HL Deb 18 February 1948 vol 153 cc1213-34

5.18 p.m.

LORD BALFOUR OF INCHRYE rose to call attention to the present restrictions on import of books; and to move for Papers. The noble Lord said: My Lords, the House has had a fairly long debate on a subject of vast importance, but I make no apologies for troubling your Lordships with my Motion for a short while. I think it is common ground that human progress largely depends upon the circulation of thought, and that the present impediments to the circulation of thought, in the way of restrictions on literature, reduce our intellectual and scientific contacts with other lands, and particularly with the United States. I would submit to the House that at this stage, from the industrial and scientific point of view, we cannot afford to fall behind in the application of the most modern processes which science has developed. As I hope to illustrate in a few moments, with the restrictions the Government have found necessary to impose, we are at present definitely handicapping our industry. To-day there is no foreign travel; there is heavy restriction on newsprint; there are grave difficulties in the publication of books in this country, due to paper shortage; and there are grave difficulties in regard to importing literature from abroad.

We are in some danger, I think, of an iron curtain on the exchange of ideas and knowledge falling around our frontiers. It is a danger which I feel sure your Lord- ships on all sides of the House would wish to avert.

I must say that when I put down this Motion I was heartened to read again the words of the noble Lord, Lord Lindsay of Birker, in the debate on the Parliament Bill, when he said: If noble Lords opposite wish to criticize the Government … they should criticize them far more for their behaviour about paper and for their behaviour about the Press. It is by their bad behaviour about paper and their bad behaviour about the Press that they are preventing public discussion; and public discussion is what matters.

I obviously shall have the support of noble Lords opposite in raising this particular matter.

For the benefit of those of your Lordships who are not fully acquainted with the present position, I will recapitulate in a few sentences, so that we may know what we are speaking about. Before the war there were no restrictions upon the import of books into this country. The second stage occurred during the war, when it was found necessary to restrict the importation of books from all countries. Immediately alter the war the restriction was on the basis of allowing an importation from other countries (if it could be obtained) of 100 per cent. of the 1938-39 imports from those countries of scientific books and books of value, but no imports of fiction were allowed. After the war an open general licence was issued which allowed the import of books from the Commonwealth but not from the United States, and the quota of 100 per cent., based on the 1938-39 trade, was built up to 200 per cent.

In January, 1947, due to the Article 9 provisions of the Bretton Woods Agreement, we were not allowed to continue any discrimination against the United States. Therefore the open general licence was extended to include books from the United States. Imports from the Commonwealth were still allowed, but the 200 per cent. was reduced to 100 per cent. of the 1938-39 trade, and fiction was allowed to be imported provided that 50 per cent. of the value of the fiction imported was re-exported from this country. That open licence lasted from January to September. During that time the imports of literature rose to something like ten times their prewar level. Also there was imported into this country from America—one might term it dumped into this country—what is known as "pulp fiction," which has no real literary value at all and was obviously taking a large amount of our dollar resources.

In September, 1947, the President of the Board of Trade found it necessary to stop the open general licences, and he re-instituted a selected individual licence which is now in force. This, theoretically, allows an import of scientific books up to 100 per cent. of the 1938-39 trade, and also a small amount of fiction. But each licence is granted on its merits, and in practice, as I shall show in a few moments, licences granted are fairly few and it takes time to obtain them. Although individual books are allowed to be imported in single numbers, the book trade and those responsible for the supply of scientific literature are heavily handicapped by the present restriction.

May I give your Lordships one or two examples which have been sent to me? The University College of London report that they have great difficulty in obtaining American scientific books. Several copies of one particular book can be ordered only if a licence is obtained, which generally involves a delay of eight to ten weeks. The University of Durham say that the position is so bad that lecturers are having to write weekly sheets for distribution to their classes, because of the difficulty of getting the necessary text books. I have tried to take a sample of what I call the scientific life of our country. The National Veterinary Medical Association of Great Britain and Ireland say that one of the books for which they have asked for a licence is Duke's Veterinary Physiology, a new edition of which was published in America in the autumn, and upon which students are entirely dependent for this particular knowledge. Smith's Veterinary Physiology— which is the British counterpart—is no longer obtainable, and students' veterinary studies are being seriously prejudiced.

