall be of any effect unless those regulations have been made with the consent of the Treasury.

LORD TEMPLEMORE moved, at the end of paragraph (a) of subsection (1), after "films," to insert "or for licences under this Act." The noble Lord said: My Lords, this Amendment is necessary to enable the Board of Trade to prescribe in regulations the form in which applications for renters' and exhibitors' licences shall be made.

Amendment moved— Page 37, line 17, after ("films") insert ("or for licences under this Act").—(Lord Templemore.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD TEMPLEMORE moved, in paragraph (b) of subsection (1), after "British film," to insert "or is a film which ought to be registered under Part III of this Act as a renters' quota film." The noble Lord said: My Lords, the Amendments made to Clause 25 in the Committee stage in another place provide in subsection (2) that a British film in order to qualify for registration as a renters' quota film must satisfy certain additional conditions. For example, the studio scenes must have been made in the United Kingdom and at least one-half of the wages paid to British subjects must have been paid to persons normally resident in the United Kingdom. The consequential Amendment now moved is accordingly necessary to enable the Board of Trade to make regulations prescribing the evidence necessary to establish the right of a British film to registration for the renters' quota.

Amendment moved— Page 37, line 19, at end insert ("or is a film which ought to be registered under Part III of this Act as a renters' quota film").(Lord Templemore.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 40:

The Cinematograph Films Council.

40.—(1) There shall be a Council to be called "the Cinematograph Films Council," consisting of twenty-one members appointed by the Board of Trade; and of the members of the said Council— (b) two shall be persons appointed as representing makers of films; (e) two shall be persons appointed as representing persons employed by makers of films. (2) It shall be the duty of the Board of Trade to satisfy themselves, with respect to any person whom they propose to appoint under paragraph (a) of the preceding subsection to be a member of the said Council or who is a member of the Council by virtue of an appointment made under that paragraph, that he will have or has, as the case may be, no such financial or commercial interest as is likely to affect him in the discharge of his functions as a member of the Council; and any such person shall, whenever requested by the Board so to do, furnish to them such information as they consider necessary for the performance of their duty under this subsection. Before appointing a person to be a representative member of the said Council the Board of Trade shall consult such bodies, if any, as appear to the Board to be representative of the interest concerned.

VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME moved, in subsection (1) (b) after "of," to insert "British." The noble Viscount said: My Lords, this seems to me a reasonable proposition because on this enormous Council—as big as the Cabinet—foreign interests will be represented sufficiently by renters and exhibitors.

Amendment moved— Page 38, line 9, after ("of") insert ("British").—(Viscount Bertie of Thame.)

VISCOUNT SWINTON

My Lords, I am prepared to accept this Amendment and the next on this understanding. It is the intention of the Board of Trade, in appointing two persons to be representatives of the makers of films, that those persons shall be representatives of the makers of British films. Of course a film made in this country by a British registered company, which conforms in the amount of labour and costs and so on to the provisions of the Bill, is a British film, no matter how the capital of the company is held. If this Amendment is inserted, what I understand would be intended by it is that the President of the Board of Trade, in appointing representatives of film makers, should as far as possible satisfy himself that the people he appoints do stand for companies which are not only British companies in the sense of being British registered companies but companies of which the capital is British. My noble friend will appreciate that it is not always possible to find out with certainty exactly how the capital of a company is owned. I accept the Amendment in that spirit, and the President of the Board of Trade will carry it out as well as he can.

Perhaps it would save time if I might be allowed to anticipate the next Amendment which I understand is intended in the same way to provide that the representatives of labour on the Council shall be persons employed by makers of British films. Of course the unions representing the workpeople in the industry who are consulted will be representatives of all the workpeople, whether working under a British controlled or foreign controlled company. Therefore, while I agree to accept the second Amendment, of course the union or other appropriate organisation to be consulted will be one which covers the industry as a whole. I thought it only fair to make those observations in order that there should be no misunderstanding.

VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME

My Lords, I am very much obliged to my noble friend. I quite understand the difficulties, and I hope they may be overcome.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME

My Lords, I beg to move the next Amendment.

