§ Motion made, and Question proposed. That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Chichester-Clark.]
§ 9.12 p.m.
§ Mr. Desmond Donnelly (Pembroke)In one sense I apologise for taking up the time of the House for a second time this evening. In another sense I make no apology, because I am concerned about serious problems within my constituency.
I would like to record my appreciation of the right hon. Gentleman the Minister for Welsh Affairs for coming to the House to answer the debate. I was a little disturbed about him, because I had noticed that he was not present at the unveiling of the Lloyd George Memorial by the Prime Minister in July, nor at the opening of the National Eisteddfod by the Queen, nor at the opening of the Esso Refinery by the Duke of Edinburgh, and I wondered whether he was all right. However, may I now record my pleasure at seeing him, looking so fit and well this evening.
The problem within my constituency is very serious. It stems from the fact that there has been a substantial shift in the balance of employment in West Wales during the last few years. As the right hon. Gentleman knows, the harbour at Milford Haven was, by tradition, a naval port. The Royal Naval Dockyard at 154 Pembroke used to provide one of the principal sources of employment in this part of Wales. In addition, during the war it was used as a convoy marshalling point. In the immediate post-Second World War era there was a rundown, followed by a certain amount of encouragement by the Government of the day, including the attraction of one particularly important and brave shipbuilding firm to Pembroke Dock, which did a good deal to stem the situation at that time.
Then the circumstances began to worsen. Not only was ship repairing more difficult to get; not only was naval ship repairing less significant in terms of shipbuilding economy, but the fishing industry at Milford Haven, which had been the fourth largest fishing port in the British Isles, and certainly the largest port in Wales, began to run into serious difficulties because of aver-fishing in the traditional hake fishing waters to which Milford Haven trawlers went.
At that point new hope was brought to the area by the advent of the supertanker, the announcement by the Prime Minister that Milford Haven was to be one of the major oil ports of Europe, and the fact that the Esso oil refinery was to be built on the northern shores of Milford Haven. In addition to that came the announcement of the British Petroleum oil landing stage on the southern shores of the Haven and the piping of the oil to Llandarcy, 60 miles away. This, at last, meant that Milford Haven would be an economic port, as opposed to one that was kept by the Government. This was a very important development for West Wales.
In the immediate period of construction there was a great shortage of manpower, and unemployment fell. Practically the only people unemployed in the area were those who were unemployable, and a large amount of labour had to be imported. But whenever this sort of thing happens, as soon as the construction work is completed the rundown starts and difficulties arise. Further, now that the run-down has almost been completed, and the graph of jobs available in the area is at the lowest point, there is a serious social problem south of the Milford Haven, in the Pembroke Dock area. This was the area in which the Royal Dockyard used to be situated, 155 and which, when the Royal Dockyard was closed suddenly, indeed, almost overnight, suffered a blow comparable only to that suffered by Jarrow in the 1930s.
The situation today is very grave from our point of view—and here I speak as a constituent of myself. I am one of the hon. Members of the House who have great pleasure in voting for themselves and living in their own constituencies. Before the construction work began there were 239 unemployed in Haverfordwest, 389 unemployed in Milford Haven and 269 unemployed at Pembroke Dock. That was in January, 1957. This year, when construction work was at its peak, the unemployment figures were 111 for Haverfordwest, 184 for Milford Haven and 84 for Pembroke Dock. Since June there has been a change for the worse. From 111 at Haverfordwest it has now risen to 221; from 184 at Milford Haven it has risen to 686, and from 84 at Pembroke Dock it has risen to 345—and these figures are rising every day.
Considering the matter in terms of percentages, which the statisticians love so much, in Haverfordwest the unemployment rate in June was 1 per cent.; in Milford Haven, it was 2 per cent., and in Pembroke Dock, it was 2.4 per cent. Those figures are now 3.7 per cent., 11.6 per cent., and 7.8 per cent. respectively, compared with 2.4 per cent. for Swansea and 2.0 per cent. for Cardiff. This gives one some idea of the problem in a small area where jobs are not all that easy to find, and the position will be much worse as the winter goes on. It is for that reason that I ask the Minister to tell us what Her Majesty's Government propose to do about it.
