HC Deb 20 November 1947 vol 444 cc1344-50
Mr. Marquand

With the permission of the House, I agree to make a statement. Early in 1947, a special priority was given to the requirements of programmes which contribute to the expansion of fuel and power resources. This involved the grant of special priority symbols for the whole of the approved steel requirements for those programmes. The programmes in question absorb a large proportion of all steel available. It is now necessary to assure supplies of steel, as far as is possible, for programmes which contribute to exports or (like agriculture) to the saving of imports. To add the whole of these large programmes to the existing priority programmes would create, a position in which the priority element in steel would exceed the non-priority element, with the result that the priority label would tend to become meaningless.

The machinery for the allocation of steel is now under review, with the object of ensuring that deliveries of steel more closely match the allocations. It will thus become possible gradually to reduce bulk priority authorisations without detriment to the carrying out of the programmes concerned. It has been decided to introduce concurrently a strictly limited system of selective priorities, by means of which Departments responsible for the existing priority programmes or for export or import saving programmes will be able to authorise the use of the priority symbol to a very limited extent and in specific cases where essential production might be held up for lack of particular quantities or qualities of steel. I must emphasise that as soon as this scheme is in operation priority in supply of steel will apply only to orders duly authorised on a form which bears the initials P.M.L.

Mr. Eden

I hope the Minister will realise that the statement which he has just made, in so far as it is intelligible, is a very disturbing one, in respect, particularly, of agriculture. The right hon. Gentleman has just said, if I understood him rightly—and he was good enough to furnish me with a copy of his statement—that it is now necessary to ensure supplies of steel to various industries, including agriculture. He went on to say that the machinery for the allocation of steel is now under review, yet, last August, the Lord President of the Council, speaking to the farmers, told them that he would insist upon "a high priority for your requirements from all Departments." How in the world is it possible to relate these two statements?

Mr. Marquand

One of the principles that was in mind in devising this new scheme, which is a scheme for gradually paring down the quantity of priority now allowed to the fuel and power programes and the like, is that we might introduce priority for agriculture and the export programme with a reasonable possibility of these priorities really being enforced. If we were simply to add a whole lot more to the list, if we were to add agriculture, we might get great applause from right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite, but, if we added a large bulk to the existing bulk, we would tend, in fact, to defeat the purpose which we are trying to fulfil. I do assure the right hon. Gentleman—and I admit that this is a difficult matter to explain—that the revised system has been devised very definitely with the object of enabling the export programme and the production of agricultural machinery and similar things to get priorities that will mean something.

Mr. Eden

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that, last August, the Lord President of the Council, a Member of the Cabinet, told the farmers that they would have priority? Now the right hon. Gentleman comes down here and says that he will try to devise means by which agriculture may find priority. In all the stories of this Government's failures to provide the right allocations, this is the worst I have ever heard.

Mr. Marquand

I am sorry that this could not be considered in a more reasonable frame of mind. This is an attempt to devise a priority system that will work, which is a desire that is shared on both sides of the House, and it is really fantastic to suggest that the Government which introduced the Agriculture Bill recently passed through this House, have no real interest in agriculture.

Mr. Eden

I am very sorry, but I must press this further. Does not the right hon. Gentleman recall that the Lord President of the Council said last August that agriculture would have full priority, and that last August is now a long time ago? Does he not realise that now, in November, he is saying that the Government are reviewing these matters to discover how they are to give the priority to agriculture which they promised last August?

Mr. Marquand

I am confident that we have discovered how. May I try to bring this matter back into a reasonable atmosphere? May I acknowledge with gratitude the help which I have received in devising this scheme from the Committee of which I was appointed chairman, and on which the Iron and Steel Federation, the Federation of British Industries and the Trades Union Congress were all represented? May I say that I was advised by them not simply to add priorities to the list, but to work out a scheme whereby the existing priorities might be tapered off and new priorities take their places, and that is precisely what the Government have done.

Mr. Eden

What in the world, then, did the Lord President of the Council mean last August when he told farmers that agriculture would have high priority?

Mr. Marquand

I am repeatedly asked what my right hon. Friend the Lord President of the Council said, but I thought that hon. Members might be interested to know how this scheme is to work. However, I am sure that the Lord President, when he said what he did say, meant what he said.

