§ 21. Colonel Lancasterasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will make a statement about the order of priority to be adopted by the Iron and Steel Holding and Realisation Agency in disposing of its holdings in the iron and steel industry.
§ The Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr. Selwyn Lloyd)The Government have decided that in all the circumstances it is best at the present stage to give priority to the sale of the fixed interest securities which the Agency holds in companies already denationalised. The Agency is proceeding accordingly.
§ Colonel LancasterWhy is Richard Thomas & Baldwins not being sold? Does my right hon. Friend's Answer mean that the Government do not propose to dispose of this company?
§ Mr. LloydNo, Sir. It is still—to use the wards of my right hon. Friend the Minister of Power in a debate in June—
the firm intention and, indeed … the confident hope that the work of the Agency will be substantially complete."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 27th June, 1960; Vol. 625, c. 992.]by the end of this Parliament.2564 That certainly includes Richard Thomas & Baldwins. But, as my right hon. Friend said in answer to a Question which appears in the OFFICIAL REPORT today, Richard Thomas & Baldwins is engaged in very extensive developments, and it has became clear that its sale should be deferred until these are nearer to maturity.
§ Mr. MarquandAs the Chancellor's Answer means that many firms now wholly owned by the Agency are to have a respite and will not be sold for same time to come, will he instruct the Iron and Steel Holding and Realisation Agency that it is the sole owner of these concerns and that it will not do for Ministers to say that they are selling them for a song because their profits have gone down? The Agency is the manager of these firms. Will the right hon. Gentleman remind it that it has a duty to look after them properly and to see that they are equipped with new capital to enable them to carry on?
§ Mr. LloydI am certain that the Agency is aware of its duties in this matter. In the matter of sales one has to pay regard to the interests of the concerns themselves, and in this case I believe that it is to the interest of the concern that it should be sold. In this case I think the Agency acted correctly. The point is that when these firms are handed back to private enterprise the State still gets over half the profits they make.
§ Mr. J. GriffithsDo I gather from the right hon. and learned Gentleman that Richard Thomas & Baldwins, under public ownership, is doing so well, and is expanding in contrast to its competitors in private ownership, that he has come to the conclusion that no national purpose would be served by disposiing of it?
§ Mr. LloydNo, that is not at all the inference to be drawn. The fact is that the company would have to find substantial sums for its development in addition to the figure of £150 million already mentioned. There is to be a loan of about £70 million from the Ministry of Power, and the Agency has other funds, but not enough to enable this development to take place. We propose to sell its fixed interest securities so that the Agency should have the money to enable this development to take place.
§ Mr. JayIs the right hon. and learned Gentleman saying that as soon as the Government have lent Richard Thomas & Baldwins another £70 million it will sell the company?
§ Mr. LloydIt is our intention to sell the company. [Laughter.] Certainly. We have never concealed the fact that we were intending to sell it. We have said so time and again. At election after election we have said that we intended to return this industry to private enterprise. The point is that when it goes back to private enterprise I as Chancellor of the Exchequer will still have an interest of over 50 per cent. in it.
§ Mr. GriffithsCan we have an assurance that when Richard Thomas & Baldwins is sold to private enterprise—when it will have this £70 million of public money—we shall not suffer the proportionate loss which has been revealed by the Economic Secretary on the sale of the Llanelly Steel Company?