HC Deb 29 January 1958 vol 581 cc352-3
33. Mr. Awbery

asked the Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation if he is aware of the growing redundancy in the Bristol Commercial Vehicles Company, which is precluded from contracting for work other than Government work, while others can contract for Government work in addition to other work; and, as this restriction is a contributing factor to the present redundancy, if he will take steps to remove this restriction and give the company a fair opportunity in the competitive market.

Mr. Watkinson

There is some redundancy at this works, but I understand that a considerable number of the men involved have already found alternative employment. The restrictions to which the hon. Member refers are, of course, contained in the Transport Act, 1947, and I have no power to remove them.

Mr. Awbery

Could the Minister do something to remove the restrictions? Inquiries are reaching this company from abroad for the purchase of their goods, but it cannot bid in the market because there is a restriction under the Act; so will he remove the restriction?

Mr. Watkinson

No, Sir, in this instance I am prepared to rest on the 1947 Act.

Mr. Gresham Cooke

Have not the Bristol Commercial Vehicles Company and Eastern Coach Works been in a privileged monopoly position for ten years under the 1947 Act? Is it not true that they alone have been able to get orders from the nationalised concerns? Would not the real answer to the problems of the Bristol Commercial Vehicles Company be that this company and Eastern Coach Works should now be denationalised?

Mr. Ernest Davies

It may be that the Minister has no power at the moment to change the provisions of the 1947 Act, although that could be done by legislation. Does he not recall that it was his right hon. and hon. Friends who pressed for the insertion of these restrictions to the 1947 Act, and that far from the concern having a monopoly, there are restrictions on the number of vehicles which can be manufactured in these factories, both in the case of the two referred to and in the case of Pickfords' works at Enfield?

Mr. Watkinson

There are obviously divergent views about this factory on both sides of the House. I think that this House has quite enough legislation before it, and I do not propose to add to that.