The Institute of Structural Engineers complain that many months pass before they can obtain licences for books, and their research work is being seriously prejudiced. The British Cast Iron Research Association has been refused the necessary currency to subscribe to an American Translation Service specializing in scientific work, for which there is no equivalent in this country. I will give one more example. The Biochemical Society say that there is a book called The Annual Review of Biochemistry, a volume which every biochemist has at his hand, which is published in America, and this year its delivery in this country was held up for many months due to Customs difficulties. The Physiological Society also complain of their troubles. There are various other bodies who complain, but I will not weary your Lordships at this late hour. One and all say that they are hampered, first, by the import restrictions themselves, and, secondly, by the administration of the restrictions which are at present in force.

I want to make three suggestions to the Government if I may, and I am not going to detain your Lordships by trying to prove my case. When the debate on the adjournment in another place was held on the subject of the importation of books, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade admitted heavy overwork in the Import Licensing Department of the Board of Trade, and he promised better things. The fact is that the delays still exist, and it is sometimes four or five months before people can get books which are at the dockside. As the Customs guarantee to hold a consignment for only twenty-eight days, if the licence is not obtained in that time there is serious danger that the books will never be delivered to the proper recipient. I would suggest, first, that there should be a maximum time laid down within the Department by the Minister in which these licence applications should be dealt with. Let it be twenty-eight days, or let it be six weeks. It should be progressively reduced. It would enable the importers to have some knowledge of the maximum time they will have to wait, so that they will know whether or not they are going to get their licences. That is my first suggestion. My second suggestion is that the figure of 100 per cent. of the 1938-39 trade should be increased again to 200 per cent. The 1938-39 trade is not a very-good yardstick to take, for two reasons. First of all, since that time values have risen.

LORD CHORLEY

May I correct the noble Lord? I am informed that the average over the years before the war is taken, and not just the figures of one year before the war.

LORD BALFOUR OF INCHRYE

I am informed that in practice the authorities are taking the figures of the 1938-39 trade. But, giving the noble Lord his point, if you look at the statistics from about 1934, you will see that the shadow of war over Europe seriously diminished the enterprise and opportunities of our book importing industry. If you took the 1920's and the early 1930's you would have a better yardstick. I suggest that it should be increased to 200 per cent., for the reason that the yardstick of years itself is bad and, secondly, because of the change in the value of money.

My third suggestion is that blanket licences up to a given amount should be granted to universities, libraries and other approved scientific bodies who, if they knew they had power to spend up to an amount decreed by the Government, would then be able to proceed with the application for a licence within the amount they were permitted to spend; at the same time they would be able to obtain a far better selection of foreign scientific literature than they can at the present time. Those are my three suggestions on this subject. I have dealt with the subject very inadequately, and in a very rapid manner. It is, I think, worthy of non-Party consideration, because we feel on all sides of the House that British culture has something to give to the world and something to receive from other countries in the world; and that British science and British industry, particularly when we are trying to regain our export markets, cannot afford to be handicapped by a lack of technical knowledge. I hope that the Government will study the representations of those in charge of industry and scientific processes. I beg to move for Papers.

5.32 p.m.

LORD CHERWELL

My Lords, I must apologize for inflicting myself upon you again after such a brief interval. But I feel that it would be wrong for a man who is a professor in one of our universities, and therefore, to some extent, responsible for the training of the youth of this country, to remain silent when a topic so vitally urgent to the teaching of young men and women is being discussed. Most people—if not all people, indeed—require quiet, solitude and leisure to ponder and comprehend new ideas and arguments. I well remember once having the temerity to derive an extremely simple equation—the equation on the motion of a rocket—in your Lordships' House. Afterwards I was told not only that nobody understood it, but that even after seeing it in Hansard people had to read it several times before they appreciated what it was all about. That is equally true concerning all ordinary lectures; and it is especially the case with young people who are not of the high standard of intelligence that we find here.

It is no use saying that lecture notes should be enough. Not only does it distract people to have to take down everything the lecturer says, but it is necessary for them to read around the subject; they should not confine themselves to the series of items that have been discussed in the lecture. I do not know that I need argue the case for the necessity of books for learning. The whole efflorescence after the invention of printing proves the case without any further discussion. We are now really back to the conditions of the Middle Ages. In Oxford, undergraduates have to lend one another a book for twenty-four hours because there are so few available. This means learning against a time limit, and one really cannot do that. One cannot study and understand something if an eye has to be kept on the clock because a book must be given back next morning. It is quite intolerable that conditions of this sort should be allowed to exist.

