CINEMATOGRAPH FILM PRODUC TION (SPECIAL LOANS) BILL (Hansard, 3 April 1952)

§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE DUCHY OF LANCASTER (VISCOUNT SWINTON)
My Lords, this House has always taken a very friendly interest in the British film industry, and that interest has been all the more valuable because it has been constructive. In 1949, Parliament approved the creation of the National Film Finance Corporation and gave to it authority to lend £6,000,000 of Government money in order to finance British films. Without that aid, production would have been so curtailed that only 1349 a small quota of British films would have been shown on British screens, and overseas showings would have been greatly reduced.
I remember well that when the Bill was passing through your Lordships' House anxiety was expressed not merely that the Government should help the industry to carry on but that this instrument of public money should be used to increase the efficiency of the industry and to effect economies. I must say that I think the Corporation has done a very good job. It has certainly set an example in economical administration. To have done the whole of the work which is set out in the Report of the Corporation at an administrative expenditure of £18,000 a year, is really an example to all of us, whether in Government administration or in business, and I should like to pay a tribute to the work both of Lord Reith and of Mr. Lawrie, who is Managing Director of the Corporation. This Corporation, apart from stimulating production, has had a fair measure of success in furthering those aims which this House was anxious to see pursued. In spite of rising costs, production has become more economical. By and large, the cost of a big film is a good deal less to-day than it was a few years ago. Much more efficient costing has been introduced into the industry. Lower salaries have been taken by executives and by film stars, and I understand (though I daresay there is some way to go yet) that there are to-day fewer restrictive practices in the industry.
Those of your Lordships who frequent cinemas (and I hope they are the majority of your Lordships) will, I think, agree that quality has not been sacrificed. New producers have been encouraged to come in. That was something we were anxious about. The organisation is described in Lord Reith's letter, which is appended to the last Report of the Corporation. Finally, what is called the Eady Scheme is now in operation. That is an agreement made between exhibitors and the trade, assisted by some sacrifice in entertainment duty by the Exchequer, which it is estimated ought to give to the producers something like £3,000,000 to £3,500,000 a year over the next three years.
Your Lordships may ask, why do I come to your Lordships to-day with this 1350 Bill. The reason is this. The Corporation has been so successful in its work that it has exhausted all the money which it has at its disposal. By that, I do not mean that the money has been lost; but its outstanding loans or commitments for further loans will absorb the full £6,000,000 that Parliament authorised. Of course repayment takes place only after the film has been shown and the receipts have come in. If we were to stop now, film production would be very seriously slowed down. There is no doubt at all, I think, that without some further finance the quota of 30 per cent. of British films could not be filled, and at this time we certainly cannot afford more dollars for foreign films. Hence I come to your Lordships with the proposal to increase the borrowing powers of the Corporation by £2,000,000. That will not be a Government loan. It is to be raised by the Corporation, I suppose, through the banks; and the Board of Trade and the Treasury have to approve of any use of this new power. I hope that the Government will not have to guarantee this £2,000,000. If that should become necessary, in whole or in part, I understand that there is power under other legislation for the Government to give the necessary guarantee. Finally, let me say that it is definitely intended that this should be the last lap of Government-sponsored finance.
I think your Lordships welcomed the original Bill, and that you will agree, from the accounts which Lord Reith and his successor have rendered, that the money has been well and wisely spent. I am sure your Lordships would wish that the industry should not be seriously curtailed at this moment, and therefore I have no hesitation in proposing this further borrowing power to the House. I beg to move that the Bill be now read a Second time.

LORD PAKENHAM
My Lords, I believe that the noble Lord, Lord Strabolgi, intends to raise one or two questions of substance in connection with this measure, but, subject to what he has to say, I should like to extend a warm welcome to it. There was considerable discussion about the Bill in another place, 1351 but certain difficulties, particularly one connected with the issue of the guarantee, were largely met. Therefore, as I say, subject to Lord Strabolgi's remarks, on behalf of the Opposition I extend to the Bill a warm welcome.

