HC Deb 16 June 1959 vol 607 cc243-6
46. Mr. Lee

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer upon what criteria Her Majesty's Government base decisions to sell firms such as Messrs. S. G. Brown, Limited, which are owned by Government Departments.

Mr. Amory

There are very few such cases, but where a decision is called for, the Government take into account a wide range of circumstances, principally how the national interest might be affected, but also normal commercial considerations and the reasons for which the company was originally acquired.

Mr. Lee

Will not the Chancellor agree that this company was taken over by the Government for £55,570? It now has assets worth £1,250,000, and it has produced one of the finest gyroscopes in the world. Does he not realise that it is a going proposition, making profits, and that the thousand men there, led by their shop stewards, have played a terrific part in bringing the company up from a derelict undertaking into one of the finest we have in the area? Why does he insist now that the results of public money and public enterprise, assisted by the trade unions, which have shown an outstanding success, should be handed back to private enterprise?

Mr. Amory

The facts that the hon. Member has given do not justify the company, however successful, necessarily being retained in public ownership.

Mr. Gresham Cooke

Should not the policy of Her Majesty's Government be to denationalise companies which, like this, were taken over in the war, since many people believe that such companies could make a greater contribution to the export trade if they were freed from Government control and nationalisation?

Mr. Amory

I agree exactly with what my hon. Friend has said.

Mr. Farey-Jones

On a point of order. As this factory is in the Division represented by the hon. Member for Watford, may I stress the urgency and importance that the disappearance of such a fantastic group of highly trained technicians is a matter of major public interest?

Mr. H. Wilson

Since it is clear that this firm has been worked up from a very small firm into a highly successful firm under public ownership, why does the Chancellor express agreement with his hon. Friend's suggestion? Will he say whether he feels that it is right that an asset of the State which is important to our exports and to State services and is highly profitable to the State should be handed over? Does he think that it would be better run by the take-over bid merchants than it has been run in the past few years?

Mr. Amory

I certainly do not think that because a firm is expanding or well managed that justifies it remaining in public ownership.

Mr. Gaitskell

What conceivable justification can the right hon. Gentleman offer for this decision? Why does he say that the firm should be sold back to private enterprise? Is he saying that when a firm becomes profitable under public enterprise the benefits must be handed over to private enterprise?

Mr. Amory

No. What I am saying is that to justify a firm remaining in public ownership the onus of proof must be that it is required in the national interest and that the firm will prosper under public ownership but would not prosper under private enterprise. The right hon. Gentleman is putting the onus of proof the other way round.

Mr. Speaker

Mr. John Dugdale.

Mr. Farey-Jones

On a point of order. In view of the importance of this matter in my Division, I beg to give notice that I shall raise it on the Adjournment.

Mr. Speaker

Mr. John Dugdale.

Mr. Dugdale

Is the Chancellor aware that the reason for this firm being taken over was—[HON. MEMBERS: "Sit down."]

Mr. Speaker

Order. I hope that the House will keep order. Mr. Dugdale.

Mr. Dugdale

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the two reasons for the firm being taken over—[Interruption.]

Mr. Speaker

The House will not let me hear what is being said by making all this noise.

Mr. Braine rose—

Mr. Speaker

Is the hon. Member for Essex, South-East rising to a point of order?

Mr. Braine

Yes, Mr. Speaker. May I have your guidance? Is it not customary that when an hon. Member who has a particular interest in a certain matter says that he wishes to raise it on the Adjournment at an early opportunity that disposes of the matter?

Mr. Speaker

It does not work as mechanically as that. During the time of my predecessor in the Chair I very well remember that a right hon. Gentleman gave notice to raise a certain matter on the Adjournment because his own side was being heckled rather badly. Mr. Speaker Clifton Brown made a statement in the House saying that he would not in that case accept such a notice. In this case I had actually called the right hon. Member for West Bromwich before the point of order was raised.

Mr. Dugdale

Is the Chancellor aware that there were two reasons for this firm being taken over? First, if was run very inefficiently under private enterprise, and, secondly, in that industry there was a virtual monopoly of production of these instruments. Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether that monopoly will be continued? Is that one of the reasons for restoring it to private enterprise?

Mr. Amory

In answer to the right hon. Gentleman, I am advised that the production capacity of this firm is no longer vital to the Admiralty, as it was in the war.

Several Hon. Members

rose—

Mr. Speaker

Order. It is clear that we cannot come to a conclusion on this matter today, judging by the interest shown on both sides of the House. In view of the interest shown on both sides of the House, this might be a proper subject for debate, but we cannot discuss it at Question Time. It is now twenty-four minutes to four, and we have a very important debate in front of us.

Mr. H. Wilson

In view of the desire of the House to have a debate, whether on the Adjournment or in some other way, will the Chancellor, in anticipation of the debate, publish a White Paper giving all the facts and figures of production, exports and profits and all the assets under both private and public enterprise, and his proposals for the future and the terms he expects to get under this deal?

Mr. Amory

I do not think that would be an appropriate course. If and when a debate takes place, I shall be very glad to make available to the House the fullest information I can.

Mr. Jay

Is the Chancellor—

Mr. Farey-Jones

Further to the point of order raised by the hon. Member for Essex, South-East (Mr. Braine). This is a very important matter to my Division. May I know whether my suggestion to discuss the matter on the Adjournment is accepted?

Mr. Speaker

If the hon. Gentleman wishes to apply for an Adjournment, he should table his request in the usual way and I will consider it with the others.

Several Hon. Members rose—

Mr. Speaker

I must insist that we get on with the Business of the House. Mr. Hector Hughes.

Mr. Beswick

Further to the point of order—

Mr. Speaker

Order. Mr. Hector Hughes.