Mr. Stokes

May I ask the Minister whether his statement means that these selected priorities will take the place of the P.M.L. priorities when granted, and that, until such selective priorities are granted, the P.M.L. priorities will take precedence over everything else?

Mr. Marquand

No, Sir. The new priorities will carry the initials P.M.L., and every P.M.L. priority will be equal in priority with any other priority.

Mr. Edgar Granville

In order to make this perfectly clear, will the right hon. Gentleman make available to hon. Members the exact figures of the allocation of steel to the agricultural industry in August, and the exact allocation contemplated under the new arrangements which have just been announced?

Mr. Marquand

No, Sir. I am afraid the hon. Gentleman is under some misunderstanding. The allocation is a different question; we give priority in order to secure the fulfilment of the allocation. Right hon. Gentlemen opposite who have had wide experience in foreign affairs, do not always appreciate that it has never been the practice to disclose allocations, and I do not propose to disclose them now.

Mr. Medland

Will the Paymaster-General inform the House how much this re-orientation of allocations—for that is what it means—will affect the allocation of steel to the war damaged areas for their rebuilding.

Mr. Marquand

I am not at all concerned this afternoon with allocation. I must simply say that that is another question altogether.

Mr. Baker White

In view of the right hon. Gentleman's statement, will he say what the Minister of Agriculture meant on 4th September when he said that arrangements were being made to increase the supply of steel?

Mr. Marquand

Obviously, the supply of machinery is increasing. Figures have been published, and everybody knows that the output of agricultural machinery is enormously greater than it was.

Mr. Baker White

Is the Minister aware that it is now 20th November?

Mr. Collins

Will my right hon. Friend say when these increased supplies of steel will be made available for agricultural machinery firms, because I received information this morning from a large firm which is having to sack men owing to lack of supplies; and will he also say whether there will be any difference in priority allocations as between different types and as between agricultural machinery, and, say, electrical generating plant?

Mr. Marquand

The granting of priority in respect of any order for agricultural equipment will be the responsibility of my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries. I am trying to describe here the overall system whereby priorities can be made effective. It is for my right hon. Friend to grant the priority for particular orders, and that question should be addressed to him.

Mr. Erroll

Can the Minister say how much the fuel and power priority programme will be delayed by the interposition of the new priorities which he has tried to describe to us?

Mr. Marquand

If the hon. Gentleman will study my answer tomorrow, when he has an opportunity to read it, I honestly believe that he will be satisfied that no one will be further delayed by the introduction of this new system.

Mr. Chetwynd

Will the right hon. Gentleman publish in HANSARD a fist of all the priorities, from top to bottom, setting against each one the different steel users who fall into that category?

Mr. Marquand

The point of a scheme like this is not to have bulk priority. Its whole purpose is that we shall get away from that sort of thing, so that people will know that a priority applies to a particular order.

Mr. Joynson-Hicks

Does the Minister appreciate that his priority system is worked out so that a farmer is unable to take delivery of a commercial steel-framed glasshouse which is ready for delivery because the appropriate department is unable to assure the restoration of the steel to the manufacturer within a year, and does he think that that is priority? Is he also aware that farmers do not consider that they are getting any priority at all?

Mr. Marquand

The proof of the pudding will be in the eating, and I am prepared to say that with all the risk that it entails. Hon. Members really must wait until the scheme comes into force.

Mr. Eden

Does not the Minister realise that the Lord President promised the pudding three months ago?

Major Legge-Bourke

Would the Paymaster-General give an assurance that when he speaks of agriculture he means British agriculture, and that, when steel is allocated to industries manufacturing agricultural implements, the implements eventually made will be allocated to British agriculture and not sent for export?

Mr. Marquand

Some will be sent for export and some will be kept at home.

Sir W. Darling

Following the question of the hon. Member for Stockton-on-Tees (Mr. Chetwynd), would the Minister, for the guidance of the commercial classes, consider setting forth what are the respective standards of the priorities? I have seen all kinds of priorities—top priority, high priority, P.M.L. priority, first priority, deferred priority, and selective priority. Can the right hon. Gentleman say what they mean, and will he publish a definition?

Mr. Marquand

I think that is a noble contribution, surprising though it may seem. I would repeat the last sentence of my last statement, and I must emphasise that, as soon as the scheme is in operation, priority will apply only to orders which are duly authorised, and bear the initials P.M.L.