Minutes of evidence taken before the Departmental Committee on Cinematograph Films (1936)

120 COMMITTEE ON CINEMATOGRAPH FILMS 30 June, 1936.] Mr. S. Rowson. [Continued. an increase of quota on the basis of an increase of £2 million to £3 million. 1222. Well, we cannot foresee that at this stage? — I know we cannot. 1223. And if there is to he an Act with a schedule such as you suggest ? — I am afraid we could not draft it. 1224. iWe have got to give up the idea? — I think so. 1225. It is desirable, but you do not quite see how you could do it. Thank you very much. 1226. (Sir Arnold Wilson) : My Lord Chairman, I feel sure I voice the opinion of the whole Committee, both those present and those absent, when I say we are greatly indebted to Mr. Rowson both for this evidence and for the paper which he prepared for the Royal Statistical Society which gives more information to us than any publication that I know, whether official or unofficial. — Thank you, Sir. 1227. Our Chairman has taken you through your evidence with such lucidity that I do not propose to offer further questions at any length to you. The memorandum is to a great extent self-explanatory, and many of the questions that you have posed to us you have answered yourself in the process. — I thought that would be more helpful in doing it in that way. 1228. Yes, indeed it is. Assuming for the sake of argument, simply for the sake of argument, that every proposal made by you in paragraph 28 were to be adopted forthwith as the declared policy of Government, do you think it would be possible in practice for the Board of Trade to act as the arbiter and the interpreter of an Act of Parliamnet giving effect to your ideas. Would it not be necessary to establish a cinema industry control board in some form to take over responsibility both on behalf of the Government and of the industry at large, to give effect to the policy which you have outlined which is, to a great extent, only an extension of the policy laid down by the Act of 1927? — I certainly have never given any thought to the suggestion which you have just made, Sir Arnold. I think it is a very interesting suggestion, and I realise that while on the one hand the Board of Trade has proved exceedingly efficient in administering an Act relating to a very complicated business, such a board as you are suggesting might be of very great added value. 1229. You appreciate that the general policy of Government for many years past has been to endeavour to co-operate with industry by means of boards rather than to exercise executive authority when large commercial interests are involved? — I do appreciate that, Sir. 1230. We have parallels, for example, in the Sugar Reorganisation Commission, the Milk Marketing Board, the Import Duties Advisory Board, the Electricity Commissioners, each with a very different ad hoc constitution, devised to enable Government to rely upon the deliberate consideration of a body of men who are not impartial in the sense that they are disinterested, but who are genuinely anxious to give effect to the declared policy of Government and to enlist the active co-operation of all those commercially interested in their particular branch of industry? — I think that is so, Sir, and, if I may say so, that was one of the objects which were aimed at in America by the N.R.A. An actual code, among others, was already drawn up for the film industry, among others, which, of course, had to be cancelled when the N.R.A. went by the board, but the code was already in existence and there would have been a code authority, of course, which I understand was the kind of thing you had in mind. 1231. At a later date, my Lord, I shall ask you to provide us with copies, if possible, of the N.R.A. code? — The reference, Mr. Patterson, is Motion Picture Industry Study Work Materials No. 34. 1232. I am anxious to hear a little more from you on the subject of the shortage of capital. It has been suggested to us last week bhat there is a plethora at the moment of short money coming into the industry and that industrial assurance companies and others have freely and not always wisely invested money in the industry, thus encouraging the production of films to a point beyond that at which the industry really is competent to envisage? — I believe that that is a statement that I am prepared to endorse. I think there has been a very considerable amount of City money coming in, short date money which has become a very heavy burden on the pictures — I use the word instead of companies — the pictures for which that money has been provided. I think if the Committee were to call for a return from the Board of Trade Companies Department of the amount of short date loans which have had to be registered at Somerset House because they have been charged on particular properties during the last year or two, I believe the result would be rather surprising in the film business. It might be a laborious piece of research, but it might be extremely instructive on this point. 1233. Would that cover the growing practice of procuring an insurance policy at Lloyds on an overdraft with a bank? — I imagine so, yes, certainly, because the system as I understand it is this : that an Underwriter at Lloyds undertakes to provide an insurance policy to guarantee an overdraft, and the bank provides that overdraft subject to that guarantee with a charge either by the bank or by the original guarantors on a specific asset, the picture in question, or on the companies which are responsible for making that picture. 1234. I am familiar with one-ship companies, but have we got one-picture companies? — Oh, yes. I do know of companies that have made one picture and have gone out of existence. 1235. And those are registered at Somerset House? — As soon as they are charged they must be registered. 1236. An enquiry covering two years would suffice ? — An enquiry covering two years I think would show a very interesting piece of information. I have found it too heavy to do myself, I was wanting to do it but it was much too heavy a task for myself to undertake. 1237. (Chairman) : Have Somerset House got all this dissected out? — No. You would have to make a list of all the production companies that are known and then analyse the charges which have been registered and satisfied in each year. 1238. (Sir Arnold Wilson): If we had a British Cinema Industry Control Board such as I have suggested it would be possible for them whether by statutory Rules or Order or otherwise to regulate the amount of capital that came into the industry and thus \o ensure that so far as they were concerned there was at least not a plethora, although they could not guarantee a sufficiency? — Sir Arnold, this is a new thought, as they say in America, and I am not prepared to answer it right away. I should like to have an opportunity of thinking of the implications and the functions of such a Control Board before I can see whether it could have any influence on capital. The administration I understand, but whether it could influence capital except in so far as it produced a better atmosphere in the film business, I do not know. 1239. I will turn to another point. You referred to the relative inefficiency of the cinema industry in regard to its administration. As I understand it what is required to make any productive industry efficient is a planned schedule as accurate as that which is prepared by a builder when a large building is going up. when the actual quantities and personnel for every stage is worked out to within a Few hours day by day for everyone of the thirty or forty sub-contractors and sometimes more employed on a, building. They have their actual .laic-, hours and positions allotted to them in advance, and the arrivals of material are also scheduled so carefully that barring accidents there is no possibility oi congestion of ''ricks or of mortar, of steel or of ancillary materials coming in. Now. that is only possible in