§ 15. Mr. Palmerasked the President of the Board of Trade if, in view of our need for dollars, he will make a further statement on the rejection by the United States authorities of the tender by the English Electric Company for generators and transformers at the Chief Joseph Hydro-Electric Scheme, Washington, in spite of this tender being $932,000 below the nearest United States price quoted.
§ Mr. MackesonI would refer the hon. Member to my right hon. Friend's statement on this matter on 20th April during 1938 the debate on the Budget proposals. Since then the United States Secretary of the Army has stated that it has now been decided to call for new bids on this contract. This decision was also referred to by President Eisenhower at his Press conference on Thursday last. I gather from these statements that the American authorities felt that they could not assess the comparative quality of the British and the American plant. I can only say that in my view every effort should be made in such a case to obtain the necessary information for this purpose from the firms concerned rather than to invite fresh bids and thus, in effect, give another chance to the firms whose prices were too high.
§ Mr. PalmerWill the hon. Gentleman say if it has been made plain to the American authorities that not only is this business bad in relation to the Chief Joseph contract, but that this is bound to have a most discouraging effect generally on British manufacturers who are anxious to compete in the American market in the spirit of trade and not aid?
§ Mr. MackesonThe decision has now been taken by the United States Administration and I think that we should await developments. I should be very sorry to say anything that would exacerbate feelings in this matter.
§ Mr. Ellis SmithThe statement made by the Minister seems good so far as it goes, and the House was satisfied with the statement of the President of the Board of Trade last week, but can he say whether since then an assurance has been given to Her Majesty's Government that this policy of discrimination by the Americans will cease against British firms which are quoting?
§ Mr. MackesonMy right hon. Friend made a pretty forthright statement on this subject and I should not like to add anything to what I have said.
§ 16. Mr. Albuasked the President of the Board of Trade what reply he has received to the representations made by Her Majesty's Government to the United States authorities on the rejection of the tender of the English Electric Company for equipment for the Chief Joseph Dam project.
§ Mr. MackesonThe United States Government have informed us of their decision and they will no doubt be letting us have an explanation of the reasons for which they decided to issue new invitations to bid on this contract.
§ Mr. AlbuIs the hon. Gentleman aware that in the United States technical, health and safety regulations are frequently used to prevent the passage of goods across the frontiers from one State to another? Does not Her Majesty's Government now think that the time has come for us to use further discriminatory measures in order to make sure that we can render the British economy independent as far as possible of dollars?
§ Mr. MackesonOf course it is the policy of Her Majesty's Government that this country should be independent. I can only say that at the moment we have received notification of the decision but not of the reasons.
§ Mr. StokesDoes the hon. Gentleman's first answer mean that the United States have given no official reason for the rejection of the tender, and if they have given official reasons may we know what they are?
§ Mr. MackesonNo, Sir. Up to now we have only had the decision officially. In answer to the last question, I was, of course, referring to Press statements and not to official statements.
§ Mr. Anthony GreenwoodDoes that reply mean that Her Majesty's Government have received no assurance whatsoever from the United States on this matter?
§ Mr. MackesonWe have simply been told that it has been decided to invite new tenders.
§ Mr. GaitskellHas any assurance been sought from the United States Government, in the event of the E.E.C. winning the contract on the next round, that there will be no interference from the United States Government in the matter?
§ Mr. MackesonThe answer is, No, Sir. We have not at present got so far. We have had the decision but we have not had the official reason for it. That is at present the extent of the reply we have had from the American Administration.
§ Mr. GaitskellWill the Minister reconsider the matter and invite the United States Government to give the assurances to which I have referred?
§ Mr. MackesonI will certainly consider that.
§ Mr. FernyhoughIn view of the attitude of the American Government to this particular contract, and bearing in mind their attitude in regard to Comet No. 3, is the hon. Gentleman prepared to tell the Americans that unless they make it possible for us to trade on a fair basis we shall have to contract out not only of the Battle Act and in other directions but we shall refuse to acknowledge the right of the Americans to interfere with British shipping trading in any country they please?
§ Mr. MackesonI do not think that supplementary question arises out of the original answer.
§ Mr. PalmerIn view of the unsatisfactory nature of the Minister's reply, I beg to give notice that I propose to raise this matter on the Adjournment.