The general shortage of books, of course, is greatly exacerbated by the difficulty—sometimes almost the impossibility—of getting foreign books. On my own subject of physics, for instance, a large number of the best and most up-to-date books are printed in America. Everybody knows that the nuclear research which led up to the atomic bomb was concentrated in America during the war, and that they have kept their lead partly because of the start this gave them and partly because of the excessively expensive apparatus required for that work. Large numbers of the most distinguished emigré Jewish scientists went to America. It is no use shutting our eyes to the fact that at the present moment in these subjects America is pre-eminent. Germany is down and out; in France science, though recovering, has not yet recovered; and unless we can get these American books our acquiring knowledge and information about nuclear subjects, at any rate, will be gravely handicapped. It is not as if we were dealing with large amounts of dollars. I believe that one-tenth of the amount of dollars wasted on dried eggs would put the whole position right at once. It is not as if the restriction were really effective. I have here an advertisement which is offering "America's best-loved magazines" to all and sundry. They say "You will be charmed with these delightful magazines. Call soon." No doubt I should be charmed with these magazines, but I should be much more charmed if I could simply go into a shop and buy Bethe's book on Nuclear Physics.

It cannot be right that tutors should be compelled to recommend their undergraduates to read, not the best book on the subject but the book that they might be able to get. That is the position we are in now. If you want a foreign book you may be lucky, but in general there is interminable delay. I have here an instance of one of the best-known book shops in Oxford, which applied for a licence on September 19, 1947, and by the middle of February, 1948, they still have not received that licence. After all, the Government are spending vast sums on education, and they will be stultifying their efforts if they do not make sure that we have enough text books to teach the people what they are supposed to be learning. I would therefore appeal to the Government, not only to facilitate the import of educational books from abroad but to increase the paper allocations to printers and publishers for educational books. Ten per cent. of the 70,000 tons of paper which I believe go on Government forms every year would put the whole position right. I hope that on this occasion the Government will be forthcoming and will make every effort to meet us.

5.39 p.m.

VISCOUNT MERSEY

My Lords, I should like to support the Motion. It seems to me sad that a Party which counts so many of the intelligentsia in its ranks and is genuinely anxious to raise the level of education throughout the country should have brought us to a position not unlike that of a totalitarian country. We have an iron curtain down now, which prevents our getting not only technical books but ordinary literature. It is rather a debacle to place Goethe and Voltaire on the same level as caviare and champagne, but that is what we are coming to. As the noble Lord, Lord Cherwell, has just said, we are back to the position of the Middle Ages. The last time, I believe, that there was a restriction on the import of books was in the reign of King Edward IV, 500 years ago. Although I am not a Protectionist, I think he had very good reason, because he was trying to encourage Mr. Caxton in his nascent industry. It was his brother, Richard III, who subsequently allowed books to come in.

It is not only technical books which are affected; ordinary literature, books that people want to read—or ought to want to read—are also restricted. Those books are needed in this country, and one cannot buy them. Go to the very few shops that deal in French, Italian or German literature, and you will not be able to buy them. They are not there. Not only is the import of foreign-produced books prohibited; so is the printing abroad of English books. We are so short of English literature in this country that we would be glad to get our English books printed abroad; but that we are not allowed to do. What the noble Lord, Lord Balfour of Inchrye, has said about the difficulties imposed by the Board of Trade is, I believe, absolutely correct. There are several Departments concerned, and to a certain extent they are at cross purposes; one or two are quite adamant. They say that a trader must have been in business before and brought in the necessary quota for him to be authorized to import at this time. I hope that the very small amount of" foreign currency which is needed to allow these books to come in will not weigh so heavily with the Government as it seems to. Mental food is surely nearly as necessary, although perhaps not quite so necessary, as physical food. This Government of all Governments ought to be able to take a strong lead and allow principle to carry the day against a purely material gain.

5.42 p.m.

