HC Deb 10 November 1955 vol 545 cc1978-9
5. Mr. Fernyhough

asked the President of the Board of Trade what reply was received from the State Department to the written representations made by Sir Robert Scott, the British Minister in Washington, about the tenders for the Chief Joseph Dam.

12. Mr. Bottomley

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he has any further statement to make about the rejection by the United States Government of a lowest tender for an electrical undertaking submitted by a United Kingdom firm.

Mr. P. Thorneycroft

The State Department defended the action taken on the ground that the contract was to be carried out in the United States in an area of substantial unemployment. The reply also stated that the decision did not represent a departure from the principles laid down in the President's executive order of December, 1954, or from the declared objectives of the United States Government to pursue a liberal foreign trade policy. I do not consider that any useful purpose would be served by replying further to the United States note.

Mr. Fernyhough

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that since the tender was rejected, the United States has increased the import duties on British bicycles and has recently increased the duty also on underground pipes? Does this not make nonsense of America's promise to liberalise trade, and is it not making greater nonsense of the Chancellor's policy of "Trade, not aid"?

Mr. Thorneycroft

I have made quite clear what my view is about these various actions by the United States. Indeed, they have come under considerable criticism from newspapers in their own country.

Mr. Bottomley

Is the President of the Board of Trade in a position to make any statement about reports that the British Embassy has made further representations about the rejection of another lowest tender by the same firm as quoted for the Chief Joseph Dam?

Mr. Thorneycroft

Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will put that question down.