Amendment moved— Page 38, line 15, after ("of") insert ("British").—(Viscount Bertie of Thame.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME had on the Paper an Amendment to insert at the end of subsection (2): Provided always that no person who,

1. (i) has been convicted of an offence under the Act of 1927 or this Act; or
2. (ii) being a director, manager, secretary or other officer of a body corporate which has been found guilty of an offence under the said Acts, was a party to such offence; or
3. (iii) being concerned in the management of the business of any person convicted of an offence in respect of such business under the said Acts, was a party to such offence;

shall be eligible for appointment to the said Council, or may continue to act as a member of the said Council without the written authority of the Board of Trade.

The noble Viscount said: My Lords, I purposely hesitated before rising to move this Amendment, in the hope that my noble friend would think it so reasonable that he would accept it. It is a difficult matter to handle with delicacy.

VISCOUNT SWINTON

My Lords, as my noble friend invites me to anticipate him I will gladly do so. I am prepared to accept paragraph (i) of his Amendment but I am not prepared to accept paragraphs (ii) and (iii), not because I quarrel in the least with my noble friend as to his intention, but because I think a provision in that form would be wholly inoperative. The only way in which you can decide whether somebody has been a party to an offence is by prosecuting that person and getting him convicted. Hitherto there has been no power to prosecute anybody other than the company or, if the exhibitor or renter or whoever it is should be an individual, to prosecute that individual. If my noble friend looks at Clause 38 of the Bill, he will see that that contains a provision designed, I think, exactly to meet the mischief which he has in mind. His object is to see that in a case where there has been clear negligence or impropriety by an officer or officers of the company, not merely shall the company be prosecuted but the individuals themselves. As I say, the only way you can decide whether a person is a party to an offence is by getting him convicted.

If my noble friend looks at Clause 38 he will see that it provides: Where a body corporate is guilty of an offence under this Act, and it is proved that the offence occurred with the consent or connivance of, or was attributable to any neglect"— it is very wide— on the part of, any director, manager, secretary or other officer of the body corporate, he, as well as the body corporate, shall be deemed to be guilty of that offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly. The President of the Board of Trade, with whom rests the duty of prosecuting in these cases, had that clause inserted with the deliberate purpose of being able to prosecute not only a body corporate but individual officers if there was a good case of consent or connivance or neglect. It would therefore follow that if there was a good case the officer or director of the company would be proceeded against, and if the Court held that he was guilty of connivance or neglect he would be convicted as well as the body corporate, and therefore would come within the first paragraph of my noble friend's Amendment. That indeed is the only way in which he could be brought within it. I accept also the words at the end of my noble friend's Amendment: shall be eligible for appointment to the said Council, or may continue to act as a member of the said Council without the written authority of the Board of Trade. Therefore, if my noble friend would withdraw the paragraphs (ii) and (iii) in his draft, I would accept the other words of his Amendment, and would also do this. The draftsmen have not been able completely to look at the wording in order to make a perfect draftsman's job of it, and if they should find that more appropriate words are suitable to give effect to the intention, then I will undertake to put down an Amendment on Third Reading to carry it out in an appropriate way. But I think it would be right, as it is the intention to accept this in principle, that I should accept the Amendment in the form which I have indicated now.

VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME

My Lords, I am again very much obliged to my noble friend. His argument seems to me to be quite watertight, and I agree to the terms which he has put forward, and beg to move my Amendment in the form he has indicated.

Amendment moved—

Page 38, line 32, at end insert: ("Provided always that no person who has been convicted of an offence under the Act of 1927 or this Act shall be eligible for appointment to the said Council, or may continue to act as a member of the said Council without the written authority of the Board of Trade").—(Viscount Bertie of Thame.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 43:

Interpretation.

43.—(1) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires, the following expressions have the meanings hereby respectively assigned to them, that is to say:— maker" in relation to a film, means the person by whom the arrangements necessary for the production of the film are undertaken: trade-shown," in relation to a film, means—

1. (a) displayed within the administrative county of London to exhibitors or their agents in a building, and under conditions, allowing for the satisfactory viewing of the film after announcement to such persons at least seven days before the display, the display not being open to any member of the public on payment, or
2. (b) displayed to exhibitors or their agents on one occasion on which the film is exhibited to the public at a theatre in Great Britain during the first three consecutive days on which the film is so exhibited.

LORD TEMPLEMORE moved, in subsection (1), in the definition of "maker," to leave out "production" and insert "making." The noble Lord said: My Lords, this Amendment is purely a drafting Amendment. It is consequent on the definition of "making" which is proposed to be inserted in the Bill in Clause 43.

