HC Deb 06 July 1966 vol 731 cc541-7

  1. (1) The power of the Minister to give assistance by way of grant under section 12(1) of the 1964 Act (grants to harbour authorities for execution of harbour works, etc.) shall include power to give such assistance to any person (whether or not a harbour authority) engaged in, or proposing to become engaged in, the improvement, maintenance or management of a harbour or the carrying out of harbour operations, and references in that section to a harbour authority shall be construed accordingly.
  2. (2) The expenses in respect of which such assistance may be given under the said section 12(1) shall include
    1. (a) expenses incurred, by any person proposing to become engaged in the improvement, maintenance or management of a harbour, in executing works for the construction of the harbour;
    2. (b) expenses incurred, by any person so engaged or proposing to become so engaged, in executing works for the improvement, maintenance or management of the harbour or in acquiring plant or equipment required for the carrying out at the harbour of harbour operations;
    3. (c) expenses incurred, by a harbour authority which is or proposes to become so engaged in the exercise and performance of statutory powers and duties, in acquiring land required for the purposes of the harbour or an extension thereof or in constructing a harbour;
    4. (d) expenses incurred, by any person engaged or proposing to become engaged in carrying out harbour operations at a harbour, in executing works required for the carrying out of harbour operations there or in acquiring plant or equipment so required.
  3. (3) In accordance with the last foregoing subsection paragraph (a) of section 12(1) of the 1964 Act (expenses in respect of which assistance may be given) shall cease to have effect, and in paragraph (b) of that subsection for the words "that paragraph"there shall be substituted the words" paragraph (a) of section 11(1) of this Act as amended by any subsequent enactment".
  4. (4) Any grant under the said section 12 may be made on such terms and conditions (including conditions for repayment in specified circumstances) as the Minister may think fit to impose.
  5. (5) The expenses in respect of which loans may be made to a harbour authority under section 11(1) of the 1964 Act (loans to harbour authorities for the execution of harbour works, etc.) shall include expenses incurred by a harbour authority— 542
    1. (a) in executing works for the construction, in the exercise and performance of statutory powers and duties, of a harbour which the authority proposes to become engaged in improving, maintaining or managing;
    2. (b) in acquiring plant or equipment required for the carrying out of harbour operations at a harbour which the authority is constructing or proposing to construct as aforesaid;
    3. (c) in acquiring land for the purpose of so constructing a harbour.—[Mr. Swingler.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

8.41 p.m.

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

I beg to move, That the Clause be read a Second time.

It is to this Clause that I referred last week when we presented the amended Money Resolution. On that occasion, I quite understood the complaints that were made by some hon. Members—including the hon. Member for Cirencester and Tewkesbury (Mr. Ridley)—about the procedure, but I want again to explain the circumstances in which this new Clause has been presented.

As hon. Members will know, in paragraph 55 of the White Paper on Investment Incentives— Cmnd. 2874 — the Government announced their intention of using the powers under the 1964 Harbours Act to provide the necessary financial assistance to bring about the reorganisation and modernisation of the ports. Since the publication of the White Paper, we have been urgently considering what assistance it would be appropriate to give, and taking advice and hearing representations from many quarters. Much of the advice has stressed that it is equally important to give assistance in this form to port operators as to the statutory port authorities, as provided under the 1964 Harbours Act.

This course was urged on us, for example, by the National Ports Council, by the Economic Development Committee for Export Movement, by the National Association of Port Employers, by the London Association of Public Wharfingers and by the British Shippers' Council. It is as a result of those consultations and representations that this Clause has been produced. The reason why it has been impossible to produce it before now—and why it was therefore necessary last week to go through the procedure of introducing the amended Money Resolution—was because of the consultations which quite properly should go on under the White Paper on Investment Incentives.

The purpose of this Clause—which appears complex on the surface in its drafting, but which is quite simple in its object—is to empower my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport to make grants towards the capital investment of non-statutory port authorities and operators as well as to statutory authorities which are provided for by Sections 11 and 12 of the Harbours Act, 1964, that is to say, those operators who carry out harbour operations as defined in that Act. That is the first purpose of the Clause.

The second purpose is to correct a defect which has been discovered in the 1964 Harbours Act. We have been advised that it is open to doubt whether that Act as it now stands empowers the Minister to make loans and grants towards the capital cost of constructing an entirely new harbour. It is perfectly clear that it was the intention of Parliament at that time that it should be provided for in the Harbours Act, 1964. We want to be quite sure that this is made plain in the law. Therefore, a subsection of this Clause clears the matter up.

8.45 p.m.

In the interesting discussion we had on the amended Money Resolution the question of cost was raised. The best estimate we can make of the cost of grants to operators and non-statutory authorities under this Clause is about £1 million each year. The total cost of the grant scheme decided upon by Her Majesty's Government is expected to be £9 million this year and about £13 million per year thereafter. Hon. Members will know that in a reply last week to my hon. Friend the Member for Woolwich, West (Mr. Hamling) the purposes were outlined. I should explain that Section 13 of the Harbours Act laid down the total amount which my right hon. Friend may give by way of loans and grants for this purpose and limited it to £50 million in all.

This limit may be increased under the 1964 Act to £100 million, but only by Resolution of this House. We do not propose at present to amend this limit in any way. Therefore, the amount of expenditure by way of loans and grants provided for by this extension of my right hon. Friend's powers is contained within the limits laid down in Section 13 of the Harbours Act. I trust that that explains the nature of the Clause and that it will commend itself to the House, because it is designed entirely, on the basis of representations made to us from many quarters I have mentioned, to assist and accelerate the process of reorganising and modernising the docks.

