HC Deb 16 July 1964 vol 698 cc1401-3
19. Mr. Lawson

asked the Minister of Power if he will make a statement about the effect on steel prices of the ruling given recently by the Restrictive Practices Court, and on the use of his powers in this regard.

21. Mr. Ross

asked the Minister of Power if he will direct the Iron and Steel Board to review the system of laying down maximum prices for steel, in view of the ruling by the Restrictive Practices Court that certain price agreements based on these prices are contrary to the public interest.

22. Mr. T. Fraser

asked the Minister of Power what consultations he has had with the Iron and Steel Board consequent on the ruling by the Restrictive Practices Court on steel price agreements.

Mr. Peyton

As the Iron and Steel Board has said, the judgment is not likely in this period of high demand to have any marked immediate impact on prices. Nor does it call for the exercise of the Minister's statutory powers.

Mr. Lawson

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this period of very high demand may not last? Is he not aware that we are asking what his intentions are? Is it his intention to leave this so-called highly competitive and very efficient industry to go on all the time safeguarding itself on the basis of controlled prices? Does he not wish to see a little more competition in prices enter into the industry?

Mr. Peyton

The position is quite clear. The Conservative Government set up the Restrictive Practices Court. The Government also decided not to exclude the iron and steel industry from its jurisdiction. An important judgment has now been delivered, and naturally, my right hon. Friend would wish to consult the Iron and Steel Board and the industry before deciding future policy.

Mr. Fraser

The hon. Gentleman has just said that the Minister would wish to consult the Iron and Steel Board. But he said that he was answering Question No. 22 which asks what consultations the Minister has had with the Iron and Steel Board. Can the hon. Gentleman tell us when his right hon. Friend will initiate discussions with the Iron and Steel Board and with what end in view? Is it not the fact that part of the steel industry's case before the Restrictive Practices Court was that it was operating on prices laid down by the Iron and Steel Board and this system of price fixing was the basis of the agreement under review? Would the hon. Gentleman tell the House whether the Minister agrees with the ruling of the Restrictive Practices Court?

Mr. Peyton

It is not for me to agree or to disagree with the judgment of the court. I apologise to the hon. Member for Hamilton (Mr. T. Fraser) if any confusion was caused by my use of tenses in my Answer. Perhaps I may say to him that whatever system may be evolved to produce a virile, competitive steel industry, public ownership would probably be the last one we should think of.

Mr. Skeet

Is my hon. Friend aware that one of the objects of the Restrictive Practices Court was to ensure ample competition in the economy, and that nationalisation could not effect this?

Mr. Mitchison

Accepting, as no doubt the Government do, that these agreements were not in the national interest, what do they propose to do about it?

Mr. Peyton

I think I am right in saying that the court decided that they were not in the national interest because they were not necessary. As I have said, at a time of high demand the judgment of the court is unlikely to have an immediate effect on steel prices. The matter is still under consideration and it is a difficult problem.

Mr. Ross

Surely the Minister must appreciate—after all that we have been hearing about the importance of this industry and the need for freedom and the rest of it—that this judgment is something which demands action from the Government? Are we to understand—irrespective of what may have been said by the Secretary of State for Industry, Trade and Regional Development—that the Government are not prepared to do anything at all?

Mr. Peyton

The judgment of the court demands action by the industry, though one is perfectly prepared to have suggestions from all sides about what should be done. Nevertheless, I find those from advocates of public ownership most surprising.

Mr. Fraser

As there is, apparently, some confusion in the minds of hon. Members about what was the ruling of the Restrictive Practices Court, will the hon. Gentleman undertake to make the text available to hon. Members?

Mr. Peyton

I should like to consider that.