The last thing I would wish to say is that we are ungrateful, or that we wish to be ungracious to Her Majesty's Government for some of their efforts. First, there is the Esso oil refinery, with £18½ million of capital investment. I should like to place on record—because this is an American company and there is a great deal of anti-Americanism in the air in these days of superficial neutralism—that it was a great American, who was also a great friend of this country, who coined the phrase, "a good neighbour." In our port we could not have found better and more socially responsible 156 neighbours than this company, which has built a great oil refinery on the northern shores of Milford Haven.
It is not without significance also to note that, quite apart from how Milford Haven finds them, in the list of donations to St. Catherine's College—the great new technological college at Oxford, on which so much depends—Esso heads the list with £82,000. This is a wholly owned American company. So sometimes, when we speak of Fords and about China—as I have been doing earlier today—or anything else, it is worth also remembering that the Americans have, more than any other nation in the world, accepted the philosophy, "I am my brother's keeper".
We are not ungrateful for what the Government have done to steer that oil industry to this part of Wales. We are not ungrateful for the announcement by the President of the Board of Trade that an advance factory—I think that that is the technical term—is to be built at Pembroke Dock. I appreciate that it is only a small factory, but I also regard this as a significant venture by the Government and I hope that small ventures may have large consequences.
In addition, there has been the announcement in the House only in the last few days, by the Civil Lord to the Admiralty, that the Royal Naval Air Station at Brawdy is to be placed on a permanent basis and to be extended, with all its consequential effects on civilian employment in the area. But this still leaves us with the problem of our unemployment, which is now mounting. In fact, it is the highest, in the town of Milford, at any time since 1939, and this presents a very real problem for us.
What are we to do about it? That is what I should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman. First, there is the question of the Milford tidal barrage. It would be completely out of order for me to suggest new legislation in an Adjournment debate, and I am not suggesting that at all. I should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman what would be the attitude of his Ministry to the administrative venture of building such a barrage, especially bearing in mind the possibility that we should like some indication of the Government's attitude to such a 157 barrage in the event of it being proved economic.
I am not suggesting for one moment that we should build an uneconomical barrage; we do not want a great white elephant in Milford Haven. But we want some opportunity of being able to provide adequate water supplies and the incentive that goes with the adequate supply of fresh water to any industries that come there. I have particularly in mind the decision of the Government to assist the Swansea Corporation in building a great reservoir with funds through the Distribution of Industry Acts. What I am really asking the right hon. Gentleman is not for money, but for an expression of noises about the barrage—how does he feel about it?
Secondly, I wish to ask about the fishing industry. The problem of that industry regarding Milford can be summed up in a nutshell—before the war there were 100 trawlers and now there are 26. As I have said on previous occasions, this port, as a fishing port, is "hanging on by its eyebrows". If there are any fewer trawlers the services will become totally uneconomic and they ace uneconomic enough as it is. If the port closes, it would be a major disaster.
There are various schemes before the White Fish Authority for new trawlers for the area. I am advised that the Authority has not given answers on any of these schemes. I should have thought that a decision would be taken as a matter of urgency if this port is to be saved. I would point out to the right hon. Gentleman the large number of people involved and the fact that were this port closed the town of Milford Haven would face very serious hardship indeed.
Then there is the venture of the steel companies involved in the iron-ore storage depot at Angle. As the right hon. Gentleman will recollect, his Ministry held a public inquiry about this storage depot for iron ore on the southern shore of Milford to which iron ore was to be brought in big ships from Labrador and other places and taken in smaller coastal ships round the shores of this country to the various steel plants.
The right hon. Gentleman will recollect that a public inquiry was held by his 158 Department to consider this matter and that it was proved conclusively that this was the only place in the whole of the British Isles where it could be situated. Yet the next we heard was that the scheme was held up by the steel companies, who were contemplating a great new £60 million project at Port Talbot, and that the majority of the £60 million was to be found by the British Transport Commission.
I do not wish to go beyond the terms of reference of this debate, but I should have thought that in these days of requirements of capital investment by the railways there might be other ways of utilising their money than in building an artificial harbour at Port Talbot. This is a very useful, valuable deep-water site, one of the few deep-water sites which can be developed easily. If the proposal is to be shelved and a new scheme to be produced for Port Talbot, what steps can the right hon. Gentleman take to ensure that this site is not sterilised but is made available for new development?
