New Clause.—(CERTAIN LAND OF PUBLIC AUTHORITIES TO VEST IN THE BOARD.) (Hansard, 9 December 1959)

§ Mr. H. A. Marquand (Middlesbrough, East)
I beg to move, That the Clause be read a Second time.
Earlier today, one of my hon. Friends asked whether the word "land" implied not merely land, but the buildings or other structures on it. That is the intention in this Clause and although the wording of the Clause might suggest that I am concerned only with land, I am particularly concerned with buildings belonging to or vested in Ministers, Government Departments, or Government agencies and which, having been used for some other and no doubt useful purpose by the Government, cease to be required 695 for that purpose. It intended to enable such buildings then to be acquired by the Board of Trade for use in development.
As we all know, all over the country there are many such buildings—Royal Ordnance factories, Ministry of Food buffer depots, even Royal Air Force stations, Royal Navy installations and so on, which have sometimes been used for new industrial development in the Development Areas when they have ceased to be required for military purposes. Many of them were put into Development Areas during the war, deliberately constructed in areas like South Wales, to make use of the war effort of the surplus labour of those areas. Some time after the war, places like the Royal Ordnance factory, Bridgend, were abandoned for warlike uses and were turned into small trading estates.
What I am trying to ensure is that in future when such Government buildings or undertakings become available, they shall at once be offered to the Board of Trade for the Board to consider whether they could be used for the development of a new industry. The Clause does not make it compulsory for the buildings to be transferred to the Board of Trade, but I hope that it will facilitate the rapid transfer from some other Government Department or agency of suitable buildings and sites for these purposes.
The example I have in mind is that with which the Minister of State is already familiar, because he and I discussed it across this Table some time ago when he was in his previous capacity as Economic Secretary to the Treasury. I am thinking of the Normanby Ironworks, in my constituency, which belonged to the Iron and Steel Holding and Realisation Agency, which was and still is the property of the nation. These works, for reasons which I will not attempt to go into now, became out of date and were closed down. These abandoned works now stand on the River Tees, on an excellent site, thoroughly suitable for industry.
12.15 a.m.
When I last made inquiries about what was happening I was told that the abandoned furnaces were still very hot, and nothing could be done about them. I have no doubt that by now, especially after the heavy rainfall that we have had, 696 they will have cooled off and be quite capable of being moved. They are heavy and cumbersome, and it will take some effort to get them away, but they can be taken away. If they were, the site could be, and should be, cleared and used for new industry.
It stands on the River Tees, an admirable accommodation, with plenty of railway track available, only a few miles from the sea. It would be a very suitable site for an undertaking using raw materials and/or exporting goods to the markets of the world. I hope that the appetite of the right hon. Gentleman will be whetted by this description, and that he will want to ensure that this property is taken over and used for new industry. If he had it in mind to remove my constituency from the provisions of the Bill—as he may have I have probed about this before but have had no answer on it—let him, for goodness' sake, at least do this first. Before descheduling or removing this site from the provisions of the Bill, let him deal with this very valuable site, which could be made vacant without a great expenditure of labour.
We have more than 3 per cent. unemployment, and even if that figure is not as high as it is in other parts of the country there is a need for opportunities to be created for further diversification. Do not let this land be immobilised, with the neighbouring ironworks lying idle, derelict, ugly, and all the other words that have been used in the debate.

§ Mr. Erroll
The right hon. Member was good enough to indicate the example he had in mind, and which doubtless prompted him to suggest, in his proposed new Clause, a countrywide procedure, which he thought might be applicable in the case of the Normanby Ironworks Company. We have looked very carefully at his proposal—because all his Amendments are thoughtfully constructed—but I regret to say that on this occasion there are serious difficulties standing in the way of our considering it as a possibility. First, if the Board of Trade wishes to clear land for the purpose of building a new factory, it already has the necessary powers, under Clause 2, to acquire land of the kind mentioned in the Amendment, if it considers that this will advance the purposes of Part I. 697 The other feature of the proposal is that the Board of Trade should automatically be offered all such land, and have to disclaim it within one month of the offer being made. That might be embarrassing for the Board of Trade, if it received a number of offers, because it would have to work very quickly in order to get out the necessary disclaimers within a month, and if it failed it would become the dumping ground for unwanted and derelict land.
Furthermore, the procedure envisaged would be unsatisfactory in regard to the title of the land, because the transfer would be on the basis of a simple offer and an acceptance, and on any subsequent resale it might be difficult to establish satisfactorily the title to the land. I appreciate that the right hon. Gentleman perhaps had not been able to work out all the implications of the Clause, and I thought it only fair to mention this as an added difficulty.
As regards the Normanby Ironworks, I remember the discussions across the Table which the right hon. Gentleman and I had a few months ago. If the locality in which the works were situated—in Middlesbrough—was one of high unemployment, and if the Board of Trade considered that the acquisition of those works was expedient for the promotion of the purposes of the Bill it would, under Clause 2 paragraph (a) and Clause 5 (2) have powers to acquire them. If. on the other hand, Middlesbrough is not listed, it would be contrary to the purposes of the Bill for the Board of Trade to spend public money in making the premises suitable for a now occupant. As I have tried to explain to the Committee, we can deal with Normanby Ironworks if it is in an area of high unemployment; and the conception behind the proposal is, we feel, misplaced.

§ Mr. Marquand
I was filled with admiration for the early part of the speech of the Minister of State. I naturally liked his reference to my constructive Amendment, of which I was myself rather proud. I hasten to add, quite modestly, that of course I did not draft it myself—that would have been beyond my capacity. That was all very pleasant and satisfactory, but the end of his speech was most disappointing. I wish he could indicate to the people of Middlesbrough 698 that here and now under powers in Acts not yet repealed the Board of Trade will step in, take this land, and use it for a public purpose before the Bill becomes law. If he cannot offer me satisfaction on that, as I am not in a position to divide the Committee, I shall have to allow my new Clause to be voted on.