Mr. Nicholas Ridley (Cirencester and Tewkesbury)

I was interested to read in the Economist, after the few words which the Joint Parliamentary Secretary and I had last week on the occasion of the debate on the Money Resolution, that The practice also seems to be growing of inserting new things into Bills at the Committee stage. This makes the Opposition suspicious and suspicion decreases helpfulness. I am glad to be able to say, having listened to the hon. Gentleman's explanation of this Clause, and having had a chance to see it—which I did not have last week—that the Opposition are less suspicious and, therefore, will be more helpful in facilitating its passage.

I think it a pity that this way was chosen to bring about this quite important change. After all, we could have considered it in Committee. I also think it a little strange that we should have power to make grants to harbour authorities and employers in harbours not contained in general legislation, but in a Bill to do with the docks. It is a major part of the Government's whole policy to substitute investment grants for investment allowances.

This is no place to argue the case for or against that, but it seems strange that it was to the Docks and Harbours Bill that this was appended and not to the Bill dealing with investment grants which is now going through the House. It would have been better if it were embraced in the general legislation.

This is the only nationalised or publicly-owned industry which will receive the 20 per cent. grant for investment The rest of the nationalised concerns will not get the 20 per cent. grant on their main monopoly function, only on their peripheral activities. We make no corn-plaint, because we recognise the need for the investment grants. We should like to feel that harbour authorities can benefit. This is wanted and it has been asked for by all the bodies to which the hon. Gentleman referred. I have no doubt that it matches the very important need for more investment in the ports.

What we like about the Clause is that it is not confined to harbour authorities. Private employers in the docks will equally be able to benefit from it. Therefore, there is no discrimination. The charge of discrimination has, I believe, been levelled in respect of another Bill at present going through the House. We are glad that it has been avoided in the Clause.

I have three specific questions. First, does the Clause apply to all types of wharf owners or wharf operators in the docks? For instance, would a timber merchant who had his sawmills at the edge of the docks, who had a wharf where le unloaded imported timber, and who had to construct dock works from time to time, be eligible for the 20 per cent. under the Clause? Secondly, can a harbour authority which engages in the construction of harbours, docks or wharves and which has, as it were, a direct labour civil engineering department, obtain the investment grant on the purchase of plant for those operations—plant such as excavators and other civil engineering equipment which are extremely expensive?

As I understand, civil engineering contractors with whom harbour authorities might compete for contracts for the docks are eligible for those grants on their investment purchases. It is obviously of vital importance that any competition between civil enginering contractors and the direct labour departments of dock or harbour authorities should be on all fours and be absolutely fair.

Thirdly, there is much talk nowadays about the importance of containers and palletisation and all the modern equipment which is to be used in the handling of goods in the future. Most of the containers, pallets and other equipment will belong to the exporters and importers who pass their goods through the docks, but it is possible that some harbour authorities will want to own their own containers. Will they be eligible for the 20 per cent. grant on investment in such equipment? This development is something we all want to encourage, but I cannot tell from the drafting of the Clause whether it goes so far as to include equipment such as pallets and containers which are necessary for the efficient future of dock operations.

If the Parliamentary Secretary would respond to these three questions I should be grateful. We welcome the Clause now that we have had a chance to study it and we are glad that it is to be written into the Bill.

Mr. Swingler

I reply by leave of the House. I am glad to know from the hon. Gentleman that we have cleared up any misunderstanding about the presentation of the Clause. I again assure him that the Clause is presented because the Bill is designed to modernise ports and docks. It is a Bill which, in a major respect, in Part III, has to do with the reorganisation of harbours and it was, therefore, thought proper to include it. The new Clause arises out of the Government's White Paper on Investment Incentives and the consultation resulting there from, and, therefore, the time factor in its presentation was affected on account of that.

To come to the questions raised by the hon. Member for Cirencester and Tewkesbury (Mr. Ridley), the grants will be made by my right hon. Friend to those who are port operators carrying out harbour operations as defined in the Harbours Act, 1964, such as stevedores, wharfingers and such like people. The grants will be made for the purposes which were outlined by my right hon. Friend in a Written Answer which she gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Woolwich, West (Mr. Hamling) on 27th June and which, I think, I should put on the record, namely, building and civil engineering works making a substantial and desirable contribution to facilities for international trade and, secondly, specialised plant and mechanical equipment required for loading or unloading goods in or from a sea-going ship or handling such goods on harbour land or at a wharf."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 27th June, 1966; Vol. 730, c. 205.] These are the two principal purposes that come within the definition of harbour operations in the 1964 Act, and the grants will be made for those purposes.

The hon. Gentleman will see that that would not include within its scope, for example, containers, but it does include within its scope major engineering works designed to improve the equipment and the docks in all respects, designed to improve the actual structure of the harbours themselves, and the provision—this is exceedingly important—of that specialised plant and equipment which is now so much needed for the loading and unloading of goods.

It is for these purposes, in the main, that the Government will be providing an increasing amount of money, calculated to be £9 million in this year and £13 million per annum in the following years, in an effort to assist statutory harbour authorities and now, under this Clause, port operators in their endeavours to improve the basic plant that will give us the modern harbours and docks that we so much need.

Question put and agreed to.

Clause read a Second time, and added to the Bill.