LORD MARLEY

My Lords, as a Back Bencher on the Government side, I should like to support this Motion. I thoroughly agree with the noble Lord, Lord Balfour of Inchrye, that this should be a non-Party question. We are all concerned with a problem which the Government are trying to solve in many different ways—the dollar shortage. The plea which I would make to the noble Lord who is to reply is that the amount of dollars involved is relatively small. I do not agree with the dried egg argument. I do not think that we could absorb knowledge if we had not previously absorbed eggs—dried or otherwise—or some other imported foodstuffs. Anyway, we are not now buying any dried eggs, and have not been since September of last year. As I say, the amount of dollars involved in the question of books is relatively small. I am not concerned with the sort of books to which the noble Viscount, Lord Mersey, referred—books for amusement purposes. These pass round from house to house. I am told that: Forever Amber can be borrowed from your friend in the next house if you want it. That is not the sort of book with which I am concerned. I am particularly concerned with books dealing with industrial efficiency. I believe that industrial efficiency is vital to the future of this country, particularly at a time when by comparison we are not showing up very well with the United States. I think it must clearly be admitted that any assistance we can obtain in connexion with the development of industrial efficiency should be supported by the Government.

I happen to have led a party of industrialists to Germany a year ago. It was quite pathetic to meet these great leaders of German industry who had been deprived of all contact with the outer world for perhaps ten years, and had, in fact, been deprived of contact with one another. It was pathetic to find, when they met one another and when they exchanged information with this British delegation, how lamentably ignorant they were of every development in industrial efficiency in the rest of the world. For instance, they had no knowledge of the basic development of industrial psychology. They did not know what factorial analysis was. They had little or no knowledge of the tremendous work done in the Harvard School of Business Administration, in the University of Iowa, in the University of New York and even in this country. They had been deprived of all possibility of learning what was going on in the rest of the world, and of the interchange of knowledge.

This problem has given great anxiety to the Parliamentary and Scientific Committee. We have now been considering this matter for eighteen months and we are profoundly concerned. It is not only industry itself which is affected; it is the. libraries upon which industry depends. I happen to be Chairman of a body concerned with industrial efficiency. We cannot obtain the books on motion economy, on job simplification, and so on, which are so improvement in production efficiency. It is a serious problem. A few weeks ago, I was in the library of the Institute of Economic and Social Research. That body were formed only in 1940; therefore, they have no licence because they had no imports before the war. They are experiencing the greatest difficulty in obtaining a licence for those books.

The same thing applies to the shortage of paper. A most important document written by Dr. Rostas which appeared some months ago had to be duplicated, and only one hundred copies were available for the world. So far as I know, it is the only document produced on a scientific analysis of a comparison of industrial productivity in the United States and the United Kingdom. Of the 100 copies available, sixty have been sent to the Dominions and other parts of the world; there are forty copies in this country. I borrowed that book; I have to return it within a week, because those are all the copies which there are available. These are the factors which are limiting our progress. I thought that the constructive suggestions put forward by the noble Lord, Lord Balfour of Inchrye, were well worth consideration by the Government. I am sure that the Government are sympathetic in this matter. I do add my voice to an appeal to allow us in this case to have the very few additional dollars which might add enormously to the value of our productive effort to meet the economic crisis in which we are involved.

5.50 p.m.

LORD MOYNE

My Lords, this obscure cloud of regulations which the noble Lord, Lord Balfour of Inchrye, has to some extent illumined, is ominous, for the reason that it casts a shadow not only over some of our most cherished traditions of freedom, but also across our relations with our friends of the Commonwealth. By Article 9 of the Anglo-American Financial Agreement, we have undertaken not to discriminate against the products of the United States in any imports we may have to restrict in quantity. Therefore the Board of Trade appear to have decided that, in order to meet our dollar difficulties, we are obliged instead to regulate the importation of books by means of these baffling and uncertain rules. But, in doing so, they have violated certain important principles.

At a time when we are all thinking in terms of closer co-operation and economic union with other countries, at a time when the group of nations associated with us is regarded as an example of economic co-operation which others ought to follow, it is not encouraging to see our administration give a lead of unilateral action to restrict the reciprocal flow of our trade with our partners. This onesided closing down on the importation of books has been resented, as a matter of principle, in several of the Dominions, notably, I believe, in Australia. I happen to know more of the reactions in Ireland, where the regulations have made it exceedingly difficult for the small group of Dublin publishers to sell their books even in Belfast. The very large quantity of British books imported into Southern Ireland, and the natural wish to trade freely within the limits of a small island, would seem to call for some special treatment. If it were put to them, I cannot believe that our friends in America would refuse to allow some agreed measure of discrimination in favour of the Dominions in this matter.

