HC Deb 05 May 1953 vol 515 cc344-54

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."— [Mr. Kaberry.]

10.22 p.m.

Mr. David Llewellyn (Cardiff, North)

It would be ungenerous of me if I did not begin this evening by expressing my appreciation of my hon. Friend's frequent visits to Cardiff, and I hope he will not think it churlish of me if I voice the hope that his evident interest will lead to manifest action.

The decline in the trade of Cardiff docks continues. Comparing 1952 and 1951 imports fell by 370,000 tons. Exports, happily, increased by 263,000 tons, but the decrease in total trade was 117,000 tons. In terms of shipping arrivals, 287 fewer vessels docked. To bring the results up to date, between 1st January and 22nd March, 1953, compared with the corresponding period in 1952, there was a fall of 42,000 tons, and comparing the period 1st January to 19th April the fall has been 77,000 tons. For some years trade has been well under 50 per cent. of the 1938 level, which was itself a poor year.

Expressing the decline in terms of unemployment, one finds that in June, 1951, of 878 workers on the Cardiff docks' register the average number unemployed per day was 190. Today, out of 786 workers on the register the figure is 208. It has been rightly said that in the port of Cardiff the dockers represent an aristocracy of labour. We certainly have a fine record of industrial peace and restraint that underlines the unhappiness of the present position. I suggest that it is a poor reward for the great war-time achievements, when Cardiff disproved the old-fashioned prejudice that she was ill-fitted to handle general cargo.

I turn to three factors which govern the waste of Cardiff's potential. First is the factor of inadequate roads. The improvement in communications to the Midlands represents a major need, although I think that the Minister is deserving of more help than he sometimes gets in this direction in the absence of a precise list of priorities being presented to him. I hope that the Minister will be able to tell the House what plans he has in mind for the time when the financial situation further improves.

Secondly, there is the factor of the loss of coal exports. I should like to compare the figures for the port of Cardiff for 1938 with those for last year. In 1938, foreign exports were 7,353,000 tons; in 1952 they were 1,406,000 tons. For foreign bunkers the figures were 1,557,000 tons in 1938 and 236,000 tons in 1952. It has always been my hope that once it was decided to embark on nationalisation of the coalfields, nationalisation would succeed and that part of the success would be measured in terms of trucks of coal at Cardiff docks. I am sorry that that hope has not yet been fulfilled. In the meanwhile, I urge my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport to keep in close touch with the Ministry of Fuel and Power to ensure that the National Coal Board allocates a fair share of coal for export to Cardiff docks. I am glad to see that the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Fuel and Power is present.

It is a fact that the decline from Cardiff's pre-war share of total shipments from the South Wales coalfield is 9½ per cent. and that, with eight coal shipping appliances at Cardiff out of commission, the Docks and Inland Waterways Executive are transferring appliances from South Wales to ports on the East Coast. It is no answer to say that the coal is not available. Cardiff's plea is for fair shares of what is available.

This would be melancholy enough but, on top of it all, comes France's recent decision to cut purchases of coal, coke and patent fuel to vanishing point. That is a regrettable decision so soon after the Chancellor's travel concessions. I am sorry to say it, but I believe that this is part of the Schuman Plan. It coincides at least with the growing influx of Belgian coal into France and also heavy French investment in the German coalfields. It would be unwise to assume that this is merely a transitory phase. It will be within the recollection of the House how economic nationalists argued what a bad thing it would be if a supranational authority could close a British coalfield. It may prove more serious to Cardiff and the South Wales ports if the operation of the Schuman Plan dams the flow of Welsh coal to its traditional European markets.

The third factor is that it costs more in rail charges to carry the great bulk of traffic between Cardiff and the rest of the country than it does in the case of other ports. It is no part of my task to apportion blame for this among the Railway Executive, the Docks and Inland Waterways Executive, the late Government or the present Government. The fact remains, and I hope that, in his reply, the Minister will tell the House what the Government plans to do about it.

Lastly, and looking ahead, I want to say a few words about the improvement of the Cardiff docks entrance channel to enable Cardiff docks to cater for the ever-increasing size of tonnage. As my hon. Friend knows, there is sporadic silting, caused by the erosion of the banks and the discharge of coal dust waste and refuse into the non-tidal part of the Taff, and, secondly, erosion of the mud banks of the tidal section of the Taff, consisting mainly of the east and west mud flats. He will also know that Cardiff Port Development Association set up a special committee to look into this.

