SWANSEA (DOCKS AND CARGO HANDLING FACILITIES) (Hansard, 19 July 1965)

§ Mr. Neil McBride (Swansea, East)

I wish to raise tonight the question of the docks and general cargo handling facilities at the Port of Swansea. In this connection, on 3rd June last, I asked my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade if he would … take steps to publish, for the benefit of exporters, regular information on the capacity available in the various docks throughout the country, and the special facilities which each is able to provide".—[OFFICIAL. REPORT, 3rd June, 1965; Vol. 713, c. 247.] I was not at all pleased with my right hon. Friend's Written Answer, because I believe that, in the wider context, these facilities should be given the widest possible publicity, in the fullest possible detail, so that shippers and others interested may be made aware of the facilities that are available. This is a matter of importance from the country's trading point of view, particularly for Swansea which, since the 17th century, has been one of the major ports of Wales and of the nation as a whole.

At present the Port of Swansea is suffering from a decline in trade at the docks. In the first six months of this year trade at the port slumped by over a third, compared with the first six months of 1964. I believe that if exporters knew the full range of facilities available there more trade would accrue to the port, which would be a good thing for the area. It should be remembered that for very many years Swansea has been the location of the tinplate industry and the main outlet for anthracite, which is mined to the north and north-east of the town.

In a Written Answer today I was informed that in 1938 3,759,023 tons of anthracite was shipped from the port. By 1964 the figure had dropped to 1,641,244 tons, with the addition of 185,889 tons of coastwise shipping. This situation is causing great concern because of the reduction in coal shipments and, in the words of Mr. Bryan Rees, the 1305 district secretary of the Transport and General Workers' Union: The fall has been particularly marked in coal shipping. In the early part of the year, it was predicted that coal shipments would be in the region of 2¼ million tons this year, but it is now unlikely to exceed 1½ million tons". The figures prove that much more information should be made known so that shippers and others may know the full extent of the facilities available, including berthage, the sizes of ships which can be accommodated, cranage arrangements and the other vital services which are available.

Many firms are tied to a tradition of shipping from certain major ports. I believe that they would welcome information about alternative major ports, particularly Swansea. One important factor is the excellent labour relations existing in Swansea. The district secretary of the T. and G.W.U. wrote to me saying: On industrial relations in the Port of Swansea, it is true to say that our industrial relations is first class and that there is never any trouble as far as stoppages of work are concerned, all our differences are discussed with the Employers at the Local Joint Committee and are resolved amicably. If a dispute does arise, then the procedure is to go to the South Wales Joint Council for determination". That statement is confirmed on pages 24 and 25 of the April edition of Export, the journal of the Institute of Export. Thus, we have corroboration from both sides of industry about the excellence of labour relations in the port, which is a major factor in the quick turn-round of ships.

As far as facilities are concerned, the largest vessel ever to have used the port was the "Edmund B. Alexandra", a troopship of the United States, 687 ft. long, with a breadth of 74 ft. 3 in., and a draught of 31 ft. 3 in. The largest vessel ever to have dry docked was the "Cape Howe", which was 608 ft. long and 80 ft. broad. The largest tanker to use the port was the "Hyperion", which had a length of 605 ft. 6 in., a breadth of 77 ft. 2 in. and a draught of 32 ft. 4 in. The largest port cargo vessel was the "Wildura"—length 568 ft., breadth 78 ft. 6 in. and draught 32 ft. 3½ in. The largest dry cargo ever handled at the port was 22,185 tons of steel coils for the Steel Company of Wales.

1306 We should also consider the excellent facilities, the fork-lift trucks, all manner of cranage and an excellent floating crane. Then there are the berths in the Queen's Dock which has five deep-sea tanker berths, three coastal tanker berths and three repair berths. The King's Dock has 10 general cargo berths, all for deep-sea ships, three bulk cargo berths, also deep-sea, and five coaling berths. In the Prince of Wales Dock there are four general cargo berths, for coastal and near continental shipping, and three bulk cargo berths, as well as five coaling berths.

