§ 10. Mr. Lubbockasked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will refer the price increases being imposed by the South-Eastern Electricity Board to the National Board for Prices and Incomes.
§ 16. Mr. Evelyn Kingasked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs whether he will refer to the National Board for Prices and Incomes the increased electricity charges imposed by the Southern Electricity Board in the area of Portland and Weymouth.
§ 25. Mr. Goodhartasked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs whether he will now refer the increase in rates charged by the South-Eastern Electricity Board to the National Board for Prices and Incomes.
§ Mr. George BrownNo, Sir.
§ Mr. LubbockIs the First Secretary of State aware that the increases imposed by the London Electricity Board on the domestic user which he has already referred to the National Board for Prices and Incomes are only 9.1 per cent., whereas those of the South-Eastern Electricity Board are 13.3 per cent.? How can he possibly in logic defend the reference of one of these cases to the National Board without referring the other case?
§ Mr. BrownVery easily, because there are hurdles which increases in the nationalised sector have to surmount. One of them is the consultative committee. The consultative committee thought that the price increase proposed by the London Electricity Board was wrong. The consultative committee thought that the increase proposed by the Eastern Electricity Board was right. Therefore, having looked at the merits of both cases, taking into account the difference in the answers of the consultative committees, I thought that the one merited reference and the other did not.
§ Mr. KingThe right hon. Gentleman said "No, Sir". May I ask him, "Why not, Sir?", because this percentage increase is quite out of tune both with his policy and with what is necessary?
§ Mr. BrownI am sorry, but the hon. Gentleman clearly was not listening. I gave that answer in reply to the previous question.
§ Mr. GoodhartDoes the First Secretary of State recall that the National Board for Prices and Incomes encouraged the customers of the road haulage industry not to pay the increased charges? What will happen if the customers of this nationalised board refuse to pay the increased charges?
§ Mr. Hugh FraserDoes not the right hon. Gentleman agree that there must be something rather wrong with his hurdles, since in one case 9 per cent. is all right whereas in the other case 13 per cent. is wrong? Surely it is time the right hon. Gentleman changed the hurdles?
§ Mrs. Shirley WilliamsDoes not my right hon. Friend find it stange that hon. Members opposite are so ready to wish him to refer increases in prices to a Board in which they have said they do not believe?
§ Mr. LubbockI believe in this Board. I think that it has an important function to perform. May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if there are some other criteria which he looks at in addition to the percentage increases, which I have shown him are larger in the case of the South-Eastern Electricity Board? Will he state what those criteria are so that we can evaluate his decisions?
§ Mr. BrownIf the hon. Gentleman would like to table a wider Question, I will certainly answer it. The matter cannot be dealt with simply by reference to the figure involved. There are many other considerations to be taken into account. I repeat that in the case of a nationalised industry, unlike private enterprise industry, a consumers' body 1816 has to be consulted first. It was not only I who decided that in this case the merits did not warrant reference to the Board. The consumers' body, which had every opportunity to refuse, also thought that there was no reason to object.
§ Dame Irene WardA terrible muddle.