They recommended that the course of the Taff from the vicinity of Clarence Road Bridge to the confluence with the Cardiff deep water channel entrance should be contained within training walls, and, as an outcome of this, 420 acres now covered by the east and west mud flats would be reclaimed. I believe that the vicinity of Clarence Road Bridge is in the constituency of the hon. Member for Cardiff, South-East (Mr. Callaghan)— all except the water; at any rate a good deal of the mud is in his constituency. I should like to thank the hon. Member for his generous attitude towards my trespassing in his field, if he so regards it, but, as he is aware, it affects us all in Cardiff very deeply.

Before embarking on a scheme of this character, there is obviously need for a special survey, and it has been estimated that the cost of that survey would be between £8,000 and £10,000. Unfortunately, the Hydraulics Research Station at Wallingford cannot undertake this scheme for some years. Therefore, as recommended by Sir Claude Inglis, it has been decided that a preliminary investigation should be made by a private firm of consulting engineers.

There would be at least three very large beneficiaries from a scheme of this kind. First, there would be the Cardiff City Corporation. They would not only benefit from the reclamation of the mud flats but they would also benefit because the city's and the port's welfare is interdependent; and the Cardiff City Corporation have agreed to make a donation of £2,000 towards the cost of this survey. The Docks and Inland Waterways Executive would benefit, of course, through the saving in dredging costs, among other factors, but I am sorry to say that so far their attitude has been non-committal, and they have promised no financial support.

Third, the Government and the nation would benefit on economic and social grounds, and also on strategic grounds. I am sorry to say that I am informed that the Government have expressed either an unwillingness or an inability to help. Had the creators of the docks in South Wales shown a similar attitude, I believe the docks would have been unequal to the challenges of the Industrial Revolution and two world wars. I earnestly ask for a reconsideration of that decision.

Perhaps I may briefly sum up the five points. It would be of great practical help, first, if a major scheme for better communication with the Midlands were put into effect; and second, if the Minister were able to direct the Transport Commision to grant South Wales rates and charges which would place our ports at no disadvantage by comparison with those in operation to and from other United Kingdom ports. The third point is that there should be fair shares of the coal that is available for export.

The fourth is that we should have some share—we get none at the moment—of the stores and equipment for the United States Forces in this country. During the war 25,000 ships with these stores came into Cardiff, and 26 million tons of cargo were brought in. I ask my hon. Friend to examine this point with his colleagues and to ask whether there is not some chance of an ordnance depot being set up in Cardiff, perhaps on Pengam Moors, whose future use is under consideration. If that were done trade from America would come naturally into Cardiff, and on strategic grounds alone that would be of certain advantage, both to the United States and ourselves. Fifth, I ask my hon. Friend to persuade the Minister to make some contribution towards the cost of the expert survey.

I have deliberately tried to raise this matter tonight in a non-party spirit and in no spirit of partisanship at all, because I do genuinely believe that the prosperity of Cardiff docks and of Cardiff's citizens is at stake, and that if decisions are not taken now they may well be too late in a year or even a few months' time. If nothing is done I fear that Cardiff's great resources will be wasted and that her accumulation of skill, experience and enterprise will be lost. If that were to be the fate of Cardiff, neither party in this House would be free from blame.

10.38 p.m.

Mr. James Callaghan (Cardiff, South-East)

I congratulate the hon. Gentleman the Member for Cardiff, North (Mr. Llewellyn) on raising this matter. I can assure him I take no narrow vested interest in the future of Cardiff docks. I agree with him it is much too important a matter to be regarded from a purely parochial angle. I have never resisted allies in this field, no matter what I may think of them in other connections. I am only too happy that the hon. Gentleman has raised this matter, although as a matter of geographical curiosity I observe that the islands of Steepholm and Flatholm both come in the ward of Adamstown, so that I have some title to claim the sea between the docks and the islands.

I think there has got to be some twist in the pattern of trade if Cardiff docks are to get a greater share in the trade of the country, and I think it has to be a deliberate twist. It can be given only if the Government are prepared to take some particular action. I would attach greater value to some of the hon. Gentleman's points than to others, obviously, but I have always held that in the development of industry under the appropriate legislation already passed there should be some great industry brought into Cardiff to bring a regular flow of ships there.

