HC Deb 22 April 1959 vol 604 cc393-8
Mr. Robens

(by Private Notice) asked the Prime Minister in what circumstances a private company is permitted to manufacture nuclear fuel elements, and what security reasons are involved in the refusal of the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Power to reveal which organisation other than the Atomic Energy Authority is now manufacturing these nuclear fuel elements.

The Prime Minister (Mr. Harold Macmillan)

As stated by my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Power—I quote his words— … at this very moment preparations are in the planning stage for a firm making fuel elements".—[OFFICIAL REPORT, Standing Committee B, 21st April, 1959; c. 27.] The Parliamentary Secretary was, naturally, unwilling to go into greater detail until he had been able to refer to the defence authorities as to whether any question of security arose.

I have considered this matter and I see no objection to stating that it is the intention that Rolls-Royce Limited should manufacture fuel elements for nuclear submarine machinery. The material will be supplied by and will remain the property of the Admiralty.

Mr. Robens

Is the Prime Minister now refuting the words of the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Power who said, in Standing Committee B yesterday. speaking to me: … the right hon. Gentleman can take it from me that fuel elements can be and will almost certainly be increasingly made outside the A.E.A."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, Standing Committee B, 21st April. 1959; c. 30.] Does the Prime Minister not agree that, so far, it has been a cardinal policy that nuclear fuel is manufactured and owned entirely by the State? Is he now deciding on a brand-new policy in respect of nuclear energy? Further, will he say upon what terms any company is now able to obtain uranium from the Government and make nuclear fuel elements, as the Parliamentary Secretary seemed to say in the Standing Committee?

The Prime Minister

As I understand it, the object of the Bill, the Nuclear Installations (Licensing and Insurance) Bill, which is still under consideration in Committee, is to provide for the future now that we are entering into the new atomic age. At present, of course, all material is manufactured by the Authority and remains, in this particular instance I have given or in other instances, the property of the Authority or the Defence Departments.

In the future, it may be—I do not think it very likely owing to the enormous costs involved—that there will be the manufacture of elements in part of the processes of industry. What we want to do in the Bill is to make provision for the future, and, of course, all material would either be the property of the Authority or the Defence Department or be manufactured only under licence and control.

Mr. Robens

I am glad to have had that statement from the Prime Minister about control and continuing ownership by the Government, but will he not agree that it is a very strange thing that a Standing Committee dealing with such a Bill as this should be the place where such an astounding change in Government policy is made known?

The Prime Minister

I do not think that there is any change at all. If, as I hope—I do not know how long it will take—nuclear power in ships, aeroplanes and all kinds of methods of propulsion is to become part of the current life of the nation, is it not a good thing to introduce a Bill to see that proper licensing and control is arranged for that future?

Several Hon. Members

rose—?

Mr. Speaker

Mr. William Yates. Private Notice Question.

Hon. Members

Oh.

Mr. Gaitskell

The subject of the Private Notice Question asked by my right hon. Friend the Member for Blyth (Mr. Robens) is one of very considerable importance, Mr. Speaker. Many hon. Members were rising, and I think that some of my right hon. Friends also wished to put one or two questions to the Prime Minister. I have been very surprised that you did not call them.

Mr. Speaker

I saw a number of hon. Members rising. If this matter was before the House for debate, I should endeavour to call them. As far as I understood it, the Question of the right hon. Member for Blyth received an answer which satisfied him. As it was his Question, I decided to pass on to the other Private Notice Questions. If there is any right hon. Member who wishes to ask a supplementary question, I will allow it.

Mr. Gaitskell

If you are not proposing to call my hon. Friends, but you are prepared to call only right hon. Members on this side of the House, I should like to put a question to the Prime Minister.

Mr. E. Fletcher

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I understood you to say that, if certain right hon. Members wished to put a supplementary question, you would call them. There are, in fact, Members of the House who, though not right hon. Members, equally wish to put supplementary questions. May I put this to you, Sir? Is it not a fact that, when you give leave for a Private Notice Question to be put, that presupposes that the subject matter of the Question is of outstanding public importance? Might one not expect, therefore, that it would be natural for a number of hon. Members to wish to pursue the answer given to it?

