§ 29. Mr. Awberyasked the Minister of Transport if he is aware that the tanker "Naess Sovereign", 88,500 tons, registered in London, entered service this year and a sister ship of the same size is to be launched in October; and which ports in this country are capable of receiving these vessels through their entrance locks.
§ Mr. MarplesYes, Sir. These and still bigger vessels can be received at Milford Haven and Finnart.
§ Mr. AwberyIs the Minister aware that this situation constitutes a grave reproach to and reflection upon the British transport industry in that we have ships being constructed now which cannot find a port in this country? [HON. MEMBERS: "He said that they can."] There are two ships being constructed at present of 88,000 tons and 122 ft. beam. There is not a port in this country to take them. Is it not a reflection upon the greatest maritime nation in the world that such ships are made to remain in the Eastern hemisphere because they cannot find a port in the Western hemisphere?
§ Mr. MarplesI said that there were two ports which could receive vessels of up to 100,000 deadweight tons, Milford Haven and Finnart, so the hon. Gentleman is not quite right in his facts.
§ Mr. AwberyWhat about the 122 ft. beam?
§ Mr. MarplesPerhaps the hon. Gentleman will put a Question down about that. It is different from the Question on the Order Paper.
§ Mr. CallaghanIs this not an important matter which the Minister ought to keep in mind? Where can these ships be dry-docked? Where can they receive a proper overhaul in this 422 country? Is it not high time that the Ministry of Transport took up a ten-year-old report and started constructing some dry docks to take vessels of this sort?
§ Mr. MarplesI am sure that the hon. Member knows as well as everyone else in the House that the particular ship which is the subject of the Question can be dry-docked at King George V dock at Southampton and the Cammell Laird No. 5 dock at Birkenhead which is about to be completed.
§ Mr. P. WilliamsAre there not two quite separate points here, first, that the economics of ships of this size have not altogether been proved yet, and, second, that because of the perhaps, inevitable increase in the size of ships up to something in the neighbourhood of the figures we are considering, there is need to improve the repair facilities in this country, which calls for another look at the Finance Bill?
§ Mr. MarplesWith regard to the second part of that supplementary question, that is for my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who, of course, deals with the Finance Bill, and not me. With regard to the first part, as I have said, in this country we have docks which can cope with these ships.
§ Mr. AwberyGive us the names of the ports.