Amendment moved— Page 41, line 12, leave out ("production") and insert ("making").—(Lord Templemore.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD DARCY (DE KNAYTH) moved to insert: 'Payable,' in relation to labour costs, means becoming payable in the future in accordance with the terms of a written contract.

The noble Lord said: My Lords, under the provisions of this Bill certain substantial and valuable advantages are provided to the owners of films in the production of which there have been em- ployed the requisite number of British subjects. The test is on a pecuniary basis. The Bill says: not less than the requisite amount of labour costs represents payments paid or payable in respect of the labour or services of British subjects or persons domiciled in some part of His Majesty's Dominions.

"Paid or payable" is the point. Your Lordships will see that the test to be applied is whether the maker has come under the obligation to pay an adequate sum, not whether he has discharged that obligation at all. Your Lordships may well realise that a rather important matter arises there. In this industry, in the early days through which it is still going, there has been a great deal of unsatisfactory finance, and considerable numbers of people have never been paid at all, but promoters have employed their employees with no intention of paying them whatsoever. I have some difficulty in realising the equity of extending to persons who do not pay their workpeople the advantages of this Bill.

It is simply giving an advantage to what is little more than a swindle. To prevent that, one would have liked to say that it must be a condition that these debts must be paid, but there are various reasons why that could not be so. My noble friend Lord Strabolgi pointed out to me one of the cases, the co-operative film, and several other people have pointed others out to me. There are cases where the employees look, not to an immediate payment, but only to have their payments discharged out of the proceeds of the film, which can only accrue after the film has in fact been registered. In those circumstances the most effective way was, I thought, to make use of the Amendment here, which says: 'Payable,' in relation to labour costs, means becoming payable in the future in accordance with the terms of a written contract.

The result of that Amendment is that no obligation upon which there has already been a definite default shall count in estimating the amount of the requisite labour costs, and any obligation to pay in futuro must be evidenced by a contract in writing.

The advantage of that provision is not a small one in an industry like this, where a great deal is done verbally and in which there is no contract at all. I think that no one will contend that this Amendment goes too far or is unworkable. In my submission it is necessary, unless you are to arrive at the grotesque spectacle of the Board of Trade investigating the accounts of a film and deciding that it is its duty to extend the privilege afforded by registration as a British film on the ground that an adequate number of His Majesty's subjects have been defrauded to an adequate degree.

Amendment moved— Page 41, line 12, at end insert the said new paragraph.—(Lord Darcy (de Knayth)).

VISCOUNT SWINTON

My Lords, while I sympathise with the noble Lord's desire that people should pay their just debts, and particularly to their workpeople, I am sure that he will see that the Amendment he proposes would really not be at all appropriate to deal with the mischief that he has described. If we are to legislate to make people pay their debts in other manners than are already provided by legislation, I venture to suggest that we must do that in an appropriate manner in an appropriate Act. The only effect of putting in this proposal which my noble friend has made would be to prevent a number of thoroughly honest people, who had every intention of carrying out their contracts, from obtaining the benefits of this Act. My noble friend will see, if he looks at Clause 43, page 40, line 28, that— 'Labour costs,' in relation to a film, means the total amount of the payments paid or payable by the maker of the film in respect of the labour or services— and so on. The word "payable" includes, as indeed I think it must properly include, all payments due in the future in respect of labour whether under a written contract or not. The payment might quite well be a percentage of profits—for example, from exhibition of films—as well as a payment already due.

If you insert the words which the noble Lord desires to insert here, you would exclude from the genuine labour costs of the film payments already due but not actually made. You would also exclude payments due in the future but not covered by a written contract. I do not imagine that my noble friend, in his ordinary labour transactions, always has a written contract with everybody he employs to do a particular job for him; but he would think it very unjust if he found that a number of people whom he had engaged to do a job and had every intention of paying—and I am quite sure he would pay—were suddenly, the moment the proper payment became due to them, cut out because he had not entered into a contract in writing. I think, therefore, he will agree with me that in this defining of what labour costs should count for the Bill, we must take into account the labour costs which have already been paid, or for which payment is due. If it were indeed right to provide for special provisions under which employees were to be able to recover from recalcitrant employers we must do that in some other Bill, but not in a Bill of this kind. I hope the noble Lord will not press this Amendment.