These things are all very important and with the elasticity of working and excellent relations between management and labour in connection with the activities I have quoted, it makes excellent reading for Swansea. I have consulted the Chamber of Commerce in Swansea and it is particularly concerned about the decline of traffic in the first six months of this year and says, in relation to coal: The position with coal, however, is more obscure and no assurance can be obtained that the drop of 374,628 tons will be recovered let alone built up to the annual figure of two million tons which had been forecast some 18 months ago. This is a disturbing feature as the decision to erect the High Speed Coal Loading Device at Swansea must depend upon the amount of coal passing through the port to justify the expenditure that would be involved in the provision of such an appliance. There is another and more serious aspect of that which I should like to draw to the attention of my hon. Friend. I would say in regard to general cargo trade that the trend has developed during the last year for liner companies to require greater inducement to call at Swansea than in years past when 500 tons was generally accepted as the inducement. Today, with rising costs, most lines look for 800 to 1,000 tons before they will send their ships to the port, failing which the cargo has to be coasted to Liverpool or some other United Kingdom port. That is two-way handling which would not add to the cheapness of freightage.

Since this is a British Transport Docks Board port, I would point out that charges at Swansea and other South Wales ports have been considerably increased by the Board during the last two years including dues, stevedoring, cranage and like 1307 services. The Chamber of Commerce comments: One wonders whether the Board are not gradually pricing the South Wales ports out of existence. Then again, when we look at the rest of the position, I would draw my hon. Friend's attention to the matter of finance for development. A Written Answer today which I had from the Minister of Transport said: The British Transport Docks Board's programme for the years 1965 to 1969 includes £14.5 million and £4.5 million for improvements at Hull and Swansea respectively. The extent to which this programme will be implemented remains to be decided."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 19th July, 1965; Vol. 716, c. 163.] Since both are British Transport Docks Board ports, I should like to know why Hull should get £14.5 million for the extensions while Swansea gets only £4.5 million for improvements. When will implementation take place? What will be the nature of the developments that are contemplated? How much improvement in berthage will take place? Swansea has safe and easy entrance for large types of vessels in the general cargo trade, and can accommodate ships of a draught of up to 29 ft. at all times and of 32 ft. 6 in. at spring tides. Has the financial implementation, when carried out, anything to do with this?

Swansea is a modern port, with a series of docks, well-equipped deep-water quays, transit sheds, warehouses, cranes, dry docks and repair facilities unequalled in the country. There is access to all these facilities and, indeed, with the improvement of road facilities this should be a good outlet for large exports. The port serves as a gateway for this trade and has a great story to tell to all shippers in Britain. Representing, as I do, Swansea, East, where the docks are, I make no apology for mentioning all this.

I believe that the port meets all the criteria of world shipping in general cargo terms. The provision of these adequate facilities needs publicity to focus the attention of exporters and importers, because I believe that if they use ports like this they will add to the country's wealth and to the quick turn-round of ships, and not be tied to the traditional use of the larger ports.

§ The Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport (Mr. Stephen Swingler)

The port of Swansea, which we are now discussing, is operated by the nationalised British Transport Docks Board, as are all the South Wales ports except Milford Haven. My hon. Friend the Member for Swansea, East (Mr. McBride) has been extremely assiduous over some time in pressing the claims of Swansea, as is his right and duty. We recognise the importance of what he has said. He has very ably outlined the general picture of the facilities at Swansea and some of the critical factors at the moment, and I do not want to spend any time at all in repeating what he has said.

I very much welcome the publicity he has given by raising this matter on the debate on the Adjournment, albeit at this time of night, and I hope that it will play some part in spreading knowledge of the importance of Swansea as a port. I especially welcome the tribute that has been paid to the port's labour relations. I recognise the need for publicity in these matters, and I shall have more to say about that in a moment.

I am very glad to have the opportunity to speak about the facilities of the port of Swansea, and to say as much as I can, as Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport, to encourage my hon. Friend and his constituents to take a reasonably optimistic view of the future of Swansea as a port.

My hon. Friend is quite rightly anxious about the plans of the British Transport Docks Board for future development and modernisation. Let me say, to begin with that since 1948 when, so to speak, nationalisation took over in Swansea after a period of considerable decline and crisis, about £3 million has been spent on the modernisation of facilities at Swansea and it has paid off. Since that time, contrary to what is often said about nationalisation, especially by hon. Members on the benches opposite who apparently are unable to be present at the moment, the venture under nationalisation has enabled Swansea to be a paying proposition.

My right hon. Friend only this afternoon, in answer to a Question by my hon. Friend, told him about the possible future expenditure of an additional £4½ million on the port of Swansea. I must 1309 make it clear that this sum is included in the British Transport Docks Board's programme for the period 1965–69, but it has by no means resolved yet to invest this money, as is true of all its plans and proposals for all the ports which it controls; but it gives some idea of the thinking of the British Transport Docks Board, namely, the fact that it wishes to see further modernisation at Swansea, which it feels has a definite future.