I fear I am not as optimistic as the hon. Gentleman is that we are going to get a substantial return of the coal export trade. No one would be more pleased than I if it came about, but in 1945 when I made my first speech there I told the dock workers it was of no use to expect any substantial increase of the coal export trade there for many years. We must develop general cargo trade. I should like to see arrive some great industry that would bring a regular flow of ships into and out of the docks. I hope that the Parliamentary Secretary will have some word of comfort and hope for us tonight that Cardiff will get what we regard as Cardiff's due. We want the maximum help that we can get from the Government.

10.45 p.m.

Mr. S. S. Awbery (Bristol, Central)

I want to say one word about an industry affecting the ports of South Wales which is seldom mentioned in this House. It is an ancillary industry to the coal industry, namely, the patent fuel industry, in which I spent 10 years of my life. Prior to the First World War we exported from from the ports of South Wales two million tons of patent fuel. That two million tons has now dropped to approximately 50,000 tons. There was one factory in Newport, two in Cardiff, one at Port Talbot and six at Swansea producing briquettes from small coal mixed with pitch.

That industry has become obsolete, but there is a possibility of reviving it. We exported this patent fuel to Argentina in order to pay for the meat we were receiving, to the West Coast of South America for the railways and to France and Italy. I am convinced that this industry can be revived. There is small coal available to mix with the pitch, and it only means utilising the factories that are there, or rebuilding those that have become derelict, in order to revive a rather important industry. About 2,500 were employed in those four ports. I just pass that on to the Parliamentary Secretary for his consideration.

10.46 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport (Mr. Gurney Braithwaite)

The remarks of the hon. Member for Bristol. Central (Mr. Awbery) make me all the more grateful to my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Fuel and Power for attending this debate. That is a matter which he has heard raised and to which he has listened carefully, and he tells me that he will give it his attention and communicate with the hon. Gentleman.

I have had the privilege of paying two visits to the city of Cardiff since I assumed office, and I would agree with a great deal of what has been said both by my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff, North (Mr. Llewellyn) and the hon. Member for Cardiff, South-East (Mr. Callaghan), who must have been greatly concerned with the problem when occupying the position in the Ministry of Transport which I now hold. The whole background of the problem is, of course, familiar to him, apart from his constituency affiliations.

I shall give the House only one or two figures. There are many that could be given in connection with Cardiff, but I shall not suggest that too many deductions should be drawn from those which I give. I merely think it is mildly encouraging to find that, whereas in 1951 coal exports amounted to 1,220,000 tons, in 1952 they increased to 1.514,000 tons. Of course, both those figures compare in melancholy fashion with the tonnage that used to be handled in the port of Cardiff in other times.

Exclusive of coal, Cardiff handled more trade last year than in the pre-war period. The figures for 1952 were 1,697,000 tons against 1,634,000 tons in 1938—a small increase, but an increase for all that in the handling of general cargo, exclusive of coal— and 1952 was the year in which imports were deliberately restricted by Government policy. There are, therefore, I think, some hopes that trade will increase —I am not talking now of coal; I am coming to that aspect in a minute—as restrictions on imports are lifted both here and abroad.

In addition, the recent agreement made with Argentina, under which this country is to supply 800,000 tons of coal, may assist Cardiff, one feels, since in pre-war days most of the coal to South America was shipped from South Wales, and we must all hope that Cardiff will get a share of that trade. Moreover, the building up of general cargo trade has persuaded shipping companies to increase liner calls to South Wales. For instance, in April last year—and I am sure my hon. Friend is familiar with this—Messrs. Furness Withy announced a new monthly service from Cardiff to the Pacific Coast. In the same month the Holland Steamship Co. added Cardiff to their Amsterdam—South Wales route, and the Bristol Steam Navigation Co. also fixed Cardiff as a scheduled port of call for their Rotterdam service.

Coming to the general problem, I wonder whether the hon. Member for Cardiff, South-East, when he was at the Ministry of Transport, made the same deductions as I have made from a study of this problem. This ties up with something which he let fall a few moments ago. I have always felt, paradoxical as it may seem, that one of the best methods of assisting the port of Cardiff—and Barry too, for that matter—lies in road development and communications with England, and the Midlands in particular.

