HL Deb 17 December 1952 vol 179 cc1046-55

2.50 p.m.

LORD MANCROFT

My Lords, in moving the Order which stands in my name, I should like to begin by reminding your Lordships that the Industrial Organisation and Development Act of 1947 authorised the Board of Trade to set up, by order, a development council for any industry, with the object of helping it to increase its efficiency and productivity and to improve the service it renders to the community. Development council orders have been made by the Board of Trade for the cotton, furniture, jewellery and silverware, and clothing industries. The Clothing Industry Development Council Order came into force on January 1, 1950. Under Section 8 of the Act, the Board of Trade are required, within three years of the coming into force of the order, to consult the Council and representative organisations of employers and workers in the industry on the question whether the Council should continue in being. These consultations have now taken place. I am afraid that the result of the consultations was a foregone conclusion. In this particular case, though the experiment has now run for nearly three years, the Council has not been, and has shown no signs of becoming, a central body representative of the industry as a whole and one enjoying its support and good will. For this reason, such work as it has been able to do (and of course it has been able to achieve some valuable work) has been seriously limited. In those circumstances, Her Majesty's Government have reached the conclusion, in the light of consultations with all the interests concerned, that the time has come to bring this experiment to an end, and for the Development Council to give place to a voluntary body which representative bodies of the employers and workers have expressed their willingness to join together in setting up.

The proposed new voluntary body will consist of equal numbers of representatives of both sides of industry, and the arrangements for setting it up are now being worked out by the parties concerned. Its functions will include research into problems affecting production, marketing and distribution, materials, equipment and methods of production, the provision of advice to individual undertakings on methods of increasing efficiency and productivity, the promotion of export trade, the improvement of quality and design, and the training of persons engaged in the industry. As to the arrangements for financing the new body, Her Majesty's Government intend, in accordance with the provisions of the Dissolution Order, to make available funds from the surplus assets of the Development Council, which I understand are expected to be fairly substantial. Further, the Board of Trade are prepared, after the Council has been dissolved, and subject, of course, to the approval of Parliament, to make an order under Section 9 of the Act, if the new joint body so desires it, providing for a levy to be raised from the industry to finance scientific research, the promotion of export trade or the improvement of design.

I want to make this point perfectly clear. The Government's decision to invite Parliament to dissolve the Clothing Industry Development Council does not mean any change in the Government's attitude towards the Act or towards development councils in general. Every case, whether it is a question of the appointment of new councils or of renewing the life of existing ones, must be dealt with on its merits. It is the Government's view that in many industries valuable work can be done by central, statutory organisations, willingly accepted—and I emphasise that word "willingly"—and performing some or all of the functions listed in the First Schedule to the Act. Experience has shown, however, that this cannot be the case if such organisations are forced on unwilling industries. The purpose of this Order is to end an experiment which, quite frankly, has not succeeded. Its approval will leave the way open to the industry to set up voluntarily a central body of a different and less ambitious kind, but one which will have a far better chance of success, because it will start with the co-operation of both sides of the industry. The Government are confident, from the assurance that they have received, that both sides are anxious to pass the sponge over the asperities and misunderstandings of the past and to get together in a practical way to tackle the problem of a great but extremely complex industry in a way that will benefit not only those who gain their livelihood in it but the much wider circle of those who handle and consume its products, both here and in our vital export markets overseas.

The purpose of this draft Order is, therefore, to dissolve the Clothing Industry Development Council. It will be the first Order of its kind to be made under the Act, and it is for that reason that I have trespassed unduly upon your Lordships' time. Such Orders must be laid in draft before Parliament and be approved by Affirmative Resolutions of both Houses of Parliament before they can be made. In accordance with Section 8 (4) of the Act, the draft Order provides for the winding-up and dissolution of the Council, for the revocation of the Clothing Industry Development Council Order, 1949, and for the application of surplus moneys of the Council for certain specified purposes connected with the industry, which are set out in the Schedule to the Order. My Lords, I beg to move.

Moved, That the Clothing Industry Development Council (Dissolution) Order, 1952, reported from the Special Orders Committee on Wednesday last, be approved.—(Lord Mancroft.)

2.58 p.m.

LORD LUCAS OF CHILWORTH

My Lords, may I first of all offer to the noble Lord, Lord Mancroft, the congratulations of noble Lords on this side of the House upon his elevation to the Front Bench. Our best wishes go out to him. He will not find it such a comfortable seat as that which he has enjoyed on the Back Bench, but I hope that we shall not lose the humour which he has practised on various platforms at different times. May I also offer him our commiseration upon his impending disability, and wish him a speedy recovery and a happy return to your Lordships' House?