LORD DARCY (DE KNAYTH)

As a result of what my noble friend has said I beg leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

LORD TEMPLEMORE moved, in subsection (1), in paragraph (b) of the definition of "trade-shown," to substitute "four" for "three." The noble Lord said: My Lords, this Amendment is designed to give greater latitude to the maker or renter with regard to the holding of a trade show under the second alternative type of trade show described as (b) in the clause. It has been represented to the Board that in the case where the first day of a pre-release of a film falls on a Friday, it might be very inconvenient or undesirable that either the Saturday or the Sunday should be the day of the trade show. The extension of the period from three to four days will enable the trade show in such cases to be held on the Monday.

Amendment moved— Page 42, line 41, leave out ("three") and insert ("four").—(Lord Templemore.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD TEMPLEMORE moved, in subsection (1), to add to the definition of "trade-shown" the words "the display taking place after announcement to such persons at least seven days before the display." The noble Lord said: My Lords, this Amendment is designed to ensure that exhibitors always have seven days' notice, in the case of the second alternative form of trade show, of the precise date of the trade show. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 42, line 42, at end insert ("the display taking place after announcement to such persons at least seven days before the display").—(Lord Templemore.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD TEMPLEMORE moved, after subsection (4), to insert: (5) For the purposes of this Act, the making of a film shall he deemed not to include the production of blank film or of positives, or the production of negatives by means of any process used for making copies of negatives. In this subsection the expressions 'blank film', 'positives' and 'negatives' have the same meanings respectively as in Section three of the Finance Act, 1925.

The noble Lord said: My Lords, this new subsection aims at defining, as far as may be, what is meant by the "making" of a cinematograph film. The definition excludes from the making of a film the production of the blank sensitised film on which the photographs are taken (which, of course, is purchased from a maker of sensitised cinematograph film), the production of positive prints for exhibition purposes, or the production of new negatives by any copying process from the original negative. In other words, the making of a film is regarded as finished when the original negative is ready for delivery to a renter.

Amendment moved— Page 43, line 17, at end, insert the said new subsection.—(Lord Templemore.)

LORD STRABOLGI

My Lords, I am not sure that this Amendment does not go rather beyond what was originally intended in the Amendment which I moved and which the Government accepted. When I tabled the Amendment it was represented to me that "maker of film" was rather a vague term, and might not necessarily include the laboratory worker. On the Committee stage Lord Templemore was good enough to explain that where a laboratory was owned by a studio, as was often the case, the workers in that laboratory would be covered by the expression "maker of film," but that outside laboratories could not very well be included. Now we have this new subsection (5) as printed. I have taken advice about this, and if I may I will read what the general secretary of the trade union that covers these laboratory workers has to say about it.

He says this: The incorporation of the additional paragraphs in the Bill would, in effect, mean the exclusion from the fair wages clause of laboratory workers. The Amendment refers to definitions incorporated in the Finance Act. 1925, which are as follows: Blank Film—One on which no picture has been impressed, known as raw film of stock. Positive—Films containing a picture for exhibition whether for exhibition or not. Negative—Films containing a photograph whether developed or not from which positives can be printed. The work done in a laboratory consists of developing the negative that has been photographed in the studio and then taking positive prints from the developed negative; this constitutes the positive prints that are exhibited in the cinemas. I must here break off to express my regrets to noble Lords in charge of the Bill for not sending them notice of this, but I only received it just before the sitting of the House this afternoon, and I had not time to advise them about it. The letter continues: In addition, other essential laboratory operations include the making of 'duplicate' negatives for obtaining 'mixing' and 'wiping' effects (i.e. dissolving one scene into another), and we feel that under the terms of this Amendment the people who are engaged in these essential processes of filmmaking would be excluded from the fair wages clause. The only part of the Amendment to which we have no real objection is the deletion from the Bill of persons engaged in making blank film as this work is not done in a processing laboratory. That is the view of the workers themselves, whom I am sure the noble Viscount and his friends want to protect.