There is the question of other industries. There is the ship-repairing industry at the moment in the Haven. It is a very small industry which, like the fishing industry, is "hanging on by its eyebrows". For some time it has survived by courtesy of the Admiralty and Government Departments. However, with the changes in the defence programme, new problems have arisen. We all recognise that the Admiralty has not the work to place there.
The difficulty which the ship repairers in Milford Haven face stems from the fact that the increased volume of traffic coming from the development of the Haven has not yet reached the point which would make it economic, but the rundown by the Admiralty has reached a point which is rock bottom. What steps can the Government take to see that these industries are not allowed to collapse, but are retained in being so that when the build-up takes place there will be ship-repairing firms and there with a nuclei of skilled personnel able to share in the growing economic development of the area?
The problem is marginal for the Government, but it is vital for us. Although the Admiralty has not got the boats, there are various other Government Departments which act as shipowners or ship agents of one kind or 159 another. There is not only the Ministry of Transport, but the Post Office, which has cable layers of different kinds. I ask the right hon. Gentleman to use the good offices of his Ministry for Welsh Affairs, if he can, to see what can be done to inform other Government Departments which own ships of one kind or another that they might be able to do something about retaining this ship-repairing industry in being. As I say, it is marginal for them, but it is vital for us. This is a very important social-political step which they should consider in our interests. It is particularly applicable to the town of Pembroke Dock.
There is the new trading estate at Milford. Although the land has been acquired by an intending developer, so far as I know nothing has transpired in the way of assistance from the Board of Trade. How can the right hon. Gentleman electrify the Board of Trade? That is the question. We want electricity in those great corridors in Whitehall to get the Board of Trade on the move in these matters.
There are the possibilities of tourism. I regard Pembrokeshire as the Cornwall of the pre-war era. It is becoming much more a place where top people go, or should go, for their holidays. It is very important for us to try to attract capital into the area through the tourist industry. Any industrial developments taking place are confined within the Haven.
The right hon. Gentleman's Department has given very valuable and important assistance to Pembrokeshire County Council and we record our appreciation for that. They have done a great deal to assist in the development of the National Park and its presentation. The next logical step is to attract capital into the area for the tourist industry to help to develop it. If the right hon. Gentleman will give us some help and guidance in these matters, I shall be very grateful.
We in West Wales face a very chilly winter. A long-range weather forecaster, writing in one of our national newspapers, said that as a suffix to this wet period we should have the coldest period that people could remember—so cold that we should be talking about it to our grandchildren. I fervently hope 160 that he is wrong about the weather, but in economics we face a chilly winter, despite all the great developments which have taken place. We may even face two chilly winters.
Does the right hon. Gentleman understand this problem? What does he intend to do about it? What hope can he give for me to take back to my constituents in Pembrokeshire to warm their hearts at this very difficult and doubtful period at the turning of the year, when Christmas is upon us? We should like some hopeful news in order that they may be able to look into 1961 with genuine hope for the future. In the past it has been, "Never jam today, but always jam tomorrow". We understand that, but today my constituency is also concerned with bread and butter.
§ 9.32 p.m.
§ The Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs (Mr. Henry Brooke)The hon. Member for Pembroke (Mr. Donnelly) knows that I visited and loved the constituency which he represents for many years before I became Minister for Welsh Affairs, and in the four years I have been Minister I have had the pleasure of enlarging my acquaintance with it. I hope that I shall be able to show him that I have a knowledge of the whole of his county, that I am acquainted with its problems and that the Government are doing everything possible to help to solve them.
The last time that I was in the county was in August, when I spent a very interesting day in the company of members of the county council and others. I am sorry that the hon. Member criticises me for not having attended every important function in Wales. One of the reasons for the appointment of a Minister of State for Welsh Affairs was that one or other Minister might always be there, and that is one of the duties which my noble Friend most faithfully carries out.