My Lords, it is unfortunate that upon the occasion of his first speech from the Front Bench the noble Lord has had to uncover this rather discreditable episode in the history of the clothing industry. Perhaps I may be allowed to refresh your Lordships' memories with some of the details. This was the only Development Council which was set up where the late Government could not claim that a majority of employers and employees were in favour, although when I had the task of securing an agreement in your Lordships' house to this Order I was successful in persuading your Lordships that a substantial number were in favour, which was what the Act called for. The reason why a majority could not be claimed was because of the terrible state of the industrial organisation of this industry. It is an industry having in the region of 460,000 workers and about 30,000 or more employers. Seventy-five per cent. of the employers were not even organised in any trade association—and trade associations abound in this industry in Yorkshire. I believe that there are twenty-five different organisations who claim to represent some section of the clothing industry, yet 75 per cent. of the employers are still outside any organisation. I believe, also, that there are only about 5,000 firms employing over 100 people, while 20,000 firms employ fewer than ten. If ever there was in this country an industry which required industrial organisation and education in productivity, at a time like the present, when our great need is to increase our technical efficiency and the productivity of all our industries, to bring down the costs and prices of those industries, surely, without any argument whatsoever, this is such an industry.

What has happened? When my right honourable friend the President of the Board of Trade in the last Government put this Order into force, sixteen to eighteen of these employers' organisations banded themselves into what I might almost call a strike committee, and went on strike. They withheld their support, apart from doing the only thing which they could be forced to do by law—and that was to contribute to the levy. In point of fact, they carried that strike action so far that they took my right honourable friend the President of the Board of Trade to the courts of this country to restrain him from setting up the Council at all. And it is to the credit of two or three of the employers' organisations and the trade unions that they carried on this Development Council for three years, and did excellent work, as the noble Lord, Lord Mancroft, has been fair enough to admit. I do not call that a very creditable performance, and I am surprised that Her Majesty's Government have not had sufficient courage to attempt at least to persuade the clothing industry to carry on with this Council.

It appears to me that at the first available moment, when the three years' probationary period is up, at the pressure of these recalcitrant employers the Government say: "We will now disband this Development Council." If any noble Lord wishes to go right back into the history of this matter, to 1943, when the first grand council of the clothing industry was formed under the chairmanship of the gentleman who is now Sir Russell Vick, Q.C., every member always maintained that there is in this industry a need for a central body to try to co-ordinate all this multiplicity of trade associations. When the noble Lord, Lord Mancroft, says that both sides of the industry will co-operate in trying a voluntary scheme, he is, of course, technically correct. But I think your Lordships should know that the unions representing the organised employees in this industry protested vigorously against the disbanding of this Development Council, and carried their protest to the noble Lord's right honourable friend the President of the Board of Trade. And I think that, in fairness, I could say this. The President of the Board of Trade was quite convinced that it is necessary in this industry to have some central authority to do the work which this Development Council set out to do.

Again, I think it is to the credit of the unions, when they could see that the President of the Board of Trade was going to succumb to the pressure—and "pressure" is the most polite word I can use in this connection—of these sixteen or eighteen associations, when they could see that he was going to give way, they said: "Well, if that is so, we will do our best to co-operate and make a voluntary organisation work." But what was the first proposal of the employers on this voluntary organisation? It was that they should have a two-to-one representation. That showed a wonderful spirit of co-operation! They sought to have a grip of this. What for? I think we should be very foolish if we entertained any great hopes that those who went to the length of destroying this statutory organisation are going to put forth any great effort to make a voluntary organisation work. I understand (if I am wrong in this I hope the noble Lord, Lord Mancroft, will correct me) that the two employers' organisations who supported the Development Council, set up under the Act, have been boycotted, and have not even been invited to become members of the new body. The noble Lord did not say this, but understand (again I say that I understand this: I have no official information) that in order to make room for all this multiplicity of trade associations, large and small, they are to have twenty a side, and the whole voluntary Council is now going to number about forty—a very convenient working number to get anything progressive done!

Now I should like to ask the noble Lord just one or two questions. He has said that there are ample funds. I believe there are. They will be placed in the hands of a liquidator, whose powers are set out quite clearly in the Order. The manner in which the fund can be disbursed is also set out in the Schedule, and corresponds very roughly to the objects of the original Order. The noble Lord has said that when these funds run out—and I can imagine that the life of the voluntary body will he measured by that time—the President of the Board of Trade can, by order, reinstitute the levy if it is desired by the Development Council so to do. As to what chance there is of getting this organisation to work past the date when it runs out of the funds which it has in the bank, my speculation is about as good as that of anyone else. If the noble Lord tells your Lordships that he has any optimistic feeling about the position at this time, and for the next four or five years, when the need will be more than ever vital, and when a great industry like this, employing 450,000 or 460,000 workers, is going to be devoid of any progressive organisation to do what has been proved to be advantageous to the rest of British industry, all I can say is that I am afraid I think differently.

