GAS SUPPLY, WEST MIDLANDS (Hansard, 25 January 1966)

§ The Minister of Power (Mr. Frederick Lee)
Because of a series of breakdowns at the West Midlands Gas Board's plants at Tipton and Coleshill the Board was forced to impose severe restrictions on the use of gas by industry on Thursday, 20th January. Practically the whole of industry in the area, except where supplies were needed to avoid damage to plant, was without gas until Monday, 24th January, when supplies were restored to about 270 firms in the Birmingham and Stoke areas including the Potteries.
These difficulties have been due to technical failures and not to miscalculation of demand. The Board had planned to provide sufficient capacity to meet a daily peak demand this winter of 490 million cubic feet, well above the demand actually experienced. However, last Thursday, 20th January, both streams at the Coleshill plant were out of commission because of the failure of boiler feed pumps, causing a loss of 50 million cubic feet of gas a day. One stream was brought 36 back into operation the following day but the other had suffered damage during the emergency shut-down. The first stream at Tipton was already under repair and on 21st January the second stream developed boiler trouble and had to be shut down. The Board was thus deprived of a large proportion of the gas which feeds the Board's high pressure grid.
With one stream at Coleshill working and the fall in demand due to the recent warmer weather a partial resumption of supplies became possible yesterday. But supplies of high pressure gas into the grid are still inadequate and resumption in those areas relying exclusively on the grid, in particular, the motor car centres of Coventry and Longbridge, is still not possible.
The Boards and the contractors' engineers are working round the clock to repair the damaged plants. It is too early yet to say precisely when supplies can be fully restored, but it is hoped that this may be possible in the next few days.

§ Mr. Peyton
May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether this very serious situation does not go a long way towards making the case for the establishment of a gas grid and more effective centralised control of the industry? May I further ask whether he does not agree that the situation shows up the appointment of the Winter Emergency Committee as the "gimmick" that it really was?
In view of the right hon. Gentleman's admission that there was no miscalculation of demand, was it not odd of the Prime Minister, whose habit of blaming other people is only too well known, to seek to blame the Opposition for the consequences of two breakdowns of plant—[Interruption.]—If only the right hon. Gentleman would listen for once. Is it not odd of the Prime Minister to blame the Opposition for the consequences of two breakdowns which took place 15 months after the Opposition left office? Do not these flimsy alibis mean that the Government are running out, not of gas, but of power?

§ Mr. Lee
The Winter Emergency Committee has not the ability to mend pumps or to repair boilers. I agree with what the hon. Gentleman has said about looking into the possibility of a gas grid. In fact, we began to do precisely that shortly 37 after we came into office. The House will have noticed that the Gas Council has now amended its internal organisation so as to facilitate this.
I remember hearing and reading that right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite were suggesting that we were to blame as well. However, both these plants were commissioned long before the present Government came to power and, therefore, it was ridiculous of the Opposition to assert that we could in any way be blamed for the breakdowns. On the other hand, my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister was on very strong ground in suggesting that the Tories had not properly planned the capital programmes for both gas and electricity.

§ Mr. Palmer
If there is any technical blame to be apportioned in this matter—and I say "if"—does not my right hon. Friend agree that it is the responsibility of the private contractors who supplied unsatisfactory plant?

§ Mr. Lee
My hon. Friend the Member for Bristol, Central (Mr. Palmer) is quite right.[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] If my hon. Friend is not right, how is it that new plant breaks down the moment it goes or stream? I would have thought this the authentic reply to those who believe that my hon. Friend is wrong.

§ Mr. Grimond
Can the right hon. Gentleman say what was the cause of the breakdown? Is there no other reserve in the event of such a breakdown?

§ Mr. Lee
As the right hon. Gentleman probably knows, I have paid a visit to Tipton. [Laughter.] If the kindergarten will listen for a second, I repeat that I have been there and have looked at the cause of the breakdown. This was a great gap in a header pump, which is a 40 per cent. brittle pipe that should not, according to the strength of pipe required, have been in danger of suffering this kind of damage. An inquiry is to be made as to why it broke.
The right hon. Gentleman will recall that Coleshill, as well as Tipton, broke down. When we have so much bigger gas works than previously, it means that when there is a breakdown supply falls well below demand. I remind the House, however, that the second Tipton plant is to be in production by next year and that it is hoped that this will enable the West 38 Midlands Gas Board to have supplies well above any possible demand.

§ Dr. Bray
Does not my right hon. Friend agree that the experience of the West Midlands Gas Board points to the need for increased underground storage? In the inquiry to be made, will he compare the experience of the gas industry in operating this plant with that of the chemical fertiliser industry in operating similar plant?

§ Mr. Lee
My hon. Friend will recall that, in legislation last year, we gave the gas industry power to store underground. My hon. Friend will also be aware that this plant used to be known as the "I.C.I. plant." The gas industry is quickly expanding. Last year, demand was up by 12 per cent., which is a very rapid rate of growth. It may well be that, in view of this, the industry will have to look at the type of reserves it needs to have against the possibility of breakdowns of this sort.

§ Mr. Heath
If the Minister is intending to hold an inquiry into the way in which the equipment functioned, should not he await the results of that inquiry before he damns the reputation of British manufacturers greatly concerned with exports? Secondly, will he reread his statement again and realise how grateful we are that he has repudiated the Prime Minister's statement of last Saturday? We are grateful to the Minister for the action that he has taken.

§ Mr. Lee
Awaiting the results of inquiries before giving answers is not something usually to be attributed to the Leader of the Opposition. I think that he has anticipated quite a few inquiries. I did not in any way damn any institution or firm—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] No, I did not. I was asked whether it was a fact that certain plant coming from a certain source had broken down. The answer is "yes".

§ Mr. Geoffrey Lloyd
Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that shop stewards have approached industrial managements in Birmingham with a view to asking the Minister to make up their rates of wages to what they would have been under normal working conditions? Could he tell us his attitude to this?

§ Mr. Lee
When I was in the area yesterday I was approached not by shop 39 stewards but by owners in the car industry on the subject and I suggested that this was a question for the lawyers and not for me. However, it may well be—and I am thinking aloud—that if the principle of compensation were to be involved some people who now think they have a good case might find themselves paying more out than they would be getting now.

§ Mr. Hogg
Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that he appears at any rate to be endorsing the charge against private manufacturers made by the hon. Member for Bristol Central (Mr. Palmer)? In view of the pendance of an inquiry, will the right hon. Gentleman repudiate his answer?

§ Mr. Lee
The right hon. and learned Gentleman cannot have been listening very closely. My hon. Friend the Member for Bristol, Central (Mr. Palmer) rightly pointed out that certain plant that had been delivered from certain manufacturers had failed. I endorsed that. No matter how the right hon. and learned Gentleman tries to twist things, that is the fact. Therefore, when I am asked whether I should not withdraw my answer before the inquiry, I say that there is no need to withdraw. It is an obvious fact. What the inquiry will look at are the reasons for the breakdown. All I say is that certain equipment did break down.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. There has been generally too much power. We must get on.