But that, is only an example of a problem which is wider than these particular difficulties. Is Article 9 going to be interpreted so as to strike at the roots of our whole economic union? Is the shortage of dollars to drive us to close down on the importation of one commodity after another until trade within our group of nations is at a standstill? As many foretold, Article 9 places us in a false position and is the thin edge of a most dangerous wedge. I suggest that we ought not to hide our heads like ostriches in the sand of expediency, but consult again with our American friends before the position becomes intolerable. I think that it is now generally believed that the Americans are encouraging other countries to unite, and they must see what a stumbling-block to effective economic union this condition must be among countries which are all short of dollars.

The other principle violated is the great international tradition that literature should pass without hindrance between one country and another. Unfortunately the United States to some extent honour this custom in the breach. They are not members of the Copyright Union and they actually charge an ad valorem duty on books. The tide is flowing the right way, however. They have lately reduced their import duty to 5 per cent. I would like to suggest that the time is ripe, that we should seek good out of evil and take the opportunity of our present difficulties for a frank discussion of this question with our American friends, in the hope that they may at last be induced to abandon their isolationism in the field of literature, as they have in so many other fields, so that publishers on both sides of the Atlantic may compete on equal terms in one another's country.

In the meanwhile we are in a desperate situation which may, for the time being, call for desperate remedies. The restrictions are on and the Government may take the short view that they must stay on for the present. But in that case I suggest that this duration should be defined, so that Dominion publishers should at least be able to know where they stand, and that the restrictions themselves should be eased to meet some of the criticisms which have been made. I would take first books in foreign languages. These very sensibly, I think, are not subject to any quota or re-export provision. Applications are considered on their merits and permission to import is being freely granted, but after a delay that often reaches up to two months, because with all these restrictions the Board of Trade are naturally overworked. But why insist on permits for bona-fide books in "foreign languages at all? Such freedom need not involve discrimination against books of this kind produced in America. Linguists are not so plentiful that any serious drain of dollars would result.

And I would extend this freedom further. For learned, scientific or educational books, I would give an open licence, whether they came from hard currency countries or not. After all, though our economic difficulties may be desperate, we are not postponing the raising of the school-leaving age. Must we add to the shortage of teachers and buildings a continuance of the shortage of books? If, however, the Government will not at present go so far as that, I would at any rate support Lord Balfour's suggestion that the quota should be increased to 200 per cent., bringing it back approximately to the pre-war position. It was suggested in another place that the privilege of being allowed to import fiction on condition of re-exporting 50 per cent. of it should be extended to serious works also. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade seemed favourably inclined to that suggestion and I hope that we shall hear that it is to be put: into operation.

This re-export privilege, however, though some help, does not, I understand, go far enough even in the case of fiction. In practice it is said to be very difficult for publishers to get the necessary individual licences, because many of them were not importers before the war and because firm orders from abroad are not easy to obtain in advance. I am told that we are running serious risks of losing old-established and valuable markets in the Dominions, which re-exportation would help us to retain. Shortage of paper and shortage of printers owing to the limited number of apprentices allowed to be trained has prevented publishers from offering the range of books which the Dominion markets desire. For instance, any relief which would enable British publishers to bring in books in sheet form for binding here and re-exporting would help us to hold those markets; and even the importation of more finished books would set free paper and other resources to help towards the attainment of the Board of Trade's ambitious export target of £12,000,000 worth of books.

As things are at present, publishers tell me they are often accused by authors' agents of being "dogs in the manger" when they refuse to cede Dominion rights to American publishers while they themselves cannot supply the Dominion markets. The Dominions would still prefer to buy from Britain, not only for reasons of sentiment but also because of the availability of our currency. The existing arrangements are a tangle of uncertainty and hamper, for instance, the making of reciprocal arrangements with American publishers who are likely, as time goes by, to resent the present oneway traffic. In conclusion, I would like to say a word on the number of tributes I have heard paid to the Board of Trade for the efforts they are making to cause these difficult restrictions to work as smoothly as possible. My contention is not that they are failing to do their best to unravel the knot, but that it ought never to have been tied so tightly, and, indeed, for reasons of broad principle, that it ought never to have been tied at all.

5.55 p.m.