In the Government's view, Pembroke Dock and Milford Haven offer the most difficult employment problem in the whole of the Principality. Two or three years ago it was Swansea, Llanelly, and the hinterland, consequent on the closing down of the old tinplate works. Now, thanks to what the Government have achieved in attracting industries there, 161 Swansea and Llanelly are prosperous and, if anything, shortage of skilled labour is emerging.
Following that, the unemployment problem in Gwynedd seemed the most intractable. Now, thanks to the taking up of the advance factory at Holyhead and the coming of the atomic power station to Anglesey and the Ferodo factory to Caernarvonshire, we are well on our way towards solving the employment needs of Anglesey and Caernarvonshire.
I can assure the hon. Member that we are attacking the problems of Pembrokeshire, which are now emerging owing to the run-down of the construction work, with the same vigour and the same intention to succeed. As he acknowledged, we have given tangible evidence by the decision to build an advance factory at Pembroke Dock. The situation there is that investigations are in progress to find what will be the most suitable site for that factory. In addition, the Government have given, and will continue to give, every encouragement to industrialists to consider Pembrokeshire as a site for a new factory. It is true, as he and I both know, that relatively few have so far shown themselves willing to come so far West.
There is the distance factor, and the price that Pembroke has to pay for being another and, as some of us would say, a better Cornwall is that it is at a long distance from both London and the industrial Midlands. It was largely because of this distance factor that the Government took the decision to site the new advance factory in the Pembroke Dock area. We greatly hope that there will be increasing numbers of industrialists willing to consider the county now that so much of South Wales east of Pembrokeshire is becoming fully employed and there is relatively less attraction now in Carmarthenshire and Glamorgan because unemployment there is going down.
I am not sure whether the hon. Gentleman mentioned this further point in his speech when paying tribute, as I pay tribute, to the initiative of the Esso Company in coming to the north bank of the Haven. It would, to say the least, be surprising if the refinery with its byproducts, coupled with the wonderful deep water facilities there are, did not in due course attract other chemical 162 manufacturers. I hope that it will. I assure the hon. Gentleman that the Government will give all the help they can, although I expect that he as well as I can foresee certain planning problems arising, including, perhaps, problems regarding the discharge of waste material into the Haven.
§ Mr. DonnellyThere was a point I did not mention which occurred to me while the Minister was speaking of the distance factor. I do not ask him for an answer now, but I should be grateful if he will bear this in mind. I refer to the quality of communications, particularly roads. There is, for instance, the trunking of the road from Whitland to Pembroke Dock. An industrialist sees where the trunk road ends. He runs his finger round that point on the map and he says, "I do not want to go there." Perhaps the Minister and his Department will take note of the point, because it will be very important.
§ Mr. BrookeI will gladly give an answer now. The answer is that the first priority for helping Pembrokeshire must be to improve and modernise the big roads. Otherwise, one would simply be moving bottlenecks from one place to another. The Government are pressing forward vigorously. The Ross Spur has just been opened. The Heads of the Valleys Road is going forward, and the. Severn Bridge is definitely planned. As regards making the road he mentioned a trunk road, he will know that the policy of the Ministry of Transport is not to consider trunking stretches of road one by one but to review the problem periodically over the country as a whole. I can definitely say that Pembrokeshire's claim for that has not been forgotten and it will be taken into account when the next review takes place.
§ Mr. Roderick Bowen (Cardigan)Will not the Minister agree that that review has been overdue for a considerable time?
§ Mr. BrookeI do not agree that it is long overdue. If the hon. and learned Member wishes to pursue that, perhaps he will pursue it with my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport. I am addressing myself principally to the problems of Pembrokeshire rather than the whole road system of Wales.
163 I come now to the Angle iron ore project. The hon. Member for Pembroke will realise, of course, that, if this project did go forward, the amount of employment, after the construction period had ended, would be very small. It is common knowledge that the company, after seeking Parliamentary powers for the plan at Angle Bay, has since been investigating the possibility of major works at Port Talbot to bring large iron ore carriers in there direct. I know of no authority for the figure of £60 million which the hon. Member mentioned.
I realise that this figure was given in the papers at one time, but, so far as I know, it had no basis in fact behind it. In any case, I hope he will agree that no decision could possibly be taken about abandoning Angle now until it has been decided by all concerned whether the Port Talbot plan is to go forward. That is the time when, I think, interest in the future of Angle Bay and that part of the coast will emerge once again. The present situation is that no decision whatever has been taken.
