HC Deb 17 May 1960 vol 623 cc1075-7
13. Mr. Manuel

asked the President of the Board of Trade to what extent, before taking the decision to permit the building by Fords of a new £10 million tractor factory at Basildon, Essex, he consulted with the Minister of Transport on the probable effect of this development on road safety and traffic congestion in Essex and the adjacent parts of England.

Mr. Maudling

This development involves no additional employment: the increased output will be largely exported. There was therefore no need for such consultations.

Mr. Manuel

Does not the President of the Board of Trade think that today —when we have such an appalling number of accidents, resulting in many cases in death, every day on the roads —in any future negotiations for the development of a site, he should consult with the Minister of Transport to see if it is likely to add to the congestion on the roads in that area? Obviously, whether the same number of staff is to be employed or not, congestion is likely to be concentrated round that £10 million factory in that area, and I hope the Minister will agree that this matter should be in the forefront in any negotiations of a similar character that take place in future.

Mr. Maudling

The hon. Member's supplementary question seems to me merely to repeat in other words what is in his original Question, to which I can only give the same answer.

Mr. Jay rose

—

Mr. Manuel

On a point of order. May I ask you, Mr. Speaker, if you would consider ruling that the Minister was quite wrong, as my choice of words was quite different, and the phrase "forefront of negotiations" does not appear in my Question at all, and I think it is impertinence—

Mr. Speaker

The hon. Member may address points of order to me, but not that sort of thing, which is not a point of order.

Mr. Jay

I was about to ask the President of the Board of Trade—

Mr. Manuel

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. As you say that I must not address that point of order to you, may I put this to you? The Minister said that I said something which I did not say. Surely I am at liberty to raise the matter with you with a view to fair treatment being extended to both sides of the House?

Mr. Speaker

I do not want to take up time unduly. What did not strike me very much as a point of order was the request that I should rule that the Minister was impertinent. He may or he may not have been, but it did not seem to me to be a point of order.

Mr. Jay

To return to the substance of the Question, would the right hon. Gentleman agree that, if this development were to lead to a large increase in employment in the Dagenham and Basildon area, it would be an unfortunate use of his powers under the Local Employment Act?

Mr. Maudling

I quite agree. Had that been likely to happen, I certainly would not have agreed to it.

Mr. Lawson

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the position is that if the firm is big enough it will get its way, despite anything that the President of the Board of Trade says?

Mr. Maudling

The position is precisely the opposite. I have made it clear on more than one occasion in this House that where a firm wants additional space in order to get greater production from its existing labour force, it would be absolute folly to refuse it and it would not be in the national interest. It is understood that the purpose of the Ford expansion in this area is to increase not the labour force but the productivity of the existing labour force. All development is taking place outside the south of England in terms of employment.