Oral Answers to Questions — India. – in the House of Commons at on 5 June 1939.
Mr. Adamson:
asked the Minister of Agriculture the reasons for the appoint- ment on the White Fish Industry Joint Council of more than 20 employers' representatives in the fishing industry whilst only two members have been appointed on behalf of the interests of skippers and mates, enginemen and firemen, crews of trawlers, fish-handers and packers, processing and transport sections who are employed in the fishing industry; and, as this is not in accordance with the specific pledges made during the passage of the White Fish Industry Measure, whether he will now consider the appointment of representatives of those grades of workers on the joint council?
The principal functions of the White Fish Commission relate to the better regulation of the various sections of the white fish industry and fish trade. It was, therefore, inevitable that the White Fish Industry Joint Council, which has to advise and assist the commission in the discharge of its functions, should consist mainly of representatives of the businesses to be regulated. Employés as well as employers should benefit from any improvement "that can be effected in the prosperity of the industry, and I think that the representatives of labour whom we have invited should be in a position to advise on any matters specially affecting the interests of employés.
No undertaking to give representation to each of these classes can in fact be traced, and if the hon. Member would like to give me any information on the point I should be delighted to look into it.
Is the right hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that his predecessor gave me a pledge on this specific point on the Committee stage, a definite assurance that there would be adequate representation for the workpeople concerned, and does he regard two out of 22 as adequate?
I would ask the hon. Member to realise that this is an advisory committee, there is no question of voting power or anything of that kind, and it seems to me that the two gentlemen whom we have asked to serve will be able to represent the views of the workpeople.
Will the right hon. and gallant Gentleman address himself to the point of the subject? Is he aware that a specific assurance was given that there would be adequate representation, and what right has he to withdraw from the pledge which was originally given?
Perhaps I might be given fuller particulars regarding the pledge.
Mr. Adamson:
Is the right hon. and gallant Gentleman not aware that the Government actually put down an Amendment after we had withdrawn our opposition?