§ Mr. MOSLEYasked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to the statement of Sir William Acworth that the Regulation of the Board preventing the cross-examination of witnesses by counsel before the Committees of Inquiry under Part II of the Safeguarding of Industries Act is a great disadvantage to those inquiries; and whether, having regard to the difficulty of eliciting facts in the absence of cross-examination, he will consider the advisability of rescinding the Regulation?
876W
§ Mr. GALBRAITHasked the President of the Board of Trade if his attention has been called to the statement made by Sir Arthur Colfax, K.C., at the proceedings under Part II of the Safeguarding of Industries Act, to reconsider the imposing of a duty of 33⅓ per cent. on imported glass-ware, that he knew of no procedure less likely to obtain the true facts appertaining to the proposal before the Committee than the procedure under which they were working; and, if so, is the President now prepared to consider the revising of the rules so as to enable the true facts to be obtained?
§ Mr. BALDWINThe reply to the first part of each question is in the affirmative; and, as to the rest, I would refer to the answer which I gave on Monday last to the hon. Member for North Lambeth (Mr. Briant).
Major BARNESasked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to the fact that the practice of giving evidence in camera before Committees sitting under Part II of the Safeguarding of Industries Act renders it impossible for the different parties to ascertain what case they have to meet and, in consequence, to furnish the Committees with material evidence; and whether he will give instructions that the evidence shall be made public save in special and exceptional circumstances?
§ Mr. BALDWINI understand that evidence given in camera has normally been confined to such matters as the costings of individual firms or similar confidential figures, and I see, no reason to doubt that the Committees have fully in mind the considerations to which the hon. and gallant Member alludes. The decision whether any particular evidence is of a confidential character rests, in accordance with the proviso to Sub-section (3) of Section 7 of the Act, with the Committee, and, in view of the terms of that Subsection, I see no reason to give any further directions to the Committees.
Captain BENNasked the President of the Board of Trade whether witnesses representing the ordinary consumer would be allowed to give evidence before the Board of Trade Committee under Part II of the Safeguarding of Industries Act as to the effect of these duties imposed on prices?
§ Mr. BALDWINBroadly speaking the terms of reference to Committees are 877W determined by Section 2 of the Act and accordingly they cover the following questions:
As the Statutory Rules of Procedure give full discretion to Committees with regard to receiving evidence, it is for the Committee to determine in any particular case whether evidence from an ordinary consumer regarding the effect of duties on prices would or would not be relevant to the matters covered by the terms of reference.
- (a) whether the conditions specified in Section 2, Sub-section (1) of the Act are fulfilled;
- (b) the effect which the imposition of a duty would exert on employment in any other industry being an industry using goods of the class or description concerned as material; and
- (c) whether production in the industry manufacturing similar goods in the United Kingdom is being carried on with reasonable efficiency and economy.