LORD SEMPILL

My Lords, before the noble Lord replies, would you allow me to make a few observations in support of all that has been said by others who have spoken in favour of Lord Balfour of Inchrye's very important Motion? I am closely concerned with several technical bodies dealing with production, aircraft and automobile engineering, and with the British section of the World Engineering Congress. All those four bodies are endeavouring to build up modern libraries. So far they have been utterly unable to do so. Our members, young and old, are oat of date because they cannot get the up-to-date publications mentioned by the noble Lord who raised this Motion and referred to by others; and unless my noble friend who is to reply realizes this fact and acts as suggested, we shall so remain. Advance in technological education will be gravely hampered and our engineers will not be up to date.

5.56 p.m.

LORD CHORLEY

My Lords, I think we have had a very useful discussion in which more points have been made in a short time than in any debate within my immediate recollection. If, in replying, I am not able to deal with them all, I hope noble Lords will forgive me. It appeared from the opening observations of the noble Lord, Lord Balfour of Inchrye, that he appreciated—and I think most other noble Lords who have taken part in the discussion have appreciated—the exceptionally difficult circumstances with which the Government is faced over this business. We are very glad indeed that this matter should have been raised, because it does enable us to ' bring out the difficulties with which we are contending. And it is very appropriate indeed that this matter should have been brought up by the noble Lord, Lord Balfour of Inchrye, because we all know how the Scottish nation in particular is enthusiastic in regard to all matters of education and of books. Indeed, he prayed in aid the observations of my noble friend, Lord Lindsay of Birker, a fellow countryman, whose remarks, I think, were not in fact directed to this particular question of the import of books. I well remember in my student days Barrie's fascinating play, When a Man's Single, in which this enthusiasm for books in a working class Scottish family is brought out. Although not being very much addicted to study themselves, they furnish the front room by ordering a yard of the best books, which were duly installed.

But I would remind the noble Lord that we in England are no less interested in literature, and in good literature. Indeed, in re-reading The Areopagitica the other day I was astonished at the number of very apt quotations to which, if time was not getting on, I might well refer your Lordships. The difficulties, of course, as the noble Lord has indicated, are essentially related to the balance of payments problem. It is because of that that there is an extreme paper shortage in this country, and this has resulted in great pressure being brought to bear on the importation of foreign books. And it is not only that there is a shortage of paper; it is undoubtedly the fact that there has been an enormous increase in the output of books, of good books, in recent years, and a very gratifying increase in the demand. Much more reading is going on here now than formerly, not only in university and scientific circles, but throughout the country as a whole.

Of the paper which is available, a generous allocation has been made to the book industry. They are receiving 80 per cent. of their pre-war amounts and, of course, having regard to the much thinner paper which is being used and other matters of that sort, the actual output of books is considerably larger, indeed it has already exceeded the prewar figure. It is true that the whole of the allocation is not available for the benefit of the general public, as 25 per cent. has to be used either for the production of educational works or for works for export. Lord Cherwell, I think, said, in effect, that the situation was so difficult at Oxford that undergraduates could not get books. The demand by undergraduates for books to be owned by them has increased enormously. As I say, it is not that the output of books is not con- tinually increasing, it is just that supply cannot keep up with demand. And that has undoubtedly meant a great pressure in favour of importing books from abroad.

The noble Lord, Lord Balfour of Inchrye, has very succinctly and accurately, on the whole, described the history of this business. The Government were very anxious indeed to encourage, so far as possible, the importation of what have been called the serious books—that is learned, scientific and technical books—and in 1947 an open general licence was given for the importation of books of this kind. Very little question has been raised to-day with regard to fiction, and I do not propose to say much about it. On the other side, this open general licence was, in fact, issued, and as the noble Lord, himself, has pointed out, the result was a tremendous increase in the supply of books. I am not sure that it was a ten-fold increase as I think the noble Lord said, but it certainly was a tremendous increase; and by the time the dollar crisis came upon us in August it was well on in the direction of £1,000,000 per annum which, with respect to my noble friend Lord Marley, is a very substantial sum. A considerable proportion of the material, it is true, was what Lord Balfour of Inchrye called pulp literature, some of it pornographic literature masquerading as the biographies or autobiographies of famous film stars, and that sort of thing.

