HC Deb 01 November 1962 vol 666 cc309-11
Mr. Morris

(by Private Notice) asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on his decision to sanction the sale by the Iron and Steel Holding and Realisation Agency of £25 million of debenture stock of the Steel Company of Wales.

The Chief Secretary to the Treasury and Paymaster-General (Mr. John Boyd-Carpenter)

I have nothing to add to the Treasury Minute which was laid before this House yesterday in accordance with the usual practice.

Mr. Morris

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his continued steps to sanction the sale of the steel industry back to the money changers and insurance companies before the election is doctrinaire Toryism at its worst? Will he tell the House what is the loss involved in this transaction, what is the total cumulative loss as far as the Steel Company of Wales is concerned and why, at this most unfortunate time, having regard to the financial state of this firm, the industrial unrest of last year and the extension of steel-making capacity in South Wales, it is being sold back now, and further, what are the Government's intentions with regard to the remainder of the steel industry?

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

The Iron and Steel Holding and Realisation Agency which advises us on these matters and my right hon. Friend and myself are discharging the duty placed upon us by Parliament in the Act of 1953 to proceed with the disposal of this industry. As far as the price is concerned, we have acted as usual in these matters on the highly expert advice of the Agency which, overall, has guided us in these matters in a way which I think the House generally, whatever the views of hon. Members about steel nationalisation, has resulted in our obtaining a fair price for this national property. The sale takes place next week, and I have nothing further to add.

Mr. Callaghan

The right hon. Gentleman cannot ride off on the matter in this way. Will he please tell the House and the country why it is at this moment that he has chosen to put this stock on the market, when the Act has been in existence now for nine years? Will he also tell us whether it is a fact that a loss of nearly £5 million will be sustained by selling this stock now, taken in conjunction with the stock sold last year? What imperative motive is driving the Government to dispose of stock of this sort which in due course will yield a handsome tax-free profit to those who buy it, but will leave the nation worse off?

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

I appreciate the hon. Gentleman's endorsement of the stock, but I do not know why he refers to this moment. That is part of a continuing process which has been going on for a number of years when, in the light of the advice which we have and our own judgment as to the appropriate moment, the duties imposed on us by Parliament are carried out.

So far as the value of the stock is concerned, it is being offered at what in our judgment and with the aid of our advice is its value.

Mr. Callaghan

If the Minister's defence is that this is a duty laid on him by Parliament, will he ask Parliament for relief from a duty which will involve the nation in a loss of £5 million?

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

No, Sir. I do not think that the nation would wish to revert to the paths of nationalisation.

Mr. T. Fraser

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that this stock was acquired four years after the passage of the Act of 1953? Will he say whether this is calculated policy on the part of Her Majesty's Government to depress the economy and, when the market is at its very lowest, to predict a boom and then make a sale of Government stock before the boom starts?

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

I do not know why the hon. Gentleman seeks to read that into it. This is a company the control of which has already been returned to private ownership. This is the disposal of second debentures therein and, as I have said, it is a process which has been going on for a number of years in an orderly and, I think, in a not unfruitful fashion.

Mr. Callaghan

As the right hon. Gentleman was the author of the famous phrase "Jobs for the boys", does this not smell very much like "perks for the boys"?

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

If the hon. Gentleman likes so to describe the discharge of our statutory duty he is perfectly entitled to do so.

Mr. Morris

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the second part of my question, about the remainder of the industry, Richard Thomas and Baldwin?

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

The hon. Member received permission to ask a Private Notice Question which contains no notice whatever of that subject.

Mr. Morris

On a point of order. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I will raise the matter again at the earliest possible moment.