This Development Council had one great achievement to its credit. In my view it did valuable work in educating the smaller firms in the clothing industry—and, as I have proved to your Lordships by figures, they are legion. The larger firms, who employ thousands of workers, are efficient. The most efficient firms in the clothing industry are amongst the most efficient in any industry in this country; but, as with every other industry, the gap between the most efficient and the least efficient is far too wide for the progress of British industry as a whole, and it was here that this organisation proved so useful. What assurance can the noble Lord give us that this productivity plan, which has worked so well, will go on? It has worked so well precisely because of the excellent permanent staff employed by the Council. What assurance can the noble Lord give that the same permanent personnel (I believe I am right in saying that there were about thirty expert technicians employed by this Council) are going to stay? Are they to be dismissed to cut down expenses? If so, will they be paid any compensation?

I am not going to oppose this Order. I hope that this voluntary body will be successful. But if it is, it will be one of the few that are. In my experience, organisations of this type fail through one fundamental weakness. They rest on the efforts of a few, which benefit the many; and this state of affairs goes on until the few get so tired of carrying the whole weight that they have to give up, either through exhaustion of their patience or through exhaustion of their funds. The next time the noble Lord, Lord Mancroft, has something to put before your Lordships I hope that it will be a little more pleasant than this. I wish this Council the best of good fortune and, for what it is worth, may I assure the noble Lord that organised labour in the clothing industry will do their best and spare no effort to make it a success. I can only hope that the employers' side of this industry will show a far better spirit than they have shown in the past, a spirit that will match the enthusiasm and helpfulness of the trade unions.

3.13 p.m.

LORD HAWKE

My Lords, I should like to ask one or two questions of the noble Lord who has just sat down. He says that the clothing industry, in its larger units, is one of the most progressive and efficient in this country. I think that is true. A study of the Army and Navy Stores catalogue of 1890, as compared with that of 1939, will show that in the course of these fifty years the clothing industry has made the most amazing progress towards bringing cheap clothing to the people of this country. That is visible in their dress as we see it in the streets. If the efficiency of the larger units in an industry in which there is the most intense competition is so good, how is it that the others run a business at all? I believe that the noble Lord is raising a complete myth when he suggests that other firms are inefficient. The fact is that they have to be in the van of progress in their methods in order to keep in business at all. They are clearly doing that. How Her Majesty's Government could support the existence of a Council which was imposed upon an unwilling industry I do not know, because the whole essence of a Council of this sort is that it must be worked with the good will and the co-operation of everybody in the industry. It is always a fruitless task to bring horses to the water when they do not want to drink. The only thing I can hope is that, now that the scheme is on a voluntary basis, the employers will gradually see that there may be some good to be got out of it, and that those, at present, unwilling spirits may gradually come in, because that is the only way by which ultimately a development council can be of the slightest use to an accept one.

3.15 p.m.

LORD MANCROFT

My Lords, may I begin by thanking the noble Lord, Lord Lucas of Chilworth, for the personal remarks he made about myself? They are greatly appreciated. I am sorry he takes such a pessimistic and gloomy view of the prospects of this Council. He dwelt at some length on the failure in the past. I think I admitted freely that there had been almost a complete failure. But it seems more profitable, on the whole, if we can forget the failure of the past and try to profit by such mistakes as have been made to make certain that this voluntary Council does not make the same mistakes as were made by the old compulsory Council. I could not help being interested in the remarks of the noble Lord concerning the work of voluntary councils, because, as he may know, I have been for four years chairman of one of these voluntary councils. While obviously it would be improper for me to make any remarks about that, I can say that I have a great deal more optimism than he has about the chances of this Council working. Perhaps, in a year's time we shall be able to give him more accurate answers to the questions he asked to-day. As to the boycott, I know nothing of that. I assure the noble Lord that the composition of the Council is not yet final, and I am certain that the best possible team will be selected.

The noble Lord asked whether we should derive profit from the undoubted good work that has already been done by the Development Council. The answer to that is, Yes. Everything useful that has been done—for instance there comes to my mind at once the investigation into the problem of sizing—will be taken over. All the good experience that has been learned will be incorporated, so far as possible, in the new voluntary body. The noble Lord also asked me what would happen to the staff of the present Council. The powers of the liquidator, as your lordships can see from the draft Order, are very wide, and I can assure the noble Lord that in this respect, as in all others, the liquidator will adopt the attitude of the reasonable employer. More cannot be said than that. I welcome the assurance given by the noble Lord that organised labour will do their best to make this new body a success. I am sure the employers will also do the same. I endorse the noble Lord's remarks about the need for some central body, particularly in such a highly complex industry as this, which the noble Lord described to your Lordships in some detail. I think it is preferable that such a body should be launched into the clothing world with the optimistic hope that it will succeed rather than with the pessimistic fear that previous mistakes will be repeated. I am certain that they will not be.

On Question, Motion agreed to.