In July and August of last year, as everyone knows, we were confronted with an exceedingly difficult economic situation. We had to cut down in all sorts of ways; we had even to cut down our importation of foodstuffs from dollar sources. I think it would have been quite unreasonable to do as the noble Lord, Lord Moyne, suggested in his very charming speech, and leave books untouched when we were cutting down food supplies. Clearly there had to be some restriction on the import of books. A famous member of your Lordships' House many years ago produced a stanza—it had great currency at the time and it may be familiar to some of your Lordships—which may not be inappropriate at the present day, when slightly modified. The author of the original stanza was Lord Lytton. Perhaps your Lordships will allow me to repeat it: We may live without books— What is knowledge but grieving? We may live without hope— What is hope but deceiving? We may live without love— What is passion but pining? But where is the man That can live without dining? We had, therefore, to return to the quota system, and the quota was fixed at 100 per cent. of the pre-war amounts which were allocated to different firms who had, in fact, been engaged in the business of importing these books from abroad. It has been suggested that that 100 per cent. is not enough. It is quite true that there are difficulties arising here and there, particularly with regard to certain types of books which have been referred to by a number of noble Lords who have taken part in the discussion. It has been suggested that if the quota could be increased to 200 per cent. that might go a long way towards alleviating the position. It is interesting to know that this is in the minds of noble Lords, because my right honourable friend is already discussing with representatives of learned institutions in this country the question of how serious is this inability to obtain these books, particularly from America. These discussions are going on at the present time, and it may well be that as a result there will be some increase in the quota. I am not in a position to say anything more definite, or, indeed, to hold out the hope that there will be an increase to the 200 per cent. which the noble Lord has suggested.

It is undoubtedly the fact that there have been administrative difficulties. This present quota system in regard to these serious books came into force, as the noble Lord has indicated, only in September last. And it so happened the department in the Board of Trade which was given the job of handling this matter was weakened as the result of illness and other troubles over those very critical months. Moreover, it was found necessary to go into the question of the quota to which each individual importing firm was entitled. The increase had to be looked at in respect of the business they had been doing in the years before the war. That, of course, meant a substantial amount of work, and that work fell on the department which, as I have indicated, was depleted by sickness and other troubles. But my right honourable friend has been able to reinforce that particular department, and I am glad to be able to inform noble Lords that the business of looking into the quotas has now practically come to an end, and therefore in future these delays ought not to be anything like so serious as in the past.

Lord BALFOUR of INCHRYE

May I interrupt the noble Lord to ask if he can tell us what this department may consider an appropriate time, once a quota has been examined, in order to go through the procedure of examining an application and then granting or refusing a licence?

LORD CHORLEY

The problem is to catch up with the arrears, which may well take a little time. When that has been done I should not imagine there would be any great delay. I am informed it would be about two weeks, and it might even be less.

The noble Lord made one other interesting suggestion which I shall be very glad to bring to the attention of my right honourable friend—namely, that blanket licences should be issued to the universities and similar institutions, to enable them to import books themselves. He pointed out—but I am not sure that he made it quite clear—that there is an open licence to any individual to import a particular book. Anyone can get currency from his bank, give an order to a bookseller in America, and the book will be imported by parcel post. There is no difficulty about it and many professors and scientists have been importing books in this way. The noble Lord suggests that something of the kind on a rather wider basis should be granted to universities. Universities are not so constituted as to embark on the business of importing books, and if it is found, as a result of the discussions to which I have referred, that the general quota can be increased, the most effective way of dealing with the problem would probably be by the regular dealers who import books from America, and who are now doing it in respect of the 100 per cent. quota, proceeding with the job. The noble Lord's two suggestions come together, as it were. If there were an increase in the allocation of this type of book, it would be probably more efficiently handled by the booksellers themselves than by the universities, who would have to set up new machinery.

VISCOUNT MERSEY

Will an English publisher be allowed to get books printed on the Continent?

LORD CHORLEY

I am coming to the speech of the noble Viscount. He made a point about foreign literature which was to some extent answered by the noble Lord, Lord Moyne. There is no ban on foreign literature and I am surprised to hear the noble Lord recount the difficulties he has had in getting the works of Goethe and Voltaire. I was recently in bookshops in both Cambridge and Oxford and I was gratified to see shelves well filled with the works of both those famous authors and many other equally famous French, German, and other Continental writers.

LORD MOYNE

I hear everywhere that these books come in freely, eventually, but there is a very long delay, because of the unfortunate overwork of the Board of Trade. If there were an open licence there need be no discrimination against books printed in America. They are presumably not normally printed in America, but if they were, they could be allowed in. I do not mean anything but bona-fide works, and not picture books with a few words in a foreign language inserted in order to get them through the Customs. If application could be avoided, this amount of extra work for the Board of Trade could be abolished and the time saved.

