§ Mrs. Kellett Bowmanasked the Secretary of State for Industry if he has received the British Textile Confederation's critique of the multi-fibre arrangement; and if he will make a statement on the report in the light of that critique.
57W
§ Mr. David Mitchell[pursuant to his reply, 13 December 1979]: I assume that the report to which my hon. Friend refers is the Consumers Association report, "The Price of Protection", about the effect of import controls under the MFA on the cost of clothing. The report has now become the subject of a critique by the British Textile Confederation. I have noted the points made in the report and in the critique.
The interest of the Consumers Association in this area is welcome. However, our attitude to the MFA must be governed by the balance of advantages and disadvantages to producers and consumers.
The market survey conducted by the Consumers Association is unfortunately incomplete and much of the report is opinion derived from a comparatively small group of importers, not necessarily a representative sample. I am not at present aware that any manufacturer or trade union was approached. It seems to contain very little analysis of supply, demand, prices or profit margins.
Unfortunately a number of statements about the MFA are inaccurate. Substantial access to the Community market was conceded for all low-cost suppliers and there was no overall cutback in access. Annual growth in access is written into the Community's MFA and associated agreements and imports have continued to increase.
It is difficult to identify the cause of price rises. However, during the course of the present MFA, clothing prices have risen less rapidly than the retail price index. United Kingdom manufacturers also repudiate the view that the MFA has little effect on production levels and the maintenance of employment. In summary, the report is a useful contribution to the debate although not a definitive or authoritative one.