Now I must come to this question of water. The hon. Member was gentle in his references to the barrage today, but he will be aware that not so very long ago, somebody in Pembrokeshire suggested that an important paper mill project was lost to the county because it could not be sure of a sufficient supply of suitable water. That was quite untrue, and the Board of Trade pointed out the following day in the Press that there was no foundation for the statement at all. It was, in fact, the distance which led the firm to look elsewhere. I cannot emphasise too strongly that no new industry has been or is likely to be lost to the County of Pembroke for lack of water supplies.
I must say, as the hon. Member spoke quite frankly to me in his speech, that he himself, in my view, made some misleading references in The Times of 24th October to the Milford Haven (Tidal Barrage) Bill of last year, suggesting that I first encouraged the idea of a tidal barrage and then reported against it. In fact, I never encouraged it. The Bill would have imposed an extremely heavy burden on the ratepayers of the county, unless the water demand in the county rose by 10 million to 15 million gallons 164 per day. When that Bill was before Parliament, the only immediate demand was for 2½ million gallons per day by the Esso Refinery, which expected a demand for a further 2½ million gallons, making 5 million gallons per day between 1967 and 1970, and that included the possible demands of associated industries.
The position is that anything up to 10 million or even 15 million gallons per day of water can be provided by other means more cheaply than by the barrage. Further, there should be no difficulty in meeting all foreseeable demands for water by new industries without the heavy expenses of the barrage for a long time to come.
The hon. Member asked me what would be the Government's attitude towards the barrage in the event of its being proved economic. I do not think I can do better than show my consistency by quoting a report which I made to the Committee on the Milford Haven (Tidal Barrage) Bill in July, 1959. In that report, I said that I did not feel that there was yet sufficient evidence to show that the barrage scheme was the right one, though I accepted that it might prove to be so in time. I felt that the Bill ought to be rejected, but on the understanding that it might well be brought forward again if and when an additional demand of 10 million to 15 million gallons a day seems reasonably assured.
That, frankly, is the position, and it still appears to me that, though I am aware of the attractiveness of having a means of communication across the Cleddau there, nevertheless, it would be an unjustifiable gamble to invest that very large sum of money in the barrage plan, unless it is quite clear that it would be justified by the demand for water.
The hon. Member also referred to the proposed private industrial estate at Milford Haven. I am not quite sure what he was expecting the Board of Trade to do. I understand that the position is that the company that wishes to develop the estate would only build factories to a customer's order, and that means that an application for an industrial development certificate would be made as necessary. Until there is an application for a certificate, I frankly do not see what further action the Government could take in the matter. 165 The hon. Member himself no doubt knows the planning aspect.
The hon. Member asked about ship-repairing. When putting ship repair work cut to tender, the Admiralty always bears in mind both the local employment conditions and the state of the Ship-repairing industry as a whole. Certainly from time to time there will be further naval work offered to firms in The South Wales area, including the Milford Haven area, but equally certainly the Admiralty cannot give assurance of work to any one firm. It must be done on a tender basis.
What I have done is to make certain that the Admiralty and the other Departments concerned appreciate the position which the hon. Member has correctly described in Milford Haven and Pembroke Dock—that there may be a difficult period to last out before the more considerable work of servicing the oil tankers and the growing activity in the Haven comes to fruition in a few years' time. A major effort between the managements and the unions concerned to bring down costs in the ship-repairing yards around the Haven would be one of the best ways of all to ensure that more repair work goes to Pembrokeshire.
The hon. Gentleman also asked about the fishing industry. I am not sure whether he knows—I suspect that he does—that a series of exploratory voyages have been financed by the Government, the White Fish Authority and the British Trawlers' Federation, and they have been undertaken to fishing grounds in the Atlantic beyond Ireland to look for more fish. A full report of the results of these voyages is being prepared, and it will be made available to the industry with the hope that the findings will lead to increased landings of fish at Milford.