LORD CHORLEY

In regard to the importation of foreign classical works, I am not sure the delay is very serious. Any delay should be avoided if possible, and if the noble Lord's suggestion that there should be an open licence is technically feasible, I hope it may be possible to carry it out. I shall be glad to bring it to the attention of my right honourable friend.

The noble Viscount, Lord Mersey, also suggested that English books should be printed in a foreign country where there is a better supply of paper, or binders are easier to get, or the printing presses are more readily available. That is a suggestion which has been made to my right honourable friend and which, at the present moment, he has under consideration. It is very much hoped that, without coming within the discrimination difficulty, it will be possible to get quotas well in excess of 100 per cent. for English books printed in countries such as Holland and Austria. I hope it may be possible to meet the noble Viscount in that way.

The main burden of Lord Marley's speech was that the question involved very few dollars, and I think I have sufficiently dealt with that point. The noble Lord, Lord Moyne, several of whose points I have discussed, said that the Commonwealth was very unfairly treated in this matter. It is perfectly true that some of the Dominions, notably Australia, have, during the war years, developed substantially increased printing industries, but the whole arrangements in regard to the importation of fiction have been based on the importance of providing for Commonwealth imports. As the noble Lord, Lord Balfour of Inchrye, pointed out, up to the time when the discrimination Clause in the American agreement came into force there was, in fact, an open general licence to all members of the Commonwealth. When the discrimination clause came into play, some method had to be discovered for retaining these imports from the Commonwealth, and the method was invented of allowing as much juvenile literature and English fiction to come in from all countries as was possible, provided 50 per cent. of it was re-exported.

LORD MOYNE

In spite of these arrangements, there are many small firms of Irish publishers, some new, and many established long before the war, whose books are not normally exported from this country. The re-export conditions virtually shut them out of the market, and they feel this bitterly. Recently I read a review in an Irish magazine giving the opinion of different Irish publishers. It was full of technicalities into which at this late hour I have not the heart to enter; but it is clear that they are, in fact, shut out altogether.

LORD CHORLEY

I hope the noble Lord will allow me. After all, he is making a series of speeches, if I may say so. The gravamen of his remarks is that discrimination is a very bad thing. That is a much wider topic than the importation of books, and is under active discussion with the whole range of imports into the country. It is not a problem which can be properly raised in regard to this question of the importation of books. The question of the flow of international books was very much on his mind; I have already dealt with that. In regard to the open licences for serious works, I hope that I have satisfied the noble Lord that it would not be possible to give them. He wanted serious works to be brought into line with fiction, so that if 50 per cent. were re-exported it would be open to an importer to import as much as he liked. Surely tat would be much less fair than the quota system. The Americans export an expensive series of books to most countries which require them. The only result of this suggestion would be that the import of this type of literature would be very much cut down.

LORD MOYNE

If the noble Lord will allow me—

LORD CHORLEY

I do not think I should give way. The noble Lord's final point related to the import of books and sheets. There is really no difference between sheets and ordinary books; nor can there very well be. Obviously a discrimination policy is exactly the same whether the book is imported bound or whether it is imported in sheets. If we are saving dollars by imposing a quota system, clearly the situation is the same. There is no reason why these sheets should not be imported, if the publishers or booksellers prefer to import them; but they must come within their quota. I think I have dealt with all the points. I hope the noble Lord, Lord Balfour of Inchrye, will realize that the Government have these matters very much in mind, and that my right honourable friend is already taking steps to deal with them.

6.20 p.m.

LORD BALFOUR OF INCHRYE

My Lords, we have had a short, if agreeable and not sharp debate—seven speeches in one hour and six minutes. I want to thank the noble Lord for his reply which, although it does not completely satisfy other noble Lords and myself, is reassuring. I have never disputed, as he said, the need of some form of restriction of books at the present time. He has given us encouragement by saying that the President of the Board of Trade is discussing with appropriate bodies the possibility of improving the situation, and I hope that we may look forward to having some early news of the result of those discussions. Let me assure the noble Lord that the importation of single books by individuals does not meet the case. I hope that he was not supporting the present position by saying that it was made much better by that. That is a help, of course, but it is not a substitute for improvement of the main position. I am glad to know that the administrative delay will be cut down to approximately a fortnight. That will be a great contribution to the smooth working of the present system. I would like once more to thank noble Lords who supported me in this debate, and beg leave to withdraw my Motion for Papers.

Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.