As the hon. Member and my hon. Friend well know, the whole question of communications in South Wales and with England, which, of course, would cover Cardiff, is now being actively examined by the Committee under the chairmanship of the hon. Member's successor, the Joint Under-Secretary of State for Welsh Affairs, Lord Lloyd, which, as the Home Secretary announced in the Welsh debate on 22nd January last, has been set up to advise the Government of specific measures necessary to modernise the area and to consider methods of attracting new industries. I need hardly say that the Committee have been in touch with my Department and that we have put before them certain possibilities; but the House will appreciate that I cannot make any detailed statement of Government action as regards road communications in this area while the whole matter is under review by Lord Lloyd and his colleagues. It is, however, a matter on which they are working very hard.

I am frequently asked in these debates whether initiated from the point of view of Scotland, Wales or, indeed, England, to make some statement as regards the priorities in these matters as and when funds become available for road improvement. I am always in the difficulty that the priorities of 1953 may well not be the priorities of 1954 or 1955. I cannot give a better example than the effect upon our priority programme of the floods on the East Coast earlier this year, which caused us to alter many of our ideas as to what should come first. Therefore, I am afraid that I cannot be drawn on that matter.

I should like to say a word or two about the really serious blow which has fallen upon Cardiff, to which my hon. Friend referred, through the announcement of the French import restrictions. As the House knows, the French Government recently announced a considerable reduction in the volume of French purchases of coal from the United Kingdom in the second quarter of 1953, notably anthracite duff. On 20th April, my right hon. Friend the Minister of Fuel and Power, replying to a Question by my hon. Friend the Member for Barry (Mr. Gower), said that the National Coal Board informed him that they did not expect to have any difficulty in finding other markets for the coal that France had decided not to buy during that period.

On 27th April my hon. Friend the Joint Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs stated in a written answer to a Question by my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff, North that representations had been made to the French Government, who had replied that the reduction in coal imports was the result of considerable easing of demand in France, but that they hoped it would be possible before long to restore imports to their former level. I hope, therefore, that there is some reason for hope that Cardiff will not suffer unduly.

There are, of course, natural fears regarding the outcome of the Schuman Plan—

Mr. Callaghan

Hear, hear.

Mr. Braithwaite

—and the recently announced cuts in coal imports by France have been cited as evidence of its level of effect. It is, however, too early yet to say how, if at all, this plan will affect exports of coal and steel from South Wales. Hon. Members are wise to be apprehensive about this. That is natural, but it is too early to say just what the effect will be. My hon. Friend will recall that, in reply to a Question which he put to my Minister on 16th February, he was told that my right hon. Friend saw no reason why the Schuman Plan should have adverse effects on the volume of trade in coal and steel at the South Wales ports.

Under the new Transport Bill the British Transport Commission will have considerable latitude within the maximum charges scheme to make such adjustments as they think proper, and on the enactment of that Measure the existing statutes requiring equality of treatment in regard to railway charges and prohibiting undue preferences will cease to apply. It is, of course, a matter for the Commission, but they have there an opportunity of assisting Cardiff.

Mr. Callaghan

Does the Parliamentary Secretary know that the British Transport Commission are going to bring in a new charges scheme? Will they now be ready to deal with Cardiff exceptionally? Do they want to deal with the country as a whole or with Cardiff exceptionally?

Mr. Braithwaite

I did not say that they would deal with Cardiff exceptionally but that they would be given latitude under the new Bill and that it was the sort of thing they should consider.

As regards the United States Forces, I will pass on to my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Defence the suggestion which was made, but I am not acquainted with the facts.

I should like to say a word about the problem of silting, to which my hon. Friend referred. This is being diligently examined by the Docks and Inland Waterways Executive on behalf of the Transport Commission. The problem of Cardiff is one not merely of increasing silting but also of the increasing size and draft of vessels, which has affected many other United Kingdom ports. This would not be solved by deeper dredging. Even if the £1 million training wall scheme were put into effect, it would have to be associated with the reconstruction of the docks themselves, which would put them out of action for a long period, with obvious reactions upon employment. There are, of course, other Bristol Channel ports which have to be taken into consideration, such as Swansea, Newport, and not forgetting Avonmouth, of which I have a certain knowledge.

Mr. Awbery

Does the hon. Gentleman know that there is 14 feet of silt outside the Barry entrance? Will he consider that matter?

Mr. Braithwaite

I am aware of that.

The Question having been proposed after Ten o'Clock, and the debate having continued for half-an-hour, Mr. SPEAKER adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.

Adjourned at Eight Minutes to Eleven o'Clock.