HC Deb 28 February 1951 vol 484 cc2091-6
Mr. J. Griffiths

With permission, Sir, I will now make a statement in answer to Questions Nos. 29, 32, 40 and 41. The Gambia poultry and general farming scheme was approved by the Board of the Corporation on 20th May, 1948, and sanction for the initial provision of capital in the sum of £500,000 was given on 21st July, 1948. After preliminary surveys, the Corporation began operations in the following year. Sanctions for the provision of additional capital amounting in all to £310,000 were given during 1949, and in addition, sanction was also given for the temporary loan to the scheme of £100,000 on 29th August, 1950. Up to date advances totalling £825,000 have been issued.

Good progress was made with the erection and stocking of the poultry houses; 38,620 eggs and 51,617 lb. of dressed poultry have been exported to this country. A further consignment of 7,000 lb. of poultry is on the way here, but the export of eggs, which is at present running at the rate of approximately 45,000 a month, has been discontinued and the farm's production is being disposed of locally.

There has been no fowl pest on the Corporation's farm, but during the summer of 1950 there were outbreaks of fowl typhoid, which caused the loss of 30,000 birds. It has since been brought under control by inoculation and the remaining stock of about 50,000 is in good condition. The laying stock took the brunt of the typhoid disease and, therefore, most of the poultry left is breeding stock, not laying stock, which explains the present low rate of egg production.

In December, 1950, the Board found that the situation was serious, and that a change of management was immediately required. The Board also sent a mission to the Gambia to investigate the scheme on the spot. The mission, consisting of Sir Ernest Wood, Joint Operations Controller; Dr. A. B. Fowler, Manager of the Animal Products Division, and Mr. A. M. Telford, Manager of the Agricultural Division, all members of the headquarters staff of the Corporation, left England at the beginning of this year and sent a preliminary report to the Corporation, whereupon the Chairman of the Corporation at once wrote to me, on 15th February, informing me of the position.

I regret to inform the House that, in the light of this preliminary report, it has become clear to the Board that sufficient feedingstuffs for the number of poultry it had been intended to maintain cannot be grown on the land. Since the scheme as originally conceived stands or falls by the local production of feedingstuffs, the Board are of the opinion that they will have to modify the scheme considerably and to incur a loss in their accounts of a substantial proportion of the capital committed to the scheme. The Board will, however, remain liable to repay to His Majesty's Government the full amount of the capital advances made towards the scheme, and the interest due thereon.

The mission is now back in London and its report is being considered in detail by the Board. When that has been done, and the Board have formulated proposals for the future of the scheme, I will make a further statement to the House.

Mr. Hurd

May we have an assurance that no more of the British taxpayers' money will be put into this effort to clear the bush in the Gambia and create a sandy desert until we have had reliable and expert advice that proper use will be made of these resources? Further, can the Minister tell us how the birds that will survive are to be fed for the next few months?

Mr. Griffiths

As I said, this scheme was based upon the possibility of feedingstuffs being grown on the land. This has been found impossible, and I repeat what I said last week about the' matter: that this does create a very serious problem indeed for all colonial development. At the same time, let me say that if we are to solve these problems risks must be undertaken, and sometimes losses incurred.

Mr. Keeling

Are we to understand that the last director of the scheme was dismissed and did not resign, as was previously stated; and can the Minister say if it is true, as was reported in the "Daily Telegraph," that the new director of the scheme has stated, "I hate chickens"?

Mr. Griffiths

I do not know anything about the latter part of that supplementary question, but the responsibility for employing and dismissing staff is entirely for the Board.

Mr. Gammans

Is not it a fact that this scheme was launched, with resultant loss of taxpayers' money, without the slightest experiment being made, either into the possibility of the growing of feedingstuffs or into the keeping of fowls in very large numbers in the tropics?

Mr. Griffiths

This scheme was launched after very full consideration by the Board, on which there sit very eminent and experienced business men.

Mr. Eden

Can the right hon. Gentleman explain why it is that whereas when the scheme was launched the whole thing was admitted to depend on the local growing of feedingstuffs, it has only now been discovered that no such feedingstuffs can be grown? Can he further explain why the shortage is so great, considering that he has only half the number of poultry for which he originally budgeted, the other half having had to be killed already?

Mr. Griffiths

The knowledge which we now have that the ground will not grow the necessary feedingstuffs has been acquired after, the experience of two seasons and, if I may be allowed to say so, from my study of this problem. All we can get from the experts is the best advice they can give, but all of them say that in advice about Africa there are no precedents to guide them.

Mr. Eden

Will the right hon. Gentleman look up the assurances about this ability to grow local feedingstuffs given over and over again in response to Questions put over and over again and doubts expressed by my hon. Friends as to whether it could be done? As the whole scheme was based on it, why is it that only now, after all this time, it is discovered that feedingstuffs will not grow there at all?

Mr. Griffiths

As I have said, the advice given to the Board justified them in going on. All advice on this problem was given with the one consideration in mind that it was the best advice which could be given, but that there was no experience.

Mr. Harold Davies

In view of the fact that so much so-called private businessmen's expert advice seems to be clearly wrong, is it not time that the Government weighed with caution that advice and applied their own policy rather than take that advice?

Mr. Lennox-Boyd

As the right hon. Gentleman has referred to eminent advice, may I ask whether the work of the Medical Research Council was ever considered while this scheme was in its early stages, or better still, before it started: and, second, what possible justification was there for the Minister of State for Colonial Affairs being allowed to say in the House, as recently as last April, that 20 million eggs a year would be coming to the British market?

Mr. Griffiths

All the answers given about projects under the jurisdiction of the C.D.C. are given in the House after consultation with them. I could not, without notice, say what advice was sought at the early stages—in 1948.

Mr. Emrys Hughes

Can my right hon. Friend say who the experienced businessmen were and whether they were trained under private enterprise?

Mr. Griffiths

My hon. Frind can look at the composition of the Board. We have all done our best—including my predecessor and myself—to see that there was the widest possible business experience on the Board.

Sir W. Smithers

Are the Government so obsessed with vanity and drugged with power that, despite all the experience of the last six years in nationalised industries, they are still determined to enact ideologies and slogans, and damn the consequences?

Mr. Griffiths

The Government are determined to do everything in their power to develop the colonial territories, which have been neglected for generations by the party opposite.

Mr. Eden

In view of the seriousness of the situation revealed by the right hon. Gentleman's answer, we shall, of course, seek a convenient opportunity to debate the matter.

Mr. Grimond

Will the scheme now depend on imported feedingstuffs, and, if so, would it not be better to wind it up and bring the feedingstuffs to this country? Second, did I understand the right hon. Gentleman to say that the moneys advanced would be repaid? If so, from what source will they come?

Mr. Griffiths

I will answer the last part of that question first. The Board is running 50 schemes and projects at the moment and it has an obligation, taking them together, and one with another, to make them commercial successes. When the Board was initiated it was accepted, as I hope it is by everyone, that the Board must sometimes take risks which might cause losses. Unless it does take risks, it would be impossible for us to do this job at all. In answer to the first part of the question, the Board is now considering in detail the report of the mission which has now returned. It will formulate new proposals and, when they are ready, I will make a further statement to the House.