Mr. Speaker

That is a rather confused question. In the first place, I should say that I judge the merits of any Private Notice Question by the circumstances in which the case arises. When I read the Question of the right hon. Member for Blyth, I thought that there was certainly some obscurity left as to the true position about these nuclear fuels and, therefore, I thought that it was a matter which should be cleared up, if the Committee were to continue its deliberations and reach a conclusion. That was the reason why in this case I thought it proper to allow the Question.

I mentioned right hon. Members in my reply to the Leader of the Opposition because I understood him to say that some of his right hon. Friends wished to ask questions. For that reason, I said that, if I had omitted to observe a right hon. Gentleman rising, I should be very glad to allow him to do so. But I do not think that we should proceed with this very much further, because the answer has been given.

Mr. Gaitskell

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. In my original submission to you, I pointed out that a number of my hon. Friends wished to put questions and that some of my right hon. Friends did, also. Some of us had refrained from rising because we wished my hon. Friends to be able to put their questions. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] I do not think that there is anything particularly surprising about that; it is a very usual practice, which I myself followed in this particular case. I ask you, Mr. Speaker, to allow some of my hon. Friends to put questions to the Prime Minister.

Lieut.-Colonel Bromley-Davenport

Certainly not.

Mr. Gaitskell

It is not the hon and gallant Member's affair. He is not the Speaker.

Following any questions from my hon. Friends, Mr. Speaker, perhaps I also might be allowed to put a question to the Prime Minister.

Mr. Speaker

All this is a little irregular. I do not want to go against the wishes of the House in any way. I try to do what is best for the House as a whole. The right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition mentioned both his hon. Friends and his right hon. Friends. When I said that I should certainly call any right hon. Gentleman who wanted to ask a question, I was merely giving to one of the categories mentioned by the Leader of the Opposition the privilege to which members of it are accustomed. I understand now that no right hon. Gentleman wishes to ask a question. I have been given notice that there is one hon. Member who has a constituency interest in this matter, and therefore call Mr. Brockway.

Mr. Brockway

Is the Prime Minister aware that at the nuclear research station of the Hawker-Siddeley Company, at Langley, in Slough, a reactor will be completed in September which, when developed, could heat a town, provide power for large industrial plant, operate a liner and provide isotopes for hospitals. While it is desirable that there should be the use of atomic energy for peace in this constructive way, should it not, in view of its immense potentialities, be in public rather than private hands?

The Prime Minister

I think that there are two quite separate questions there. There is the question of safety and control and, of course, there is the question we often debate in the House, whether all industrial processes should be nationalised or not.

As regards safety and control, I think that what the hon. Member says, which I did not know and which I am very happy to hear, is a very good reason for a Bill which sets up a proper system of licensing and control being passed into law.

Mr. Gaitskell

Is the Prime Minister aware that we are not questioning the principle of the Bill, namely, that there should be effective licensing and control? The question my right hon. Friend the Member for Blyth put to him was directed to the particular case of manufacture of nuclear fuel elements by a firm. Is it intended that nuclear fuel elements shall be manufactured on a large scale in many cases by other firms? Is it essential that this should be done by private enterprise and not be left to the Atomic Energy Authority?

The Prime Minister

As a matter of practical fact, I think it probable that there will be a certain amount of processing. Manufacture, of course, as the right hon. Gentleman knows, calls for enormous investment and plant at the present stage, but the purpose of the Bill is to make quite clear that, whatever may be the developments during the next twenty or thirty years, a proper system of licensing and control is enforced if it should ever arise that processing or manufacture is to be done by private enterprise.

Mr. Gaitskell

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what conditions are laid down by the Atomic Energy Authority and what the financial arrangements are, for instance, when the "know-how" is made available to these private firms to make nuclear elements?

The Prime Minister

That is really another question. This is an enabling Bill, a Bill to set up and give to the Authority—

Several Hon. Members

indicated dissent.

The Prime Minister

The whole question arose out of the Bill—the proper system for the future. I gather that the right hon. Gentleman approves of that. At present, as I said, and for many years, I should think, except for certain matters of processing, of which I gave a particular instance, the material will be supplied either by the Atomic Energy Authority or, for defence purposes, by the defence Departments.