29. Mr. H. Wilsonasked the President of the Board of Trade how many proposals he has rejected for building factories and factory extensions in Development Areas over the past six months; and if he will make a statement about his policy in this regard.
§ Mr. Walker-SmithNo application for an industrial development certificate for a privately financed factory has been rejected in a Development Area in the period to which this Question relates. As regards applications for the building or extension of Government-financed factories, no precise figures of cases rejected are available, as no statistics are kept of inquiries or proposals which are tentative or obviously without claim on Government finance. However, no applications outside this latter category have been finally rejected in the period in question. But in view of the need for the strictest economy in Government expenditure, it has been necessary to defer consideration of all proposals for the provision of new Government-financed factories or extensions under the Distribution of Industry Act save in a very few cases of special importance and urgency. The applications which may qualify for this special category are under consideration, and the remainder have been deferred. The latter will be reviewed as soon as economic circumstances permit.
Mr. WilsonBut does this not mean that the Government have made a major change in Development Area policy without informing the House, and that what has been the admitted policy ever since the end of the war has now been changed? Further, does it not mean that the Government are refusing to build factories, many of which may be essential, if they have to be built on public account, but that there is no control whatsoever of inessential private factory building?
§ Mr. Walker-SmithTaking the first of the right hon. Gentleman's supplementary questions, I do not agree with him that this is a major change in policy. It is a change in the tempo of the application of the machinery of the Distribution of Industry Act. In regard to industrial development certificates, the right hon. Gentleman well knows that there we are 865 bound by our statutory duties as defined by Section 14 (4) of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1947.
§ Mr. JayIs it not utterly unprecedented at any time since the war for the Government to refrain from building factories in Development Areas on the grounds of saving money, and is not this a policy of lunacy, to try to help the country out of its present difficulties by not building new factories?
§ Mr. Walker-SmithI am sorry if the right hon. Gentleman finds the policy of trying to save money unfashionable. On the contrary, I should have thought that it was right to review the application of the machinery of this Act in accordance with the general economic position of the country.
§ Mr. JayDoes the hon. and learned Gentleman see no distinction between spending money on the building of new factories and spending money on current consumption?
§ Mr. Walker-SmithThat is precisely why these applications have been divided into the two categories to which I have referred, and why those of special importance and urgency have been picked out for special treatment.
Mr. WilsonOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. This is clearly a change of policy, and in view of the hon. and learned Gentleman's unsatisfactory answer, he can be sure that we on this side of the House will find an opportunity of raising the matter in debate.
30. Mr. H. Wilsonasked the President of the Board of Trade why he has rejected the proposal to build on the Huyton Industrial Estate an extension to a factory, particulars of which have been supplied to him, in view of the contribution that would be made to employment in a Development Area and to exports, including dollar exports.
§ Mr. Walker-SmithThe company concerned were informed in March this year that we could not in current circumstances approve their application for the building at public expense of a large extension to their present factory; and they have substituted a smaller scheme, which is now under consideration.
Mr. WilsonYes, but is this not a clear case of a factory that would make 866 a contribution to dollar exports as well as to employment in a Development Area? Will the hon. and learned Gentleman answer this question. Is it not a fact that essential factory building of this kind is being held up owing to the economy drive of the Government, and that the Government have so far refused to take powers to make corresponding cuts in inessential factory building that does not help our export trade?
§ Mr. Walker-SmithNo, this application comes within the category of those to which I referred in answer to the right hon. Gentleman's previous Question, namely, of special importance and urgency, on which a decision will be made shortly. In arriving at that decision, both the factors to which the right hon. Gentleman refers, employment and export contribution, will be taken closely into consideration.
Mr. WilsonBut if the hon. and learned Gentleman admits that this comes under the heading of special urgency, both for employment and exports, why has the company been asked to withdraw its major proposal for an extension which would make a major contribution to exports, and has been asked to substitute a very small scheme in its place which can make only a small contribution to increased exports?
§ Mr. Walker-SmithMy reference to its being included in this category was a reference to the current application, which is the modified application, and which is now the only thing before us.
§ 36. Mr. Hamiltonasked the President of the Board of Trade the total amount of new factory building provided in the Scottish Development Area in each of the last four years; and what were the comparable figures for the developing mining areas in East Scotland.
§ Mr. Walker-SmithAs the Answer is rather long and contains a table of figures, I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.
§ Mr. HamiltonCan the Minister indicate whether the figures relating to the developing mining areas of East Fife in the east of Scotland are negligible or otherwise? If they are, in view of the importance of these areas to the economic well-being of the country as a whole, will Lie take additional powers to seek to attract industry into them?
§ Mr. Walker-SmithThe figures are, of course. much smaller than those for the central Development Area in Scotland, but in the central Development Area the figures of labour available are much higher and there is a heavy concentration of industry. I will bear in mind everything the hon. Member has said about the importance of the area which he represents.
§ Mr. WoodburnWould the hon. and learned Gentleman also ask his right hon. Friend to compare the lowering of factory building in Scotland as a whole with that allowed in London in recent years? Is it not a wrong policy to bolster up already over-populated areas and to allow sparsely populated areas to be depleted still further?
§ Mr. Walker-SmithAs the right hon. Gentleman is well aware, there has been a very substantial contribution of new factory building in Scotland over these years. The factory building in London has mainly been in respect of extensions to firms already there.
Following is the answer:According to the latest information available to the Board of Trade, the area of new factory space completed in the Scottish Development Area in each of the last four years was as follows.
| sq. ft. | |
| 1952 | 2,037,000 |
| 1953 | 2,341,000 |
| 1954 | 2,159.00 |
| 1955 | 2,168,000 |
§ The comparable figures for the developing coalfield areas of East and West Fife, Alloa and the Lothians are:
| sq. rt. | |
| 1952 | 168,000 |
| 1953 | 158,000 |
| 1954 | 242,000 |
| 1955 | 99,000 |
§ All the figures relate to new factories and factory extensions of over 5,000 sq. ft. for which industrial development certificates have been issued. They do not include new buildings and extensions approved for the National Coal Board.