During 1959 the owners of vessels at the port became much more interested than they hitherto appeared to be in the assistance available from the White Fish Authority towards the cost of converting the old coal-fired vessels to oil or diesel propulsion. At the end of 1959 more than half the grants approved far this type of modernisation were in respect of vessels operating from Milford Haven. In addition, some fairly modern vessels were transferred from other ports and 166 some new ones were approved for construction under the Authority's grant and loans scheme. Further applications for assistance towards the building of new vessels have been approved during 1960.
A new owning company has recently been formed which, I understand, is negotiating with the White Fish Authority for the construction of several now vessels for the hake fleet. The hon. Member suggested that the Authority is slow to give approval. My information is that the first inquiry by this company was made to the Authority as recently as September and the formal application for assistance, with the full details required, was made only last month. It is a proposal involving a very considerable sum of money. It certainly indicates confidence in the future of the Haven fishing industry, but because of its magnitude I am sure the hon. Gentleman agrees that it must be carefully considered. Meanwhile, although the fleet is much smaller than it used to be, it is also much more modern, and the prospects for Milford Haven as a fishing port seem brighter than they have been for years.
The hon. Gentleman spoke about the tourist trade. The principal initiative here must, I am sure, come from the local people themselves. There is direct responsibility on all those who, commercially and otherwise, are seeking to meet the needs of visitors. There is a considerable responsibility on the Park Planning Committee and all the local authorities to help to make sure that holiday visitors to Pembrokeshire will want to come again.
I understand that there are plans to form a Pembrokeshire tourist association. I have no doubt that one of the things that it will wish to make sure is that hotel accommodation in the county advances in both quantity and quality to meet the needs of the increasing numbers Who seem to me likely to be coming to Pembrokeshire as the years go on. The important point for the hon. Member and for me is that the Tourist Panel of the Council for Wales is preparing a report on the tourist industry throughout Wales. The Government are looking forward to receiving that report and will study it carefully.
167 One point which the hon. Member did not mention but Which is of importance in the economy of the county is horticulture. I am told that early potatoes are now estimated to bring into the county something like £1 million a year. There are between 50 and 60 commercial bulb producers and flower growers in the county. It is slightly disappointing to me that only two applications have so far been received from Pembrokeshire for Government grants under the Horticulture Improvement Scheme, both of which, I can tell the hon. Member, have been approved. Possibly, my words tonight will encourage others to apply.
The hon. Member mentioned Brawdy. It is an important decision by my noble Friend the First Lord of the Admiralty to keep the Royal Naval Air Station at Brawdy, which I know well, in commission indefinitely. It was announced in answer to a Question by the hon. Member last week. Both he and I have had anxiety when its future after 1962 was not certain.
Not only will Brawdy be kept in commission, but a good deal of reconstruction work will be done there. The perimeter track and the main runway will be strengthened and may need to be extended. Additions will be made to the technical buildings and living accommodation. The station will remain open during the reconstruction period and the money which the Admiralty proposes to spend on the reconstruction will bring further employment to the county.
I have endeavoured to answer all the points raised by the hon. Member about 168 the county, and I have mentioned one or two other factors which seem to me relevant to its future. I assure the hon. Member, as, I trust, my words have done, that the Government are fully familiar with all the aspects of the considerable problems that face the county in this sad and difficult period while employment on reconstruction work is tapering off to almost nothing and the new works which we hope to attract there have not yet come. I believe that with the magnificent deep water harbour, the future is good. I certainly assure the hon. Member that the Government, helped, I am confident, by all the local people as well, will do everything in their power to mitigate the unemployment that may exist during the interim period.
§ Mr. James McInnes (Glasgow, Central)The right hon. Gentleman made the statement that the allocation of Admiralty ship-repairing contracts was determined by the tender price. Do I understand that that is the only factor which is taken into consideration? Let us assume, for example, that there are two tenderers quite close to one another but one of them is located in an area of high unemployment. Is such a factor not taken into account in determining the awarding of the Admiralty contract?
§ Mr. BrookeI said that in my speech. If the hon. Member needs further clarification, no doubt he will put his question to my hon. Friend the Civil Lord. I sought to make clear, however, that in offering ship-repair work for tender, the Admiralty took into account both the employment situation in the area concerned and the state of the ship repairing industry nationally.