HC Deb 26 March 1953 vol 513 cc894-9

Amendment made: In page 12, line 17, at end, add:

6.45 p.m.

Mr. Nugent

I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read the Third time."

In asking the House to give the Bill a Third Reading, I should like to record my thanks for the help which I have been given by my hon. Friends and by right hon. and hon. Members opposite. The Bill has had a harmonious course. We had a valuable discussion on the Committee stage, and several constructive Amendments have been made. The broad purpose of the Bill is to help the rebuilding of our inshore and near- and middle-water fleets, on the one hand, and to enable those sections of our fleets which are not so well placed as others to keep going in the present rather difficult circumstances.

The background to the difficulties of this perplexed industry is, no doubt, the problem of over-fishing; and we have had to have a very careful regard to seeing that in the measures we were taking in giving grants for rebuilding vessels and in giving a subsidy to assist men to continue fishing, we have not exacerbated the basic trouble of the industry.

In the discussions which we had at length in Committee, we gave great care to finding the right balance in the rate of grants that we have now decided to give. I believe that we have found the right balance, but we have undertaken that we will carefully watch the progress of rebuilding. If we find that it goes ahead at a faster rate than we consider is justified, we shall certainly be prepared to reduce the rate of grant if we think it right to do so, or, alternatively, if we think it is the proper course, to introduce a "scrap and build "policy, as was suggested by the right hon. Member for Grimsby (Mr. Younger). I believe, however, that we have found the right balance.

It is of particular value that we should have managed to reach general agreement on all sides of the House as to what was the right balance, so that this Measure can go forward from here as one which has the full support of the whole House, and which can go to the industry as a mark of our assistance to help the industry to meet its difficulties and to get in due time on to a sounder basis

The industry will know that behind the Bill is the united voice of Parliament saying, "We think this is the right Measure for you. Now, we look to you, the industry, to make the best use of this and to do your part to reorganise the industry and, where it is inefficient, to make it efficient; to strive in collaboration with the White Fish Authority and the Herring Industry Board to try to bring the standard of the not so good up to the standard of the best." If they will go to it with those sentiments, the Bill can do a great deal to help this perplexed industry.

6.48 p.m.

Mr. McNeil

There has been so much restraint and I am so anxious to assist those who have restrained that I hope I shall not be thought discourteous if I reply very shortly. There is nothing the Minister has said with which I disagree. It is a better Bill than when we first discussed it, because not only upon our advice, but upon pressure from all sides, it differs in two respects.

First, the industry are to have larger grants, and second, Parliamentary control over public moneys is more clearly established. That is an improvement from the point of view both of the industry and, I believe, of the public. As the Parliamentary Secretary has said, however, there can be no grounds for complacency on either of the two main sectors of the industry.

Since we discussed the Bill in Committee, the facilities for conservation of these fish supplies have moved a stage further, but if the Bill is used in any way to further the rape of the northern seas this would be a bad Measure. If the industry and the two authorities—the White Fish Authority and the Herring Industry Board—do not use this opportunity to improve their service to the consumer, they will be misusing public moneys and a great opportunity. Everyone wants to see greater imagination, greater energy and greater confidence exerted by these two authorities. With that background, on behalf of my hon. and right hon. Friends, I welcome the Bill and wish it well.

6.50 p.m.

Mr. Boothby

This is a good Bill, and I am glad that it has been welcomed by the right hon. Member for Greenock (Mr. McNeil). I am sure that it will go to another place with the goodwill of hon. Members on both sides of this House.

If I may defend myself for a moment from the right hon. Member for Belper (Mr. G. Brown), I wish to say that I have looked at the OFFICIAL REPORT of the Committee stage, and find that I said that there was a certain weight of argument behind the right hon. Member for Greenock; and I went on to say: In effect, we are divesting ourselves of the right to intervene in the conduct of a scheme unless we go as Members of Parliament to the statutory authority, which I think is undesirable."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, Standing Committee A, 10th February, 1953; c. 14.] The right hon. Member subsequently described my speech as eminently reasonable; and I therefore think I have vindicated myself from an unwarranted attack.

There are two points arising out of this Bill, affecting the herring industry in particular, which I should like the Government very seriously to consider. The first is the desirability of seeing the younger men getting the grants and loans to the maximum possible extent. That is very important. The second is the desirability of expanding our markets for cured herring; and on this point I want to quote a sentence from a letter I have received from one of our leading curers: The facts are clear, we have lost French and Belgian markets, we are facing very severe competition in the Mediterranean markets, and curing is only a fraction of its prewar importance. The Dutch on the other hand are producing and selling a larger quantity of cured herrings today than they did in 1939. This is a disquieting statement. The herring industry will not survive on meal and oil alone; we must retain our export markets, and therefore have a more competitive and more flexible price structure for cured herrings than we have got at present. Those are the only two points I wish to make; and I have only to add that I am sure that the Bill will be warmly welcomed by the fishing industry as a whole.

6.54 p.m.

Mr. Edward Evans (Lowestoft)

I welcome the Bill, but I want to strike a note of warning. Whatever we do in order to secure the building of boats we are not getting to the crux of the rehabilitation of the industry unless we do a great deal more to get more men, par- ticularly young men, into the industry. I was very concerned to hear the Parliamentary Secretary quote these figures during the Committee stage: The number of vessels in the near and middle waters fishing in 193'8 was 1,087; it had dropped to 857 in 1949; and at the end of 1952 it had dropped to 762."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, Standing Committee A, 10th February, 1953; c. 48.] These are ominous figures and spell disaster unless we can encourage the industry to take itself in hand and use these grants to help build new and better boats.

There is a more disquieting matter. I have been in communication with a friend in my constituency who is on a youth employment committee. During the last year they interviewed 130 boys and their parents about careers. Of those 130 boys only two started a course of training in the navigation school, and one of those has already withdrawn. Unless we can encourage the youth of this country to go into this great industry, on which we depend, not only for our economy but in large measure for safety in times of danger, it cannot survive. I hope the Government will pay particular attention to this matter. We might build the boats, but, unless we are able to man them, the industry cannot survive.

6.56 p.m.

Mr. Desmond Donnelly (Pembroke)

I wish to make two points, but, before doing so, perhaps I might apologise on behalf of my right hon. Friend the Member for Belper (Mr. G. Brown) for his apparent discourtesy in being absent when the hon. Member for East Aberdeenshire (Mr. Boothby) was speaking. He had to attend a meeting and he asked me to apologise to the hon. Member. I am sure that we do not want to turn this into a "Boothby blow-up."

I support very strongly the argument of my hon. Friend the Member for Lowestoft (Mr. Edward Evans) about the fact that this Bill will not solve the real inherent problems facing the fishing industry today. I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will keep this closely in mind when the Bill comes to this House again in a short time and have concrete proposals to deal with the malaise facing the industry.

I also ask the hon. Gentleman to bear in mind the importance of the speedy administration of grants under this Bill. The White Fish Authority are given powers to make grants. I should like him to let the Authority know that we are particularly anxious that there should be speedy answers, sympathetic consideration and no unnecessary delays or bureaucracy of any kind. I should like him to convey to them that we should like speedier administration of all their other work under various enactments.

I join in the general chorus of approval and good will, not forgetting—as I do not think we should leave the Third Reading without going on record on this—our profound gratitude to the hon. Member for East Aberdeenshire for the great enlightenment he brought to the Bill in Committee and on Report stage, and the great entertainment as well.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill, accordingly read the Third time, and passed.