My hon. Friend mentioned particularly the question of coal. A large item in this programme that I would mention is the sum of £1½ to £2 million for high-speed coal handling appliances. At the moment, the British Transport Docks Board is engaged in discussions with the National Coal Board about this matter. I know that my hon. Friend will appreciate that, much as we may wish to see the money spent, we have to be certain that the future traffic in coal is going to justify this substantial expenditure. The outcome of the discussions between the British Transport Docks Board and the National Coal Board will determine what the expenditure will be on coal handling facilities, but, at the moment, we are optimistic about the possibilities in this respect, and trust that Swansea is going to have a very definite future in the handling of coal.

The guidance of the interim plan of the National Ports Council is not yet available as the background to our debate, though we hope that it will be very shortly. What the Council has to say about the future of the South Wales ports in general and Swansea in particular will be of very great relevance to all the matters that have been mentioned by my hon. Friend, but I would ask my hon. Friend to appreciate that it will be for the Docks Board, in the light of the Ports Council's report on its interim national plan for ports all over the country, to formulate the particular plans for Swansea.

We know that there has been a considerable amount of speculation about the effects of other plans upon Swansea. My hon. Friend has not mentioned it tonight, but I did brief myself very carefully on the very interesting speech that he made the other day in the Welsh Grand Committee. Some mention was made there about the possible effects of the recommendations which the Govern- 1310 ment have accepted about iron ore terminals at other ports in. South Wales. It could be—and I say no more than that—that, for example, when Port Talbot is developed, as I am sure it will be, as an iron ore terminal, the closure of the other docks at Port Talbot may be considered and there may be a possibility of transfer of traffic to Swansea.

That is certainly a matter that we have in mind in relation to the decline of trade and traffic that my hon. Friend referred to the other day in his speech—for example, in tinplate. I certainly would not myself expect any decrease in tinplate shipments from Swansea as a result of the building of the iron ore terminal at Port Talbot. Certainly the Ministry of Transport is determined not to jump to any conclusion that the future facilities for handling, for example petroleum products at Port Talbot, referred to in the recent White Paper on the iron ore terminals, would automatically take away any valuable trade from Swansea. I have been given to understand that the oil company concerned has it in mind to handle additional, and not necessarily existing, traffic at Port Talbot—that there will be a net addition to the amount of traffic in petroleum products—and, therefore, that developments in other ports in South Wales would in no way jeopardise the trade in Swansea.

I know that my hon. Friend has been concerned too about the Portbury scheme. My right hon. Friend has the responsibility for considering all possible effects of the recommendations which the National Ports Council may make. Here again we shall take into account very carefully indeed the merits of the port at Swansea, and the need to modernise, develop and expand the facilities of Swansea, in considering any recommendations about Portbury.

I come to the first question raised by my hon. Friend, about publicity. He said that excellent facilities are available at Swansea but that they are not sufficiently known to many manufacturers. I can assure him that the Docks Board is taking action to make sure that the best possible use is made of this port, and it is engaged at the moment in a survey into what makes exporters prefer one port to another. Questionnaires have been sent out by the Docks Board to firms 1311 throughout the country in order to discover, especially for those concerned with exports to South America—to Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay, for example—why they use one port in preference to another. The Board is very anxious to gain this information and to promote the maximum use of the ports under its control. Through its contacts in the main centres of industry and commerce it is doing its best to make the facilities of places like Swansea better known. A firm of public relations and advertising consultants is at the present moment advising the Docks Board, and future publicity will be related to individual ports in order to advertise their special merits. There is at the moment a commercial and traffic development officer in South Wales who is maintaining personal contacts locally and also with trading interests further afield.

It is inevitable in this transitional stage that there are many questions that my hon. Friend has raised that I cannot 1312 answer because we are at the moment awaiting the announcement of the recommendations of the National Ports Council, on which the Docks Board will have to base its judgment. But the Docks Board and the Ministry of Transport are well aware that Swansea port has very much to offer, and everything possible will be done to attract extra traffic to it. The management of the Docks Board at the moment is lively and energetic, and is keenly interested in the future of the ports in South Wales generally and in particular in Swansea.

Therefore, there is no ground for pessimism. We are on the eve of great developments and substantial investment in the modernisation of our ports. Very shortly announcements will be made by my right hon. Friend on these matters, and Swansea is one of the ports which will be very seriously considered.