They think that this Amendment goes too far, and that it excludes practically all the laboratory workers. I agree with them. I believe I am right in saying—the noble Lord on the other side has great experience of this laboratory work—that the laboratory owners themselves would welcome some standard of fair wages. There is great competition, and tremendous price-cutting, and they themselves, I understand, would welcome some sort of basis and would therefore welcome a fair-wages clause. I am further informed that these highly-skilled, chemical workers are suffering from this depression very severely, and are receiving less wages than men of their skill and attainments should be able to look for. I am sure it is not the intention of Parliament and of the Government to exclude these people from the benefits of the Bill. I do not ask the Government to alter their Amendment at the moment, but if I send them the communications that I have received, and they will further consider the matter, something may be done on the Third Reading, so as to carry out the intentions expressed by Lord Templemore during the Committee stage—namely, to protect workers in laboratories owned by studios.

VISCOUNT SWINTON

My Lords, I am sure the Department will be glad to receive any documents sent to them by the noble Lord, and if there is any Amendment which ought properly to be inserted on the Third Reading I will undertake to see that a suitable Amendment goes down. I rather think the noble Lord is at cross purposes on this. There is no doubt that what was intended to be included in what the noble Lord calls a fair-wage clause was a provision that there should be fair wages in the cinematograph-making industry. This definition covers much more than that. It is what is the making of films for the whole of the purposes of this Act—namely, what is to be counted when you come to assess the labour costs for the purpose of what I call the means test of this Bill. The object of putting in this provision here is to show that there is not included in the making of the film activities which are not really part of the cinematograph industry, in the sense of the cinematograph industry of making British films in this country.

For instance, we do intend to include the production of the blank sensitised film on which photographs are produced, and which is purchased from the makers of sensitised cinematograph films, which is quite a separate industry. Now it is very necessary both for the purpose of assessing the cost properly and also for limiting, in the way which we all intend to limit, the fair wages provision in the cinematograph industry, that we should not step outside the industry of making films and get into the industry of making photographic paper. That really is the purpose of this—and also that we exclude from "making" a mere copying process by which a large number of positives are produced from the negative. I will look into the matter, but that clause was very carefully drafted, and so has this definition been. I feel pretty sure that, unless both the clause and this definition in the form in which it is put, are maintained, we might find we were travelling far outside what is the intention of either the noble Lord or myself. But perhaps he would be good enough to send to the President of the Board of Trade the document to which he refers.

LORD STRABOLGI

I am much obliged to the noble Viscount.

VISCOUNT BRIDGEMAN

My Lords, whatever may be the necessity for defining labour costs, these Amendments as they are now drafted do in fact have the effect of excluding the laboratory workers from the fair-wage clause. It is a pity that any section of workers who could be got into a fair-wage clause should be out of it, more especially seeing that there is this tremendous price competition in the film industry—and here I am bound to agree with the noble Lord opposite—and that price competition, if continued, may sooner or later have a prejudicial effect on wages. But there is another point as well. Naturally the Government are anxious to draw the line somewhere. There are three places where you could draw that line. One is by the exclusion of all processors. In that case you may get some of the employees, where the producers do their own processing, in a fair-wage clause and some out. Or you could put in all the employees of the film producers, in which case you would have some processors in and some out. But the real line of demarcation is so to speak beyond the laboratories. The laboratories are not connected with the manufacturers of raw stock, they are very closely connected with the film producers. They depend entirely on what the film producers are doing, and do not depend on what the manufacturers of raw stock are doing. In some cases the actual developing of the original negative when taken by the camera is done by the laboratory, and not in the producers' organisation itself. Therefore, whether or not this is the right place or time to bring the laboratory workers into the fair-wage clause, I do hope that sooner or later it may be possible for the Government in this respect to draw the line so as to include the laboratory workers with the rest of the makers of films. I hope that the Government may not have said the last word on this matter.

VISCOUNT SWINTON

My Lords, perhaps I may be allowed to add one word. As I understand it—but I will be completely briefed on Third Reading—a laboratory worker who is working in a studio, the part of the organisation that makes a film, would be included in the making of the film and in the fair-wage clause. A laboratory worker working in some other industry which may provide material for the film would not be included, because he would not be a worker in the cinematograph industry; he would be a worker in the sensitised paper industry, or whatever it may be. But what I think my noble friend wants to be sure of is that a genuine laboratory worker in the studio industry would be included. As I understand it, that man is in fact included in this, but I will make quite sure what the position is before we come to the Third Reading.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

First Schedule:

1. FIRST SCHEDULE.
1. PART I.
c273
1. RENTERS' QUOTAS. 166 words
2. PART II.
cc273-87
3. EXHIBITORS' QUOTAS. 5,789 words