§ 11.8 a.m.
§ Viscount AMORYMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will reply at the earliest possible date to the representations of the British Textile Confederation about the effect on production and employment in the traditional textile industries in this country of the greatly increased volume of imported cheap fabrics and garments.
§ Lord LOVELL-DAVISYes, my Lords. This matter is being urgently considered by the Government and they hope to reach conclusions very soon.
§ Viscount AMORYMy Lords, while recognising fully the difficulties involved in any import restrictions, are the noble Lord and his colleagues aware that there are at present over 150,000 people on short time out of a total workforce of, I think, approximately 830,000? Furthermore, there is a considerable number of skilled personnel leaving the industry 1401 every week, and is the noble Lord aware that if that situation continues it is bound, one fears, to inflict permanent damage on the productive potential of the industry?
§ Lord LOVELL-DAVISMy Lords, we are indeed aware of this and, as I have said, the matter is under active consideration. As noble Lords will know, and as has been pointed out by the noble Viscount, Lord Amory, there are difficulties in using import restrictions, which are a blunt instrument, in these cases, and the fact remains that the textile industry is very heavily protected at this moment.
§ Viscount AMORYMy Lords, I believe there is an adjective which goes beyond "active", if I remember rightly—" urgent "or" very urgent ". Would the noble Lord he prepared to substitute the adjective which means a few months quicker than "active "?
§ Viscount ECCLESMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord two questions? First, has there been any application for a case under the anti-dumping legislation; and, secondly, from which countries does the main problem of cheap imports come, which so distresses our own industry?
§ Lord LOVELL-DAVISMy Lords, we must distinguish between dumping and low cost selling. Exporting a product at prices below those obtained for comparable sales on the exporters' home market is dumping. The Department of Trade has received only one anti-dumping application in recent months; that was in connection with acrylic yarn from the Far East. The Department, or the EEC, need only reasonable evidence—not proof—of dumping in order to act. So far as the figures are concerned, rather than taking up a lot of your Lordships' time by quoting them, perhaps I might write to the noble Viscount. But I can tell him that restrictions are being applied right across the world on the markets from which we are receiving these imports.
§ Viscount ECCLESMy Lords, can the noble Lord say whether the bulk of the imports are coming from outside Europe?
§ Lord LOVELL-DAVISYes, my Lords. I think it is true to say that they are coming from outside Europe.
§ Lord BARNBYMy Lords, will the Minister convey to his right honourable friend the dismay with which the dilatoriness in coming to a decision is regarded in the textile industries, which, as the authoritative questioner has explained, extends to some 830,000 workers of which, as he said, 150,000 are either unemployed or under-employed? Does the noble Lord remember that these representations have received the endorsement of all the leading textile trade organisations and the trade union organisations—and I emphasise that fact—in addition to being strongly pressed in both Houses of Parliament, and is lie aware that this delay is dangerous and is causing great concern?
§ Lord LOVELL-DAVISYes, my Lords. I recognise there is a delay. These are very complex and difficult matters. In considering the BTC proposals a large number of factors have to be taken into account. Import restriction is a blunt instrument. I would remind your Lordships that United Kingdom textile and clothing exports amounted to over £1,000 million in 1974. The effects of retaliation, if they were to occur as they have in the case of Turkey, could be very harmful to us. We must take these matters into consideration.
§ Lord BARNBYMy Lords, as the noble Lord has raised the question of the possibility of retaliation, will he remember that under Article XII of the GATT we should not be in a position likely to attract retaliatory action? Could he make some further comment on the apparent tardiness in this case, as against the alacrity with which Government action was taken in the steel industry, where modernisation involving the introduction of new prototypes must, and properly should, if it is effective, produce a reduction in the work force?
§ Lord LOVELL-DAVISMy Lords, in answer to the first point of the noble Lord, Lord Barnby, on the subject of Article XII of the GATT, it is true that import restrictions may be imposed if severe balance of payments difficulties exist; but one must not lose sight of the fact that these restrictions would have to he applied right across the board. They cannot apply just to textiles. One can imagine what the results would be on all our trading. On the other matter raised 1403 by the noble Lord, I cannot agree that the Government have done little. The Government have done a great deal to encourage investment in the industry. As I have said, the basic effect is that no other private sector industry has such a history of high protection or of protection which is about to be extended.
§ Lord LEE of NEWTONMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that in the areas of Lancashire where we find the textile industry there are also many other industries which are now in great trouble? A number of these areas are not development areas and therefore they become depressed. It would help a great deal if we could have a speedy decision on this important matter.
§ Lord LOVELL-DAVISMy Lords, we are pressing forward with this matter as speedily as we can. As I said in my first Answer, it is being urgently considered by the Government.