LORD STRABOLGI
My Lords, as usual my noble friend spoke for me, and I think for other noble Lords on these Benches, in extending a welcome to the Bill; and I certainly do riot oppose it. Let me begin by praising the continued interest in this subject shown by the noble Viscount who introduced the Bill. I think the cinematograph industry owes him a great deal. When he was President of the Board of Trade he showed a great interest in the industry, and throughout the years, although he and I have sat on opposite sides of the House, we have always been united in trying to help the industry. When he had the opportunity he certainly used it to do as much as he could, and I think the industry has a great deal for which to thank him.
My Lords, I ought to declare an indirect interest in this matter because, as I think I have said before in your Lordships' House, for a good many years I have been a director of a small producing company and we have received assistance from one of the great distributing organisations, which has been helped, in its turn, by this Fund. Therefore, in an indirect way I have some small interest in this matter.
I should like, first, to ask the noble Viscount a question about which I took the precaution of giving him notice—namely, whether the possibility can be explored of some help being given from this additional £2,000,000 to an organisation to take the place of the Crown Film Unit which the Government have executed? What is suggested to me, and what I am advised would be possible, is that a certain amount of money should be specially allocated to a documentary film unit which would work along similar lines to those followed by the Crown Film Unit. And I am further advised that those very able men who have made a great success of the National Film Finance Corporation are favourable to this idea. But I think it needs some stimulus, so to speak, from the Government. I am therefore asking 1352 whether it would be possible for this matter to be looked into. The new nucleus of another attempt to carry on the Crown Film Unit must, of course, be a commercial company. It could have no more subsidy from the Treasury, but I think it is entitled to look for help from the Film Finance Corporation. The noble Viscount will be aware that there is very strong feeling in the country about the passing of the Crown Film Unit, and that has been reflected in both Houses of Parliament during the various debates that have taken place on the Finance Bill and the economic situation.
The other matter to which I should like to refer is this. There is still a good deal of unemployment among technicians in the film industry. I am told that they are averaging now only about fifteen weeks' work a year, and that only half the existing studio space in this country is at present occupied. Therefore, while I support what has been said by the noble Viscount and by my noble friend Lord Pakenham about the advantages we have reaped in the production of British films through the financial help of the Corporation, I must say that it has not been quite so successful as some of us had hoped. I am told that one reason for this is that there has been a tendency recently to change policy and to concentrate more of the assistance to the two big groups, the Rank group and the Associated British group, and that the independent producers, whom everyone wants to help (in all debates everyone who has taken part has said that the independent producers should be given as much help as possible), have rather been left out. This is a recent change of policy—that, at any rate, is what I am informed—and there may be a good explanation for it. It seems to me to be rather a pity if the undoubted talent among the independent producers is being neglected in this way. I should be grateful if that matter also could be gone into.
Generally speaking, I support what has been said about the good work that has been done, and I hope that it will be possible for this £2,000,000 to be raised from private sources. If this £2,000,000 is raised and repaid at a fair rate of interest, it will be an encouragement to other outside independent finance to return to the film industry—which, I think, is a great argument for it. If it cannot 1353 be raised, owing to conditions in the finance market, then I understand that the Government will have to help. I very much hope, with the sponsors of the measure, that the £2,000,000 will be raised.

§ VISCOUNT SWINTON
My Lords, with the leave of the House, perhaps I may be allowed to answer the questions which have just been raised, and, at the same time, express the gratitude of Her Majesty's Government for the way in which the Bill has been received. I thank the noble Lord, Lord Strabolgi, for what he has said about me. We have been fighting in politics for over thirty years, and the cinematograph industry is probably about the only subject on which we have ever agreed. He asked whether the Corporation could out of this £2,000,000 assist the Crown Film Unit or re-establish a like unit with the same personnel. That would not be possible under the terms of reference of the National Film Finance Corporation, which are to give financial assistance for the commercial production of films. They must be films made by companies which are producing films on a commercially successful basis. Whatever can be said in favour of the Crown Film Unit—and it certainly produced some admirable documentary films—no one can contend that it was on a commercially successful basis. But—and I am authorised to say this—if members of the Crown Film Unit should get together and form a unit for the commercial production of films, then the Corporation would be prepared to consider any worthwhile proposition which they may make to them. The Corporation have already, I understand, let this be known within the film industry.
The other point which the noble Lord, Lord Strabolgi, raised was whether the Corporation were really confining their finances to the two great groups of producers and distributors which he mentioned. He expressed an anxiety, which was indeed expressed in this House when the original Bill was going through, that the Corporation should, if they had a reasonable proposition put before them, give a chance to the independent producers. I am glad to say that that certainly is being done. Figures which I have asked for, and which have been given me, are these. During the twelve 1354 months ended March 31, 1952, the Corporation have agreed to advance money for about fifty-five first feature films as well as a certain number of shorts and second feature films. Of this total only eleven were films produced by the two groups to which the noble Lord referred. The remainder included films produced through British Lion—which has a wide clientèle, I understand—and films made by other independent producers. I was really surprised to get those figures because I thought that probably far more had been done through the big groups, who naturally have large resources and, therefore, were a better financial risk.

LORD STRABOLGI
Which period are those figures for?

§ VISCOUNT SWINTON
They are for the period ended March 31, 1952. They are the latest figures—they are for a period ending only a few days ago. As I was saying, I was surprised to see what a large proportion of the films had come from and were being produced outside the two main groups which the noble Lord has mentioned. I think that shows how thoroughly the Corporation have done their work in accordance with the spirit of the Act. I hope that, having said that much, I have satisfactorily answered the two questions put to me, and that the House will now give the Bill its Second Reading.